Introduction

The year 1988 marked a pivotal moment in the economic landscape, heralded by the introduction of the controversial concepts of liberalisation, privatisation, and globalisation under a corrupt guise. These changes, propagated through the formation of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), were argued to be a sly strategy to exploit public assets and distort economic balances. For countries like India, the narrative was clear: follow the commands and witness the inevitable benefits. However, the reality painted a bleak picture, where corruption and exploitation have left lasting scars.

The Myth and Reality of Privatisation

Throughout the years, privatisation has been evangelised as a panacea for all economic ills, yet the harsh truth is that it has been more of a double-edged sword. Critics argue that privatisation has often led to a concentration of wealth, exacerbating social inequalities and environmental degradation. This scepticism is fuelled by numerous instances where the private sector, driven by profit motives, has shown little regard for social welfare or sustainable practices.

It is often conveniently forgotten that the original privatisations in the 1980s were heavily influenced by the interests of corrupt political elites and wealthy industrialists. The aftermath saw a significant line in the sand drawn between the public sector, where corruption was rampant, and the private sector, which appeared to be equally, if not more, corrupt. The consumer, in this tug-of-war between public and private entities, has often been the silent sufferer.

Corruption and the Private Sector

One sector that has garnered widespread condemnation is the private telecommunications industry. Examples abound of private companies, such as those offering internet and mobile services, exploiting customers through dubious practices. A prime case in point is the bloated charges imposed on mobile services, where companies have been known to create artificial confusion by altering their billing periods to further their financial gains.

Not only are these companies criticised for their overtly exploitative practices, but they are also accused of engaging in malpractices like price hikes, adulteration of goods, and non-compliance with tax laws. These actions not only erode consumer trust but also contribute to a cycle of economic inefficiency. The question arises: when profit is placed at the centre, who does ethics and social responsibility benefit, if anyone?

Privatisation with a Conscience

While it is true that privatisation alone is not the silver bullet for all economic ills, it does not mean that the concept is inherently flawed. The key lies in ensuring that privatisation is implemented with stringent parameters that prioritise social welfare and environmental sustainability. Concepts such as "Less governing, more governance" must go beyond mere rhetoric and embody a commitment to ethical practices and accountability.

For governments, the task at hand is to create regulatory frameworks that can ensure corporate responsibility. This includes measures to monitor and penalise unethical practices, promote research and innovation, and ensure that the interests of the consumer and society as a whole are protected.

Conclusion

The path to sustainable development cannot be solely reliant on privatisation. Instead, it requires a balanced approach that integrates both public and private sector strengths while adhering to strict ethical and social standards. By doing so, we can ensure that economic growth is inclusive and sustainable, benefiting not just a privileged few, but the broader society.

Further Reading

Understanding Privatisation: A Comparative Analysis

References

[1] World Trade Organisation (WTO) - Key Players and Objectives. [2] Indian Government - Policy Statements on Privatisation. [3] Academic Research on the Ethics of Private Sector Operations in Developing Countries.