✌✌✌✌ THE HINDU ✌✌✌✌
✌✌ An alliance of its time ✌✌
In the end, the Congress party got itself a better seat-sharing deal from the Samajwadi Party that it could have realistically hoped for; never mind that its vice-president, Rahul Gandhi, had sounded a war cry with a Deoria-to-Delhi trek through Uttar Pradesh on the claim of the party forming the government on its own. On Sunday, after some tense moments with each party affecting that it was ready to walk away if it did not get its maximalist demands, an alliance for the February-March U.P. Assembly elections was announced. The SP will fight 298 seats, the Congress 105. With this, both parties have created for themselves an opportunity that may be more than the sum of their individual chances, and for both it is perfectly timed. The SP is battling not just anti-incumbency but also the shock of the 2014 Lok Sabha verdict, when it won just five seats. It has gone through a nerve-wracking rite of passage as Chief Minister Akhilesh Yadav took on his father Mulayam Singh Yadav’s perceived coterie, for control of the party organisation, and then, at the Election Commission’s door, for the party symbol of the cycle. In fact, this was a necessary transition in the SP for any tie-up with the Congress to strike true. The Congress’s relations with Mr. Mulayam Singh have always lacked good faith to encourage vote transfer, and the history of dashed expectations would have made the alliance difficult to pull off on his watch.
For Mr. Akhilesh Yadav, the alliance completes his effort to rebrand himself, from being no longer the young Chief Minister of the past years who was mocked for being witless in allowing his “uncles” (family members and party seniors) to run the administration. As the unity among the uncles cracked in the past few months, the Chief Minister came into his own. It helped cast him in the public eye as a leader capable of standing on his own terms, and he strategically showcased the fight as being less about spoils and more about ideals. Now, by turning the election into a three-cornered contest, he can use the SP-Congress alliance to attract voters, especially the minorities, looking to cast their ballot tactically to defeat the BJP candidate. For, even at its historic nadir in the State in 2014, the Congress got almost 8% of the vote. In turn, for the grand old party, to be even seen to be on a winning ballot in U.P. would be a transformational leap. The two parties are not operating in a vacuum, and both the BJP and the BSP will put up formidable campaigns. But together they have made the contest more keen than their individual challenges could have done.
✌✌ Globalisation’s new spokesman ✌✌
President Xi Jinping’s message to the World Economic Forum in Davos was timely and perhaps visionary as well, in this time of extraordinary global uncertainty. It is no surprise if, as in the case of German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s potential leadership of the Western alliance, questions have arisen at this juncture about Mr. Xi’s willingness to take up cudgels on behalf of broader internationalism and against the rising tide of inward-looking nationalism. His address at the opening plenary before captains of business and industry could not have been a more robust and reassuring defence of the current world economic order, perceived to be at its most fragile in the post-War era with the election of Donald Trump as U.S. President. Foremost is Mr. Xi’s caution against attempts to prevent the free flow of goods, services, capital and people as running counter to the historical trend. It is tempting to interpret this remark as a pointed rebuke to growing calls for economic protectionism at a time when a slump in world trade underpins slow economic growth. Not to be missed also is the categorical support he expressed for the swift enforcement of the Paris accord on climate change. Mr. Xi reiterated the call for a reform of global economic governance structures, to reflect the contribution of the emerging and developing countries. His plea for more inclusive representation is in contrast to the unprecedented attacks mounted against post-War institutions in the same countries that crafted their original architecture.
Mr. Xi fundamentally rejected the stance that seeks to lay the blame for the current challenges at the doorstep of globalisation. The tragic effects of mass migration, he said, have their roots in the recent wars and regional conflicts, rather than in economic globalisation. His diagnosis of Europe’s challenges on this front could not entirely be faulted, even if it is largely true that the developing countries have reaped most of the benefits of economic mobility, rather than having to deal with the difficulties of immigration. There may be arguments over the modes and methods of managing the political fallout from globalisation. But there is no denying the mounting and demonstrable evidence that the post-Cold War era of open economies has brought unprecedented prosperity and income redistribution around the world. Mr. Xi’s case for globalisation is the most forceful such statement by a Chinese leader yet. For long Beijing has been accused of not taking on the burdens of a leadership role commensurate with its economic and strategic power. The changing world order may have left it with no option but to step up to the podium. It also turns the mirror on Beijing, demanding of it a lot more action to back its own words.
