Uddhav Thackeray's aggression

Uddhav Thackeray's aggression

From all accounts, Shiv Sena chief Uddhav Thackeray appears an unlikely candidate for a skirmish...
HC rejects PIL against Robert Vadra

HC rejects PIL against Robert Vadra

A PIL had sought CBI probe into various land deals allegedly entered into by Robert Vadra's firms.

Tata denies using strong words

Dec 09 2012, 01:05 IST
Comments 0
SummaryTata Sons on Saturday denied that group chairman Ratan Tata has used words such as “venal” business environment or accused the government of “inaction” in media interviews.

Tata Sons on Saturday denied that group chairman Ratan Tata has used words such as “venal” business environment or accused the government of “inaction” in media interviews.

“Tata Sons clarifies that in Mr Ratan N Tata’s interview with the Financial Times, he spoke about coherence in implementation of government policy rather than “lashes into the PM”, “rapping India”, “warning government of inaction” or “venal business environment”, as has been reported in the Financial Times and other media,” said a statement from Tata Sons.

“These are terms used by the publications and not not by Mr Tata in any manner,” it said. “Tata Sons is surprised that reputed media entities have sensationalised the observations, without taking into cognisance the tone, tenor and context of the interview,” the statement said.

The Tata Sons statement said Tata has always supported Prime Minister Manmohan Singh even when there was mass criticism of him and the last thing he would wish to do is to be a critic of the Prime Minister, as has been reported.

Releasing excerpts of the interview with the Financial Times, the statement said Tata was asked why he still thought that “....the way India was being governed made it very difficult to grow business here and therefore you felt that Tata and Indian companies should look abroad.”

In the answer he said, “Sometimes the issue is that different agencies of the government, different constituencies in the government, have almost contradictory interpretations of the law or different interpretations of what should be done.”

“By that I mean there are differences between the Centre and the state in some cases. So you have a central policy that is announced, on paper sounds very exciting but at the same state level is very difficult to operate. Singur would be one such example. In other cases, it’s that constituencies or government may have made it a personality issue.”

Ads by Google
Reader´s Comments
| Post a Comment
Please Wait while comments are loading...