 |
 |
 |
| |
|
 Sunday, 12 October 2008 |
|
|
Are the Railways Reforming? |
|
|
|
Written by S Sriraman
|
|
Monday, 24 April 2006 |
The emphasis on better utilisation of existing capacity in the Indian
railways has obviously come to stay, though the railway budget of
2006-07 also outlines investment possibilities that are to be tapped.
What will be crucial is the ability of the railways to increase their
share of freight traffic over a period of time, even as areas in the
passenger segment require review and consolidation. The budget gives
the impression that the organisation might soon emerge from the chaotic
situation in which it has been for a long time.
S Sriraman
In the course of summing up a debate on ‘Why Do We Need the Railways?’
a decade back at the European conference of ministers of transport, it
was strongly emphasised that nothing is possible without a plan of
action that sets clear objectives and clearly specifies the associated
financing mechanisms. This is, of course, provided that commitments to
pursue such objectives are respected and an end is put thereby to
stop-start policies. Essentially, at a more basic level, the question
was whether or not we wish to maintain a significant level of activity
in the rail sector and thus acknowledge the social benefits and
economic benefits of the railways or if we simply wish to see them
confined to playing a minor role. Analysts of the Indian railways have
been asking precisely the same set of questions for nearly a decade.
Time and again it has been pointed out that the railways in India have
been positioned for quite some time at a junction from which only one
path might have the potential to move the organisation towards success.
Having taken other paths, the railways have only managed to maintain a
status quo. This year’s rail budget (2006-07) promises many steps
towards the reform route (in terms of the road map provided by the
Rakesh Mohan Committee which is not being acknowledged) though there
are many plans, which could derail the process.
Riding on a surplus wave, the minister attempts to sustain it. The
increased efficiency on the system in terms of the various dimensions
has provided the benefits. Studies, including those of the author in
the past two decades, have shown that this would indeed occur because
of better capacity utilisation. The railways have realised this
potential finally – maybe a bit too late. The diversion of freight
traffic to the roads that has taken place slowly, but steadily over a
period of time, has resulted in its present share of nearly 70 per cent
in freight movement. Apart from the inherent advantages of road
transport in terms of flexibility, it was always common knowledge that
significant road movements, especially bulk movement of coal, ores, and
many other such items, were forced upon truckers because of the
inefficiency of the railways. Higher costs resulted, thereby imposing a
huge burden on the economy. This issue of being able to take care of
the bulk movements first is still being glossed over. At present, only
67 per cent of the coal movement, 65 per cent of ore movement, 40 per
cent of cement movement, 74 per cent of fertiliser movement, and 25 per
cent of petroleum product movement take place by rail. A higher level
of efficiency could result in much larger movements without any tariff
increases. This was attempted in the past two years, as a result of
which the originating tonnage has increased significantly. Further, the
plan to load more on a wagon is a useful step. Equally important are
the proposed discounts on freight movements during peak and non-peak
seasons, and discounts on incremental freight in the empty flow
direction. These proposals have been in the air for quite some time but
have not been put into place earlier due to the continued emphasis on a
centralised framework of decision-making.
Limits to Capacity Utilisation
There are limitations, of course, to the potential that be tapped from
better utilisation of capacity. Unless significant investments are
made, more benefits cannot accrue. To do this, the budget provides some
outline of investment possibilities that are to be tapped. Once such
initiative relates to public-private participation in a number of
areas. For example, the move to get private sector containers on
railway tracks is a good commercial strategy. To begin with, the
proposal is to enable rail movement of private container traffic, which
was not allowed till now. Later, the private sector will be persuaded
to get its own vehicles, with the railways providing the tracks and
motive power. The success of this venture would naturally depend on a
much higher level of efficiency of operations. Ultimately, some private
sector participation is expected in the provision of the freight
corridors that are being planned between various metros. This is an
ambitious project, the details of which are still being kept under
wraps. As of now, the total investment on phase I of the new freight
corridors is expected to be Rs 22,000 crore with a special purpose
vehicle expected to leverage equity of Rs 7,500 crore and raise a debt
of Rs 15,000 crore for financing the project. Though this will involve
the continued dependence on internal financing and budgetary support,
it is expected that some oil majors would roped in to invest in the
equity of the proposed project. This may yield returns over a period of
time. Some of the investments on network expansion, double tracking,
etc, are expected to yield returns earlier. But what is crucial is the
ability of the railways to increase their share of freight traffic over
a period of time by sustaining a high level of efficiency of
operations, which would be important for realising a certain rate of
return on investments. Considering the fact that the railways were able
to achieve a new record of loading 668 million tonnes of freight with a
historic growth of 11 per cent by reducing wagon turnaround time and
achieving additional loading of 4 to 8 tonnes per wagon, this is
perhaps the right direction in which they are moving. By sustaining
this growth, the economy would reap the economic and social benefits
associated with such huge investments.
