Four Reasons Why Indian Railways Should be Privatised

Those among us who have studied even BASIC economics know why monopolies, in any sector, aren’t beneficial for the various stakeholders involved (customers, bureaucrats, nation’s poor, and national economy). Monopolies are the “antithesis” of competition. They often maintain high prices and have no incentive to innovate or to provide efficient services.

In the case of Indian Railways, perhaps the high prices argument doesn’t apply. That’s because it artificially tries to maintain low fares in the name of serving the poor. Who cares if, in the process, it incurs huge losses (ultimately borne by us taxpayers)! Who cares if maintaining low fares translates into third-class services i.e. lousy IRCTC website, unclean stations, ramshackle train wagons, sluggish booking processes, the list goes on.

Oh, and did I mention chronic corruption? It’s no secret that corruption is endemic in almost all nationalised sectors of the Indian economy. Don’t get me wrong! I know corruption is also found in the private sector. But what differentiates the private sector from a public (i.e. govt.) sector is that in the former the corrupt actually get punished, while in the latter the corrupt get promoted. Or to put in another way, “When a private business fails, it’s closed down. When a govt. business fails, it is expanded.”

The benefits of privatisation are endless. To get straight to the point, let me enumerate a few advantages of privatising Indian Railways:

(1) Not surprisingly, railways are one of the the cheapest and fastest means of transport. Currently, Indian Railways is lacking TONS of wagons to support the demand of freight transportation. We must remember that the economy of a country rests on the growth of its businesses, which increase employment and thus indirectly reduce poverty. Given the lack of enough wagons, businesses that want to transport their goods from one place to another have only two options (1) wait for months or (2) choose the more expensive and slower option of road (truck) transportation. Thus, this inability of railways to meet the growing demand of freights translates into lower productivity of our businesses.

(2) The cycle goes on: Lower business productivity in turn causes lower output –> lower profit –> lower wages –> lower employment –> and thus more poverty. You can now see how Indian Railways is also one of the many reasons that explain why Indian businesses are not able to compete on a world-level.

(3) When businesses choose road transportation (instead of railways), they cause oil imports to rise. This adds to the rising deficit of our economy.

(4) We have already seen privatisation in airways, barring Air India of course. It works amazingly! Airline ‘fares’ are one of the MOST competitive. In fact, ask any informed businessman and he’ll advise you to stay out of venturing into an airline business — there’s so much cost-cutting and price wars in this industry that most airlines literally struggle to maintain profits. And while Kingfisher stands on the brink of bankruptcy, Air India keeps on expanding despite the fact that BOTH are failing businesses.

So, if airlines can be privatised, why not railways! I bet that privatisation will drastically improve the condition of our stations, wagons, and services — and not to mention fares as well. Competition inevitably leads to low prices, innovation, efficiency, and world-class customer service. This is the basic premise of economics. We only have to make sure that privatisation is complete, meaning it is not solely and favourably given to only a few select companies — like it was done in the 2G auction. Else, we shall soon see cronyism (the evil nexus between govt. and top businesses) in this sector too.

The Great Sikh Guru Tegh Bahadur Singh

Blame it to our inability or frivolity in recording history, India has never had the privilege of good historians TILL DATE. Most historians we have today are either given to appeasing the dictates of the ruling political party or to the prejudices of belonging to a particular religion. What we need are researchers who are willing to look at facts objectively and dispassionately, not through their colored lenses. For this, we need to stop the State (government) from sponsoring research. Let private players do it – only then can research be accomplished scientifically.

I realized the dearth of historical facts when I wanted to read more about our Sikh Gurus – Govind Singh and Tegh Bahadur Singh. No books are available which study their biographies in detail (by referring to original, first-hand sources).

Even then, one common story I found among ALL the sources I researched about Guru Tegh Bahadur is that he was BEHEADED by Aurangzeb (a cruel Mughal tyrant) who wanted to Islamize India. Tegh Bahadur had refused to convert to Islam and willingly gave up his life.

To be specific, Kashmiri Pandits were increasingly getting worried about the growing torture carried out by Aurangzeb’s empire. So, they approached Tegh Bahadur in Punjab, who then challenged Aurangzeb that if he would convert him to Islam, then all Kashmiri Pandits would also do so willingly. Four days later, Aurangzeb had Tegh Bahadur captured and tortured. Unwilling to surrender, Tegh Bahadur was beheaded.

Today, Tegh Bahadur stands as a hero who saved Pandits from the Moghul tyrant’s atrocities. Brave, valiant, and unflinching character he possessed!

Why is this relevant today?

Fanatic Hindus would look at Tegh Bahadur as a savior of Hindus. By becoming “inspired” by him, they would justify undue violence against today’s Muslims. This is ignorance and stupidity at best.  Today’s Muslims have nothing (NOTHING!) to do with Aurangzeb. It is unwarranted to avenge Aurangzeb’s cruelty by punishing today’s Muslims.

Yes, truth be told. Tegh Bahadur gave up his life for Hindus. But seeing from a bigger, much broader perspective, he gave up his life for freedom – freedom to practice one’s own religion. Had Aurangzeb allowed Kashmiri Hindus to practice their religion with COMPLETE freedom, had he not threatened them with life on failing to convert, Tegh Bahadur wouldn’t have had to sacrifice his life. So Tegh Bahadur stood for freedom, just like Bhagat Singh, Rani Laxmibai, and others.

Preserving this basic freedom sometimes demands life. It demands one’s own blood. To quote from Ronald Reagan, “Each generation must renew and win again for itself the precious gift of liberty, the sacred heritage of freedom.” Freedom, not from a particular religion, but to practice one’s own religion peacefully.

In today’s era, India being democracy, our Constitution has provided for a democratic process to ensure the preservation of our freedoms. Undue violence is not only NOT needed, but is illegal. Let us therefore make sure that we don’t make it a war between two religions, but between supporters and enemies of freedom. If some extremists within Islam impose their views on other religions, let us protest them with all our might, but peacefully. Nonviolently. Let us use our constitutional rights (laws and judiciary) to ensure we are not dominated by antisocial elements again. That is the India our ancestors dreamed of. This is what Tegh Bahadur preached.

ਤਿਲਕ ਜੰਵੂ ਰਾਖਾ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਤਾ ਕਾ ॥ ਕੀਨੋ ਬਡੋ ਕਲੂ ਮਹਿ ਸਾਕਾ ॥
ਸਾਧਨ ਹੇਤਿ ਇਤੀ ਜਿਨਿ ਕਰੀ ॥ ਸੀਸ ਦੀਆ ਪਰ ਸੀ ਨ ਉਚਰੀ ॥੧੩॥
“He protected the janeu and tilak of the Hindus. It was a great event in the modern ages. For the sake of humankind, he sacrificed himself. He laid down his head but not his creed.” – Bachittar Natak