THE GOA HORTICULTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION – NO CASE FOR ITS CLOSURE OR FOR SUSPENSION OF THE M.D. by Joaquim Correia-Afonso.

According to press reports, the Opposition in the Goa Legislative Assembly, led by the Leader of Opposition and supported by the Fatorda MLA, has been trying to focus public attention on the supposed “bunglings” in the accounts of the Goa State Horticulture Development Corporation.

One of the allegations is said to be about “ploughing the interest earned from funds at the disposal of the corporation into the balance sheet to show a profit”. The LoO alleged that funds at the disposal of the corporation sanctioned by the government “for the betterment of the people” is parked as fixed deposits in the banks and the interest is shown as income in the balance sheet.

To the best of my knowledge, government had sanctioned an amount as the share capital of the corporation, around the time when the corporation was established, about a decade or two back. The share capital cannot be utilised “for the betterment of the people” or “to promote horticulture activity” but can only be used for capital expenditure like, say, construction of a new building for housing the corporation office, repairs of old building and other such works of a permanent nature. If the amount sanctioned by the government is actually the share capital, may be it was lying unutilised, and has, therefore, been kept in a fixed deposit, earning a higher rate of interest than it would have earned in a savings account. This (getting a higher rate of interest) is definitely in public interest. It is not clear for what purpose these funds, which are kept in fixed deposit, were sanctioned by the government – is it “for the betterment of the people”, or, actually, the share capital? In the latter case, should the amount be kept in a savings account, earning a low rate of interest, thus causing loss to the corporation?

Another allegation has been that the audit of the accounts of the corporation has not been carried out for the last few years. The corporation, being a government corporation, is like a “company”. The Statutory Auditors have to be appointed by the government. Not by the corporation. So, if there has been no audit, the management of the corporation cannot be faulted.

The main allegation, however, seems to be about the “profit” made by the corporation in the procurement and sale of vegetables to the local vendors, numbering over 400. The Leader of Opposition has even demanded the suspension of the Managing Director, based on all these allegations of “bungling” in the accounts.

Regarding the sale of vegetables: first and foremost, if one goes round the towns and villages, one will see that the vendors are all GOANS. Second, the daily sale prices are exhibited in the “Prudent” channel on TV. Has any Opposition Legislator, at any time, cared to compare these prices with the exorbitant prices at which vegetables are sold in the market? Have any of them cared to note the vast difference in the rates? Even supposing that the corporation is making “huge profits”, there is still a marked difference. And if a government corporation makes profit, does the government suffer any loss? Do the people suffer any loss?

But read on …

Unless I am mistaken, it is incumbent on the corporation to sell the vegetables to the public at the same rate at which it procures from the suppliers. The losses incurred, say, by margin of profit given to the vendors, or any other expense, are made good by the government. Seems to me that the Price Intervention Scheme is meant exactly to compensate the corporation for such losses and to ensure that the low prices are maintained. I may be corrected if I am wrong.

The scheme is a boon to the general public, the consumer, who gets vegetables of good quality at a much cheaper rate than in the market. It is also a boon to the vendor who derives benefit from the creation of this direct self-employment opportunity as well as earns income from the sale of vegetables. And the beneficiaries are GOANS – the vendors as also the consumers.

There is no case, therefore, to close down the corporation or put an end to the scheme. Much to the contrary, as the Economic Survey has shown. Nor is there a case to suspend the Managing Director. The vegetable supply scheme is his baby and GOANS stand to gain a lot from it. And he seems to have done nothing wrong.

Does the Opposition have any love for Goa and Goans? It is apparent that the Opposition members are not interested in the welfare of Goans, they cannot swallow the fact that vegetables are made available to the GOAN public at a cheaper rate. One can see, from past events, that their interest lies in ensuring a higher purchase price to their associates in Belgaum for the procurement of vegetables. One understands that they were not only prepared to arrange with their agents to stop the supply of vegetables to Goa but even went to the extent of finalising a strike by the local vegetable vendors in the Goa markets. Thankfully, this evil plan flopped.