Advani is not wrong in
any sense. In many areas in America particularly Chicago, New York, Los Angles
all have issues with Wall-Mart’s low wages and its impact on local mom and pops
which it tends to wipe out the moment it sets up a store. A bout 73% of NY
residents voted against Walmart in NYC. When Wall-Mart is considered to be bad for USA
economy due to jobs loss, and bad for family because of low wages, how can it
be expected to be good for. It actually procures junks products from and
distribute in America and elsewhere.
Where is the guarantee that it will not do the same in India?
Wall-Mart already has a joint venture with
Bharati. It is alleged that
Bharti-Walmart is illegally carrying out multi-brand retail trade despite being
permitted only to carry out wholesale cash and-carry or wholesale trade in the
country. On the basis of the suit filed by environmental activist Vandana
Shiva, the Delhi High Court sought replies of the Centre, Bharti-Walmart and
Bharti Retail on a plea for a probe against the firms for allegedly carrying
out retail trading in the multi-brand sector in violation of India’s existing
FDI policy. Thus, even before getting permission to operate Wall-Mart has
violated Indian rules and regulations has unlawfully involved in multi-brand
retail trading. Will Wall-Mart and other multinational retail giants respect
Indian laws once permission is granted to operate multiband retail stores?
Moreover, if Wall-Mart or Tesco set shop in New
Delhi and may source products to the neighbouring Uttar Pradesh, Haryana or
Punjab. And in keeping with the mandate to invest at least 50 per cent of the
FDI component in back-end infrastructure, Wall-Mart ,Tesco or others will have to invest in manufacturing and processing
facilities, cold storage and other logistics in neigbouring states. Therefore, indirectly they are permitted to
operate in a state which has not permitted FDI in retail trade.
.
No comments:
Post a Comment