However, the fairly elaborate plan to increase the number of passenger
trains on different routes could pose immediate problems. This involves
the introduction of 55 new trains and conversion of 200 mail/express
trains to super fast ones. Without additional track capacity, freight
movement would be hit and therefore revenue too. However, this effect
is sought to be minimised by increasing the number of coaches to 24 in
many popular passenger trains. This exercise would, no doubt, have to
wait till the project to increase platform lengths of the concerned
sections is completed. Without doubt, these are attempts to face the
intense competition that has already emerged from road transport, even
in the long-distance segments consequent to the developments on the
national highway front. But the railways need to understand that there
are areas, especially in the passenger segment, which require review
and consolidation. The proposal to reduce air conditioned passenger
fares is not likely to have an impact on revenue since the
long-distance segment of passenger traffic is usually unresponsive to
fare changes. Some changes in the fares for the second-class segments,
especially express and mail trains, could prove to be useful from a
revenue generation point of view. The observation that such changes can
drive people to the air does not seem to be valid since there is very
little capacity that is as yet available on airlines, and this too is
very restrictive in terms of routes. The rationalisation of goods
tariff is a continuing process as a result of which tariffs for some
categories could go up, while for the others it could come down. Over
the next three years, except rates of some light commodities, the rates
for the highest classification would be less than double that of the
lowest classification. The impact however is expected to be marginal
and not of consequence to the user.
Technological Upgradation
Technological upgradation is a prime necessity. The budget provides for
this by attempting to do a number of things. One method is to increase
goods train capacity, which is expected to be doubled in five years.
The plan is to introduce lighter wagons that will be moved at much
higher speeds. This has been a major problem for decades. At present,
it is conceded by the railways that the average speed of goods trains
was just about 23 km per hour on the broad gauge and 17 km on the metre
gauge. While upgradation by way of induction of concrete sleepers,
heavier rails, minimising of rail joints would enable enhanced axle
loads, higher speeds would be possible on the new freight corridors.
Equally important is the requirement in terms of a quantum increase in
terminal capacities. This is necessary in order to reduce loading and
unloading times. The emerging competition from road transport,
especially in the freight segment, cannot be met effectively in any
other way.
Higher Plan Outlay
The higher plan outlay of Rs 23,475 crore reflects the immediate
investment plans of the railways and is higher by 32 per cent from the
plan size for the current year. The general exchequer is expected to
provide Rs 7,511 crore, which include Rs 1,365 crore for the special
railway safety funds, and Rs 711 crore from the central road fund,
leaving a net budgetary support of Rs 5,435 crore for distribution to
different plan heads. It is to be clearly noted that internal resource
generation is expected to be much higher at Rs 10,794 crore compared to
a little less than Rs 6,000 crore in 2005-06. The total amount to be
mobilised through extra budgetary resources is Rs 5,170 crore of which
Rs 4,170 crore will be raised through market borrowings by the Indian
Railway Finance Corporation for procurement of rolling stock, with the
remaining expected to be raised by Rail Vikas Nigam Limited for use in
investments on various railway projects. The total borrowings are
higher by nearly Rs 2,000 crore compared to 2005-06. It is observed
that the provision for the safety fund set at Rs 2,100 crore appears to
be a substantial decline from the provision of Rs 3,645 crore during
2005-06. This is not a positive sign since the backlog in terms of
arrears of track renewals and bridge rehabilitation, which has been a
persistent feature of the Indian railways for quite some time, could
only get larger and create more operational problems.
Given the performance in 2005-06, the targets set for freight movement,
namely 726 million tonnes, may not be ambitious. With the railways
attempting to reorient themselves with a focus on core activities, the
situation at present is that they are about to be reorganised, and the
public authority responsible for the rail sector is playing a fairly
proactive role in the process. The origin of the current situation of
the railways lies far in the past and calls for all those responsible
for rail transport policy to examine the innovations that the
organisation can, and must at all costs, propose if it is to remain a
major player in the transport sector. However, it is for this very
reason that the railways should not be treated as a single and coherent
entity. In practice, the railways offer a variety of services which are
not all equally well matched or in some cases, not matched at all to
the requirement of the users. It is precisely this multiplicity of
services, that holds the key to revitalising the role and standing of
the railways, which would thus be able to compete effectively, adapt to
market conditions and ultimately move towards meeting the goal of
economic and social profitability. Overall, the railway budget 2006-07
gives the impression that the organisation can soon be expected to come
out of the chaotic situation in which it has remained for quite some
time.
Email:
This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
Reprinted from
http://www.epw.org.in/showArticles.php?root=2006&leaf=04&filename=9929&filetype=html |
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
