But is the Government alone responsible for the slump in FDI, while the role of private sector has been stretched further, particularly after liberalisation? It is perceived that the big Indian private corporates, who act as protagonists in chambers and associations, have double standards. Whenever the Government imposescontrols, they clamour, and whenever the Government liberalises they raise a hue and cry, fearing growing competition.

In terms of policy, India's FDI policy is acclaimed as one of the attractive policies compared with the FDI policies in some of the south-east Asian countries. Coupled with this, the sustainable maturity in GDP growth and the strong investment security should have embellished India a potential destination for foreign investors.

Critics say liberalisation is on paper. It is neither transparent nor transpired into actual work. To withstand the criticism, the Government has recently decided to set up the Foreign Investment Implementation Authority, which will provide a proactive one-stop after-care service to foreign investors in obtaining various approvals, sorting out operational and coordination problems with different arms of the Government. Can this authority alone succeed in providing services effectively without courting the cooperation from the chambers and associations?

In fact,the implementation of the policies should have been the responsibilities of both the Government and the private sector. The chambers and associations, well equipped with their widespread wings in the country, have better opportunities to provide services to the foreign investors at the grassroots level than the policy makers.

Implementation of policy does not mean only central approvals. It comprises various downstream clearances at the state level, including clearances for land, building, electricity, water, and other infrastructural facilities, besides FIPB or RBI approvals. While much was liberalised and simplified at the central level, very little was done at the state level.

In this perspective, it is lamented that the contributions by chambers and associations were insignificant to supplement the Government's efforts in implementing the policies at the downstream level. They have confined their role to organising seminars, holding business cooperation meetings with glee, and sending delegationsabroad. None of these organisations has established close tie-ups with the state level Infrastructure Development Corporations or other state level agencies dealing with several clearances required at the state level. They also have no adequate information of the various states.

There is virtually a frigidity in the role of these chambers and associations to promote FDI. Practically, no change was made in the activities of these organisation, commensurate with the liberalisation processes which took place in a phased manner over the period of last eight years. They continue to organise seminars and send delegations abroad despite knowing that the impediments to FDI flow were the implementation of the policies and not the unawareness of the policies.

In the initial period of liberalisation, the visits abroad were considered plausible steps to promote FDI. But after eight years of liberalisation, frequent visits abroad were proved not only unviable for the fund-stricken Indian chambers and associations, butwere also portrayed as a gimmick of Indian liberalisation, since the policies and implementation did not run parallel to each other.

With the opening of the economy, MNCs flocked into the country and many have signed MoUs with the leading chambers and associations with the hope that these organisations would act as engines to promote MNCs' interest in this country. It is an usual expectation that whenever a foreign investor targets a new destination, he seeks a comprehensive package of counselling. Since these facilities are rather impossible from the Government end at a single window level, the signatories of MoUs had high hopes from the chambers, federations and associations.

In contradiction, the industry associations reposed confidence in organising seminars, workshops and delivering documents on liberalisation, instead of providing counselling and facilitation at the downstream level on a one-to-one basis.

The upshot is that foreign investors have to run pillar to post at various Governmentagencies to understand fully the procedures, or have to depend upon the services of consultants who are exorbitant even for small information. Thus, a piquant situation is emerging where the MNCs' confidence in India's industry association is abating.

So far, no chamber or association could establish its prerogative in exuding Indian industry's grievances with adequate and justified arguments, since few of them are aware of the real implications of the various agreements of the WTO. Ironically, even after four years of ratification, the country's industry associations are busy promoting WTO awareness, rather than providing appropriate arguments to give solidity to India's standpoint in the WTO.

It is imperative that the chambers and association should remodel their mode of activities. Gone are the days when the associations were busy doing liaison with the Government. Time is ripe for them to embrace more of promotional activities and cooperate with the Government, so that domestic industry can learn tolive in competition rather that survive under the grace of protection.