The document, namely the Telecom Commission Memo on the progress of implementation of New Telecom Policy (NTP) 1999, prepared by the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) and dated September 1, completely exposes the BJP government's claim that the migration package was essentially aimed at bailout or revival of the private telecom companies. The CPI(M) had maintained from the very beginning that there was nothing in the package which could lead to revival of those companies whose licences had been terminated earlier.

The DoT document clearly shows that not only those companies whose licences stand terminated, but a number of other companies as well, are not in a position to comply with the stipulations arising out of the package offered by the government. In all such cases of non-compliance, the DoT had recommended to the Telecom Commission for termination of the old licences or measures in that direction.

It is clear that these views are not those of the DoT alone, but mark the factual position of the government as a whole before several constitutional forums including the Delhi High Court. The fact that the Telecom Commission rejected the DoT's contention only proves further the fact that the government is going back on its own stated position.

The reference of the question of termination of licences for some of the companies to the attorney general (AG) further substantiates the fact of this going back. The question is: If the package itself was based on the AG's opinion, as the government had claimed earlier, how does the question of once again referring the follow-up to non-compliance of the package arise?

(It will be noted that in his earlier opinion the AG stood in favour of the licensing system but changed his opinion later and backed the revenue sharing arrangement that was subsequently incorporated in the July 6 package. The CPI(M) had earlier released copies of the AG's communications in this regard.)

The reference to the AG and the rejection of the DoT's suggestions by Telecom Commission a full month after the conditional clearance by the High Court, via its ruling on August 10, underlines the failure of the government to implement the package which it had itself devised and proceeded with undue and questionable haste.

Finally, the press clippings attached with the main document also substantiate the CPI(M)'s contention that the bailout/ revival claim of the government was a sham and was in actuality intended to help the metro cellular operators to make a killing.

The government led by Shri A B Vajpayee stands exposed, the CPI(M) says. Moreover, it has pointed out that it is the prime minister who has to explain the situation to the people as it was he who shunted out Shri Jagmohan from the ministry of communication and who now holds the portfolio. The prime minister also owes an explanation to the people as to why the national exchequer was made to suffer a loss of about Rs 4,000 crore this year alone and why contractual obligations worth Rs 15,000 crore were allowed to fall by wayside.

Addressing the presspersons on this occasion at the party's headquarters at New Delhi, CPI(M)'s Rajya Sabha member, Nilotpal Basu, described the situation as really pathetic. For, he said, the way the BJP as well as government spokespersons are trying to defend the July 6 package, makes it clear that they are getting increasingly shameless day by day. Yet the fact is that the government has failed to implement the so called revival package which it was trying to project as extremely urgent, and for which it even ignored the president of India's suggestion that since it involved a major policy issue, it should be taken up by the new government after the 13th Lok Sabha polls are over.

On this occasion, Basu also pointed out the need for a debate on the issue. However, he added to say that the parliament could have been the proper forum for such a debate, but it was not utilised. He also accused the BJP and the central government led by it of having vitiated the whole atmosphere on the issue, in order to conceal their real motivations.