In our country the more things change, the more they remain the same! We have had interminable debates on the merits and demerits of public sector vs private sector for two decades now. Meanwhile global economy has changed beyond recognition. Most countries, which subscribed to state monopolies and government ownership altered their policies radically. USSR collapsed, and east Europe has been liberated. China is almost entirely market driven, and state is retreating from business functions rapidly. And yet, our Union cabinet dithers on disinvestments! Let us examine a few facts.

An efficient market economy needs effective and independent regulators, speedy justice and mechanisms to enact laws to protect the investors and citizens. These are the lessons we in India need to learn from the US response to the collapse of Enron. It soon became the world's largest electricity and natural gas trading company.

One of the great challenges confronting contemporary India is the growing regional disparities. Prof. Amaresh Bagchi and NJ Kurian point out that the percapita income (1996-99) of Maharashtra is Rs 19,248 and that of Bihar is Rs 5,465. This maximum / minimum ratio was 1.87 in 1960-63, 2.50 in 1970-73, 3.28 between 1987-90 and is now at 3.52. The high-income states of Goa, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Punjab and Haryana, with a population share of 20% account for 33.8% of NSDP. Their share of NSDP was 27.6% in 1970-71.

One of the recurring themes of Indian public expenditure and budget making in the last decade is the fiscal rigidities making it difficult for governments to change policies and priorities. In the Union budget, interest payments, defence expenditure, transfer of resources to States and wages are more or less inflexible, and there is no room for manoeuvering. It is now axiomatic that subsidies cannot be removed without incurring high political and social costs.

Classical liberals (libertarians) are intelligent, articulate, freedom-loving people. Unlike the “bleeding heart” liberals of the US, libertarians hate big-government, and are particularly opposed to centralized state or bureaucratic control. In much of this opposition and love of liberty, they are right. The history of 20th century is the triumph of liberalism against fascist authoritarianism and collectivist totalitarianism. It is now axiomatic that the government which governs the least is the best government.

Reviewing the health care in the United States twenty-five years ago, the prestigious 'Daedalus' magazine coined the expression "Doing better, and feeling worse". That description certainly fits our economic scene.

The new year brings little cheer to the long-suffering people. War clouds are hovering over our skies. Much of the economy is stagnant. The share of manufacturing sector as a proportion of GDP is in decline. Tax revenues are well below projections, and expenditure – mostly unproductive - continues to mount. Capital markets are jittery and investor confidence is low. Banks are flush with funds, and yet legitimate credit requirements of the surviving manufacturing enterprises are not met. But spurious companies get large loans for imaginary purposes.

Exactly a decade ago the Narasimharao-Manmohan Singh duo initiated the economic reform process under severe fiscal compulsions. The process has been incomplete and there have been many problems. But even the worst critics of economic liberalization would admit that there are many successes. Moderately high growth rates have been sustained for a decade. Inflation has been under control. Consumers have far greater choice now, with quality of goods improving, and prices declining.