There was a time when Export Promotion Bureau (EPB) was like home to the exporters; the one stop shop that we turned to in our hour of need. To be sure, not all our problems were solved, but one could always be sure of ready access, and if the problem was not solved someone got back to you to tell you why not. Those were the days when we didn't need to communicate with the government through newspaper ads. That was EPB's job - to fight the battles on behalf of the exporters, one set of bureaucrats rattling sabres with another. Our job was to arm them better - facts, figures and options. We were part of team EPB.
EPB chaired an effective inter-departmental committee consisting of senior representatives of all relevant agencies, including State Bank, CBR, Ports and Shipping. Genuine export facilitation was ensured.
Did our exports go off the charts in those cozy days? No But they didn't show a secular decline either. Those were the days of textile quotas and high tariffs in the US and the EU. Our export basket was quite small, dominated by textiles, leather and carpets. Despite all that, and growing competition, the base was laid for exports to climb from less than $7 billion in 2000 to above $20 billion within some five years.
We like to think that was in no small measure due to a close interaction between the exporters and the EPB. Exporters wore the shoe and knew where it pinched. EPB knew 'horses for courses', what worked and what wouldn't, and how to go about making the workable work.
Then someone had this bright idea to create Trade Development Authority (TDAP). It wasn't a case of 'call it by any other name'. In the name of greater professionalism - the last refuge of every governmental scoundrel - the basic human resource structure was shaken up, and it has never been the same ever since.
TDAP arrogated to itself virtually the entire export portfolio of the Ministry of Commerce. It freed itself of any ministerial oversight (the TDAP Board, though chaired by the Commerce Minister, does not, technically speaking, report to the Ministry). It conveniently forgot that an 'Authority', by definition, is supposed to be revenue earning (eg WAPDA, PTA, CAA), unless it is a regulator. TDAP is neither. This was a UDI if there ever was one. TDAP is yet to make the rules to govern its own functioning.
UDI or zero autonomy, what do we business people care? What we want is things to get done, for us to focus more on our business than chasing papers through the bureaucratic maze. Thus, if our main facilitator becomes more independent we say more power to its elbow.
But are things getting done?
If they were you would see a throng of exporters crowding the corridors of TDAP. What we see are the visa seekers in the guise of trade fairs, minions sent for certificates of various kinds, and of course the luncheon guests of the Chief Executive. The valuable linkage between the serious exporter and the lead agency responsible for exports has been lost. Policy formulation is that much the poorer.
If they were you wouldn't have the exporters running from pillar to post begging for their legitimate refunds. And here we are not talking of the 'mega refund scandal' attributable to the Accountant and his fiscal woes, but of such claims as offices abroad, laboratories testing, and freight subsidy.
If they were you would have the TDAP Secretary spending less time on junkets abroad and more on trying to solve export issues. She would have been interacting with exporters here rather than getting away from them, looking for just any excuse to get on that flight to places well travelled or new. Her doors should have been opened more for exporters, even the less likable ones, than for friends, photographers, and event managers.
Arguably, scandals like freight subsidy, that have left TDAP paralysed, would have been avoided, or nipped in the bud, if there was proper oversight. The phenomenal wastage on travel and pointless fairs and the extravaganza that reached new heights under the outgoing Secretary could have been reined-in with a modicum of financial control. The large number of vacant posts could have been filled up with greater imagination and better leadership.
The age of 'internet of things' has rendered trade fairs and delegations, the sole focus of TDAP's export effort, virtually redundant. The profile of participants in the TDAP sponsored fairs tells us volumes about their utility. Where genuine exporters find it useful, like Heimtex, they stay away from the TDAP stand. They set up their own stall, and also bear all associated expenses.
To be fair to the outgoing Secretary, it is not her fault. You bring to the job your background. If you have never been exposed to export matters there is not very much you can contribute. If your experience has been in women development and meena bazaars, that's what you would tend to infuse into your new job. Alishans, no matter how well organised, will not make a square peg fit into a round hole.
It is for the government to find the right person for the right job.
There was a time we had stalwarts heading the EPB: the likes of Shamim Ariff, Yunis Khan, Qamar Beg and several others. Few would call them friends but none could dispute their friendliness. Their doors were open, and they were astute enough to listen to the usual suspects, yours truly included, while making sure that they found time and encouragement for the emerging exporters as well. This also helped them get the right perspective. They knew it was all about 'team' and built a competent one that was both responsive and responsible.
There is still a dance left in TDAP but it won't tango without a dexterous dance master. It would also need some superintendence that provides space without curbing initiative. And it needs to give place on the table to the principal stakeholder: the exporter.
We will share our views on the way forward for the TDAP in a forthcoming column. Meanwhile, the Government will do itself a favour if it reviews the TDAP Act, a veritable mish mash of a nut that has forgotten its skin.
[email protected]
Comments
Comments are closed.