Most performance indicators look unreliable: R Sivadasan

A vote-on-account Railway Budget is always labelled an 'interim' Budget, but often dressed as a vehicle to announce several new rail projects and a dose of reforms. The Budget in June-July will follow the perceptions of the new incumbent in the railway ministry. After the elections, 'regulars' will invariably make efforts to look very different, often carrying a white paper that makes a pliable Board belittle its own performance during previous years. It may also carry a vision-2030/2050.

Therefore, except the projected freight tonnage, perhaps all other performance indicators seem unreliable. We will see a different performance report in the regular Budget. Despite a 35 per cent annual increase in freight rates and a 20 per cent rise in passenger fares in the last two years, railway finances remain poor.

The bright side is completion of some rail expansion project in the Northeast. Also, premium trains have been introduced.

Critisising the Pay Commission provides an alibi to cover up the inability to control costs. Post the 6 th Central Pay Commission, the railways has flaunted the cumulative Pay Commission payouts in every successive Budget. All organisations, including the railways, provide periodic pay raises to employees. The railways provides only a decennial rise.

The proposed captive tariff regulatory authority, designed to be manned by retired bureaucrats, with a mindset incapable of intelligent operations and maintenance cost management of the railways, can do practically nothing except ritually administer fares and freight rate increases. Semi high-speed trains with speed of 160-200 km/hour are well within the railways' domain. However, does a ministry have powers to announce a high-speed rail (more than 300 km/hour) project for introducing a new, ultra-fast mode of passenger transport without moving a Bill or an Act in Parliament? That too, without public consultation?