After struggling through a lot of problems similar to the Mumbaikar, the much coveted Mumbai Metro finally started running on 8th June 2014. With total 63km of lines to be laid, the first line of 11.7 km between Versova-Andheri-Ghatkopar finally became operational. This PPP had raised lot of expectations not only from commuters point of view but also as a model on which other PPPs could be formualted. May it be cost and time overruns or Reliance claiming the Metro to be Reliance Metro this project has shown the cooperation or (lack of it) that exists among Infrastructure Players.
Latest to top it is the secrecy that Reliance Infrastructure has been maintaining about the project. Three RTI applications to get reports by RDSO, CMRS and Railway Board have not been responded to. This is not the first time Rinfra has been unwilling to share information with the public. It has ran away from taking responsibiltiy for signal failure near Jagruti Nagar Metro Station and technical failure at Ghatkopar Metro Station as well.
Mumbai Metro One Pvt. Ltd. is the joint venture of Rinfra, Veolia Transport and MMRDA running the operations of the Line 1 of Metro. Rinfra has a major stake while MMRDA owns only 26%. With 3 of the 8 Board of Directors being from MMRDA other from Rinfra, the latter certainly has a upper hand in decision making process. Rinfra is a private organisation and hence does not come under purview of RTI. However, RTI experts claim that since CEO of MMOPL is Metro Rail Administrator, a public servant, MMOPL should come under RTI.
In the current grievance redressal mechanism, Mumbaikars have to direct their pleas to MMRDA for information, which then alerts MMOPL, which may or may not reply since the RTI has not been served directly to it. Hence, Rinfra stays clean and non-accountable. Steps need to be taken to make the mechanism more transparent and hold Rinfra accountable, so that same mistakes are not repeated for other phases of the project. Any suggestions and also what are the problems that we may face in implementing them?
Source : http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-dna-exclusive-is-rinfra-s-mumbai-metro-a-top-secret-project-2012706
Latest to top it is the secrecy that Reliance Infrastructure has been maintaining about the project. Three RTI applications to get reports by RDSO, CMRS and Railway Board have not been responded to. This is not the first time Rinfra has been unwilling to share information with the public. It has ran away from taking responsibiltiy for signal failure near Jagruti Nagar Metro Station and technical failure at Ghatkopar Metro Station as well.
Mumbai Metro One Pvt. Ltd. is the joint venture of Rinfra, Veolia Transport and MMRDA running the operations of the Line 1 of Metro. Rinfra has a major stake while MMRDA owns only 26%. With 3 of the 8 Board of Directors being from MMRDA other from Rinfra, the latter certainly has a upper hand in decision making process. Rinfra is a private organisation and hence does not come under purview of RTI. However, RTI experts claim that since CEO of MMOPL is Metro Rail Administrator, a public servant, MMOPL should come under RTI.
In the current grievance redressal mechanism, Mumbaikars have to direct their pleas to MMRDA for information, which then alerts MMOPL, which may or may not reply since the RTI has not been served directly to it. Hence, Rinfra stays clean and non-accountable. Steps need to be taken to make the mechanism more transparent and hold Rinfra accountable, so that same mistakes are not repeated for other phases of the project. Any suggestions and also what are the problems that we may face in implementing them?
Source : http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-dna-exclusive-is-rinfra-s-mumbai-metro-a-top-secret-project-2012706
2 comments:
Also, the Government and Reliance infra has decided to scrap the Mumbai metro II deal. Sources say it is due to things beyond control of both and there would be no cost to any party.
Last year DMRC took over the airport link in Delhi which was earlier run by reliance.
With such incidences in Mumbai and Delhi, Reliance infra is not doing so well on the metro side.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/Maharashtra-govt-and-Reliance-to-scrap-Mumbai-Metro-II-deal/articleshow/36451270.cms
http://businesstoday.intoday.in/story/delhi-metro-to-take-over-airport-express-link/1/196340.html
This again brings the whole questions of freedom of operation and accountability. The basis of PPP model is to use the leveraged strength of government and Private. Private companies can operate freely without many obligations and as they are profits oriented they will induce efficiency into the systems. Every company will have their own operational secrets which they don’t want to disclose and through which they might have won the bidding. So bringing them under the purview of RTI defeats the purpose of PPP. At the same time we need to have a grievances redresal mechanism for any efficient system. There are 2 ways to go about it either to pass a legislation that necessitates the companies to respond in a stipulated time (30 days) failing that they will be liable to penalty, or bring this component in the contract itself. To make them more accountable we can have a representative body to which Board is answerable with regard to functioning of the Metro.
Post a Comment