The race to succeed British Prime Minister, Boris
Johnson has become an international sensation, particularly in India. The
reason is simple, the front runner of succeed Mr. Johnson, is the former
Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Rishi Sunak, who is of Indian descent.
The news of Mr. Sunak’s success has gone set the Indian
media on fire and his expected accent to the premiership of the UK is portrayed
as “karma” for British rule of India.
In a way, its good to see Mr. Sunak succeed. If you
look at it from the Singapore perspective, the only question one can ask is “how
is that nobody in the UK seems to care that Mr. Sunak comes from a ethnic
minority, whilst in Singapore, despite 55-years of pledging to be “regardless
of race or religion,” we’re still told that we are not ready for a Prime
Minister from an ethnic minority.”
The fact that Mr. Sunak’s rise has not raised an eye-brow
speaks well for the UK. Its as if ethnic origins have become immaterial. The
British Press has thus far not talked about a “First Indian Origin” Prime Minister
in the same way that the American press talked about “First Black” President
when Obama took power back in 2008.
There’s much going in favour of Mr. Sunak. He’s highly
presentable (he’s officially known as “Dishy Rishi” and was voted sexiest male
politician by Daily Mirror readers) and articulate. He was praised for his
handling of the Covid-19 relief. After three years of an incompetent fat slob,
it would be nice to have someone presentable and vaguely competent in charge.
There is, however, one major but unfocused minus point
against Sunak. The minus point that everyone focused on was the fact that his
wife. Ms. Akshata Murthy, daughter of Infosys co-founder, Mr. N.R Narayana
Murthy, was registered as “non-domicile” in the UK and didn’t pay a penny to
the exchequer on her very vast dividend income from Infosys shares.
Being a “non-domicile” was not illegal but it didn’t
look good. More importantly, it distracted everyone from the real issue – which
is what exactly is the influence that Infosys plays in Mr. Sunak’s political
career.
Now, Mr. Sunak has admitted that he has received advice
from his father-in-law and he’s admitted that his father-in-law is not easily
impressed. This isn’t what you’d call anything abnormal in a family situation:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Rq8RIAP20g
Then, in fairness to Mr. Narayana Murthy, he is one of the “good guys” in the capitalist story coming out of India. Mr. Murthy made his fortune in a sector of the Indian economy that functions at international standards (Intellect’s Design’s Managing Director, Arun Jain, once called it the sector that the Indian government stays out of). He isn’t “inherited” wealth nor did he use dubious letters of credit to swindle people. Mr. Murthy is a “hero” by anyone’s standards and if there is anyone you should take advice from, it is Mr. Murthy.
Mr. Sunak is rightfully proud of what his in-laws have
achieved and, in many ways, their success story is what “conservative” parties
should proclaim:
https://indianexpress.com/article/world/rishi-sunak-hits-back-over-wife-infosys-wealth-8036715/
However, while nobody expects Mr. Sunak not to have
any contact with Mr. Murthy at all, what role is the well being of Infosys
going to take in Mr. Sunak’s decision making. As benign as Mr. Murthy is, every
political office holder in a democratic system needs to be clear about where
their interests are.
While nobody has yet to raise the question and nobody
has yet to suggests that it has. Ms. Akshata Murthy merely owns shares and Mr.
Murthy has officially left the running of Infosys in 2014. However, Mr. Murthy
is still an influential figure in Infosys and when so much of the family wealth
is tied up in a single company, one needs to make clear where the lines are drawn.
This isn’t to suggests that Mr. Sunak or Infosys will do anything unethical but,
in a day, and age of social media, one should be very clear about certain
things.
Let’s face it, the record of politicians being a bit too
cozy with business isn’t stellar. America just had four years of a president
who used the state to further his own business. While the Donald was loud about
how he was only working for a single dollar a year, somehow the Trump International
Hotel in Washington became the favorite haunt of international dignitaries and
whenever he visited Mar-A-Lago, he could bill the state for the Secret Service accommodation.
Believe it or not, he wasn’t the first politician who
refused to sever ties with his business whilst in office. In the 1990s, the
Italians had Silvio Berlusconi, who became the European role model for Thakshin
Shinawatra a few years later. All these men never really made it clear where
their business interest ended.
Singapore has a different take on “conflict of
interest.” For years, the head of the “Sovereign Wealth Fund” (which Temasek Holdings
is in practice, even if it legally isn’t one), was married to the Prime
Minister and the daughter-in-law of the highly influential first Prime
Minister. On paper, there was no
official conflict. Temasek Holdings have been shouting about how they are “independent”
of the government. Then, there’s the fact that Temasek Holdings is owned by the
State rather than the Lee family, you could say that there’s no issue here
(even if Madam Ho’s salary was a state secret while her husband’s was out in
the open).
However, if you look at the way Singapore Inc has
functioned, you’ll notice that the “big” Singapore companies have inevitably
failed to grow beyond Singapore’s miniscule domestic market. The only exception
would be SIA, which operates in a space where domestic protection is pointless
and SingTel, which bought companies from elsewhere. How is it, for example,
that laws get passed that seem to benefit the big players. One of the most
prominent areas is in finance, where as Emanuel Daniel, publisher of the Asian
Banking and Finance Journal pointed out – the regulator ensured that FinTech
companies would be mere subcontractors to the banks instead of competing with the
banks. Officially, there’s nothing wrong with our companies until they have to
function outside the protected ecosystem of Singapore.
Mr. Sunak has a chance to be something exciting for the
UK. However, he needs to be clear as to where Infosys’s interest end and his
begin. As long he does that he should be a decent enough amount of fresh air
after the incompetent Johnson years.
No comments
Post a Comment