✌✌✌✌ THE ECONOMIC TIMES ✌✌✌✌
✌✌ No benign neglect of Luxottica-Essilor, CCI ✌✌
When two European firms merge, should the Indian competition regulator take a view? It can and it could. Italy-based Luxottica, maker of Ray-Ban and other eyewear brands, has announced a merger with leading producer of lenses, France’s Essilor. The all-share merger would produce a €46 billion eyewear giant. While there is, as of now, no indication of abuse of its market dominance, which is what competition authorities worry about these days, rather than market dominance per se, there is potential for such an integrated player to act to the detriment of competitors.
Should this worry India’s competition authority? After all, the merger is taking place in faraway Europe and subject to the approval of Europe’s own beady-eyed watchdog. The simple point here is that such considerations about the national affiliation of companies and their regulatory oversight by the competent body of the relevant jurisdiction should not prevent the Competition Commission of India from examining such mergers for their impact on the Indian market.
In 2001, the European Competition Commission blocked the proposed merger of GE with Honeywell. Both are American companies and had approval from American regulators and from the regulators of 11other jurisdictions. Yet, Europe’s regulator assessed the merger to be not in Europe’s interest. Since Europe was too vital a market for GE or Honeywell to ignore, they abandoned the merger. India is slated to be one of the largest and fastest-growing consumer markets, including for eyewear. It is not a market anyone can ignore. It could well be that the proposed Luxottica-Essilor merger has no negative implication for India. But that should be established by CCI after a proper review, not assumed away at the outset.
✌✌ An alliance of its time ✌✌
In the end, the Congress party got itself a better seat-sharing deal from the Samajwadi Party that it could have realistically hoped for; never mind that its vice-president, Rahul Gandhi, had sounded a war cry with a Deoria-to-Delhi trek through Uttar Pradesh on the claim of the party forming the government on its own. On Sunday, after some tense moments with each party affecting that it was ready to walk away if it did not get its maximalist demands, an alliance for the February-March U.P. Assembly elections was announced. The SP will fight 298 seats, the Congress 105. With this, both parties have created for themselves an opportunity that may be more than the sum of their individual chances, and for both it is perfectly timed. The SP is battling not just anti-incumbency but also the shock of the 2014 Lok Sabha verdict, when it won just five seats. It has gone through a nerve-wracking rite of passage as Chief Minister Akhilesh Yadav took on his father Mulayam Singh Yadav’s perceived coterie, for control of the party organisation, and then, at the Election Commission’s door, for the party symbol of the cycle. In fact, this was a necessary transition in the SP for any tie-up with the Congress to strike true. The Congress’s relations with Mr. Mulayam Singh have always lacked good faith to encourage vote transfer, and the history of dashed expectations would have made the alliance difficult to pull off on his watch.
For Mr. Akhilesh Yadav, the alliance completes his effort to rebrand himself, from being no longer the young Chief Minister of the past years who was mocked for being witless in allowing his “uncles” (family members and party seniors) to run the administration. As the unity among the uncles cracked in the past few months, the Chief Minister came into his own. It helped cast him in the public eye as a leader capable of standing on his own terms, and he strategically showcased the fight as being less about spoils and more about ideals. Now, by turning the election into a three-cornered contest, he can use the SP-Congress alliance to attract voters, especially the minorities, looking to cast their ballot tactically to defeat the BJP candidate. For, even at its historic nadir in the State in 2014, the Congress got almost 8% of the vote. In turn, for the grand old party, to be even seen to be on a winning ballot in U.P. would be a transformational leap. The two parties are not operating in a vacuum, and both the BJP and the BSP will put up formidable campaigns. But together they have made the contest more keen than their individual challenges could have done.
