WEBVTT NOTE Economic Planning and India’s Economic Performance: A Re-Examination 1 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.400 Very good morning to everyone. 2 00:00:02.400 --> 00:00:07.600 The title of my paper is Economic Planning and India's Economic Performance, a Re-examination. 3 00:00:07.600 --> 00:00:10.000 Well, that's the tentative title, anyway. 4 00:00:10.000 --> 00:00:14.160 Before I begin, just a little bit of background regarding Indian history, 5 00:00:14.160 --> 00:00:16.480 to just put what I'm saying in perspective. 6 00:00:16.480 --> 00:00:21.520 For nearly more than a hundred years, or maybe 150 years, India was a colony of the British. 7 00:00:21.520 --> 00:00:27.840 In 1947, you know, she got independent from the British. 8 00:00:27.840 --> 00:00:33.040 and in 1950 they put in place a Central Economically Planned Economy, 9 00:00:33.040 --> 00:00:35.920 went down the road of development planning, whichever way you want to say it. 10 00:00:35.920 --> 00:00:43.440 In 91 there were a set of like pro-market reforms introduced, so that's where we stand today. 11 00:00:43.440 --> 00:00:50.080 Well, at independence India was a very underdeveloped economy, 12 00:00:50.080 --> 00:00:55.040 more than 70% of the workforce made its living off the land, 13 00:00:55.040 --> 00:01:11.040 The production processes were very short, there was not many capital goods, nearly 80-85% of total commodity consumption were of agriculture or manufactures based on agricultural materials, which means very short processes of production. 14 00:01:11.040 --> 00:01:20.160 Now, all economists who have analyzed the Indian economy all have concluded that prior to independence, 15 00:01:20.160 --> 00:01:27.400 the GDP growth rate of India was in the 1 to 1.5% per annum range, but post-independence 16 00:01:27.400 --> 00:01:34.400 and the introduction of economic planning, it went up to about the 4% per annum range 17 00:01:34.400 --> 00:01:41.020 and they conclude from this that the introduction of economic planning caused a huge improvement 18 00:01:41.020 --> 00:01:45.260 in India's Economic Performance. 19 00:01:45.260 --> 00:01:49.980 What is surprising here is that this view is held by economists regardless of their political 20 00:01:49.980 --> 00:01:50.980 beliefs. 21 00:01:50.980 --> 00:01:56.060 So you have, I mean, of course, India is famous for a, I mean, vast horde of economists who 22 00:01:56.060 --> 00:02:01.940 are pro-planning, but there are few who do, who are supposedly free market. 23 00:02:01.940 --> 00:02:07.820 For example, the most famous being Jagdish Bhagwati, who is at Columbia University. 24 00:02:07.820 --> 00:02:08.820 ividers. 25 00:02:08.820 --> 00:02:09.820 I mean, he's a renegade planner. 26 00:02:09.820 --> 00:02:12.940 He was a planner before, but he's now more, he's moving more towards, he's moved towards 27 00:02:12.940 --> 00:02:15.780 free market over his career. 28 00:02:15.780 --> 00:02:21.220 More recently, there is his student who also teaches at Columbia University, Arvind Panagariya. 29 00:02:21.220 --> 00:02:26.400 But what's surprising is that these economists too, even though they support the pro-market 30 00:02:26.400 --> 00:02:33.340 movement of the Indian economy post-1991, they all agree that, yeah, you know, the introduction 31 00:02:33.340 --> 00:02:36.540 of economic planning did boost India's GDP growth rate. 32 00:02:36.540 --> 00:02:42.540 They hedge that. They say that the growth rate wasn't as high as it should have been to eradicate India's poverty. 33 00:02:42.540 --> 00:02:50.540 It wasn't as high as other countries' growth rates were, who also gained independence around the same time and didn't introduce economic planning. 34 00:02:50.540 --> 00:02:57.540 But they do, nevertheless, concede that there was this huge boost to India's GDP growth rate. 35 00:02:57.540 --> 00:03:02.540 So we can't say that economic performance did not improve. 