✌✌ Globalisation’s new spokesman ✌✌
President Xi Jinping’s message to the World Economic Forum in Davos was timely and perhaps visionary as well, in this time of extraordinary global uncertainty. It is no surprise if, as in the case of German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s potential leadership of the Western alliance, questions have arisen at this juncture about Mr. Xi’s willingness to take up cudgels on behalf of broader internationalism and against the rising tide of inward-looking nationalism. His address at the opening plenary before captains of business and industry could not have been a more robust and reassuring defence of the current world economic order, perceived to be at its most fragile in the post-War era with the election of Donald Trump as U.S. President. Foremost is Mr. Xi’s caution against attempts to prevent the free flow of goods, services, capital and people as running counter to the historical trend. It is tempting to interpret this remark as a pointed rebuke to growing calls for economic protectionism at a time when a slump in world trade underpins slow economic growth. Not to be missed also is the categorical support he expressed for the swift enforcement of the Paris accord on climate change. Mr. Xi reiterated the call for a reform of global economic governance structures, to reflect the contribution of the emerging and developing countries. His plea for more inclusive representation is in contrast to the unprecedented attacks mounted against post-War institutions in the same countries that crafted their original architecture.
Mr. Xi fundamentally rejected the stance that seeks to lay the blame for the current challenges at the doorstep of globalisation. The tragic effects of mass migration, he said, have their roots in the recent wars and regional conflicts, rather than in economic globalisation. His diagnosis of Europe’s challenges on this front could not entirely be faulted, even if it is largely true that the developing countries have reaped most of the benefits of economic mobility, rather than having to deal with the difficulties of immigration. There may be arguments over the modes and methods of managing the political fallout from globalisation. But there is no denying the mounting and demonstrable evidence that the post-Cold War era of open economies has brought unprecedented prosperity and income redistribution around the world. Mr. Xi’s case for globalisation is the most forceful such statement by a Chinese leader yet. For long Beijing has been accused of not taking on the burdens of a leadership role commensurate with its economic and strategic power. The changing world order may have left it with no option but to step up to the podium. It also turns the mirror on Beijing, demanding of it a lot more action to back its own words.
✌✌✌✌ THE ECONOMIC TIMES ✌✌✌✌
✌✌ No benign neglect of Luxottica-Essilor, CCI ✌✌
When two European firms merge, should the Indian competition regulator take a view? It can and it could. Italy-based Luxottica, maker of Ray-Ban and other eyewear brands, has announced a merger with leading producer of lenses, France’s Essilor. The all-share merger would produce a €46 billion eyewear giant. While there is, as of now, no indication of abuse of its market dominance, which is what competition authorities worry about these days, rather than market dominance per se, there is potential for such an integrated player to act to the detriment of competitors.
Should this worry India’s competition authority? After all, the merger is taking place in faraway Europe and subject to the approval of Europe’s own beady-eyed watchdog. The simple point here is that such considerations about the national affiliation of companies and their regulatory oversight by the competent body of the relevant jurisdiction should not prevent the Competition Commission of India from examining such mergers for their impact on the Indian market.
In 2001, the European Competition Commission blocked the proposed merger of GE with Honeywell. Both are American companies and had approval from American regulators and from the regulators of 11other jurisdictions. Yet, Europe’s regulator assessed the merger to be not in Europe’s interest. Since Europe was too vital a market for GE or Honeywell to ignore, they abandoned the merger. India is slated to be one of the largest and fastest-growing consumer markets, including for eyewear. It is not a market anyone can ignore. It could well be that the proposed Luxottica-Essilor merger has no negative implication for India. But that should be established by CCI after a proper review, not assumed away at the outset.
No comments:
Post a Comment