36 00:03:02.540 --> 00:03:07.340 So, I mean, that seemed like surprising to me when I was reading this because I was like, 37 00:03:07.340 --> 00:03:13.820 how can you support, like, oppose planning and support the market when you can't, you 38 00:03:13.820 --> 00:03:18.060 know, when you're saying that, yeah, the introduction of economic planning did lead to an increase 39 00:03:18.060 --> 00:03:21.260 in improved economic performance. 40 00:03:21.260 --> 00:03:27.100 I mean, so this is very, I mean, all the leftists, I mean, the Indian leftists, the pro planners, 41 00:03:27.100 --> 00:03:31.420 they all generally, you know, they always say that, oh, if only planning had been done 42 00:03:31.420 --> 00:03:44.420 If only we had got the bureaucracy right, if only we had actually kicked out all the private producers, if only this growth rate would have been 10%, 12%, but you get my point. 43 00:03:44.420 --> 00:03:53.420 My paper attempts to critique this view that the introduction of planning and the causation between that and GDP. 44 00:03:53.420 --> 00:04:01.660 My basic point is that given the nature of the Indian economy and given the nature of 45 00:04:01.660 --> 00:04:07.940 production in a centrally planned command economy, that GDP figures can no longer be 46 00:04:07.940 --> 00:04:14.140 interpreted as indicators of economic progress. That's my basic thesis. 47 00:04:14.140 --> 00:04:22.800 Before I get into a few words about the Indian economy and the planning, I just want to briefly 48 00:04:22.800 --> 00:04:26.800 What is the vision of the Indian planners? 49 00:04:26.800 --> 00:04:34.800 When we analyze a market-based economy, we are never asked this question because entrepreneurs are producing thousands of different commodities. 50 00:04:34.800 --> 00:04:38.800 Nobody has any one vision which they want to take the economy towards. 51 00:04:38.800 --> 00:04:45.800 But in any case where there is a centrally planned economy, the vision of the planners becomes very important. 52 00:04:45.800 --> 00:04:51.800 In India's case, the economic planner was Jawaharlal Nehru. 53 00:04:51.800 --> 00:05:03.800 I mean, until his death in 1964, and my paper really deals with the first 15 to 20 years of India's post-independence economic history. 54 00:05:03.800 --> 00:05:10.800 He was the economic planner and all plans went through him. He was the Prime Minister as well as the head of the Planning Commission. 55 00:05:10.800 --> 00:05:24.800 So, even a superficial perusal of his writings will show you that his basic vision for India was to make it an industrial superpower. 56 00:05:24.800 --> 00:05:32.800 So, rapid industrialization, but also not only just rapid industrialization, but rapid industrialization within Indian borders. 57 00:05:32.800 --> 00:05:40.800 So we have to produce these heavy machinery, power and all these capital goods, but we 58 00:05:40.800 --> 00:05:43.640 have to do it in India, we cannot be dependent on other countries. 59 00:05:43.640 --> 00:05:48.400 So I'm quoting from one of his many speeches, he says, the real strength that is for a country 60 00:05:48.400 --> 00:05:52.280 comes from industrialization, from modern techniques. 61 00:05:52.280 --> 00:05:56.400 The test of real strength is how much steel you produce, how much power you produce and 62 00:05:56.400 --> 00:05:57.400 use. 63 00:05:57.400 --> 00:06:01.040 And he goes on to say, you cannot advance or industrialize this country without an industrial 64 00:06:01.040 --> 00:06:02.040 base. 65 00:06:02.040 --> 00:06:13.120 And he says that if you do not establish that industrial base, you not only do not advance 66 00:06:13.120 --> 00:06:17.120 fast enough, but you are tied up to other countries who are economically dominant over 67 00:06:18.120 --> 00:06:19.760 You are not economically free completely. 68 00:06:19.760 --> 00:06:24.240 So you know, it's like socialism in one country kind of. 69 00:06:24.240 --> 00:06:27.720 But I mean, what were the means that the Indian planners used to achieve these ends? 70 00:06:27.720 --> 00:06:30.800 They did build up a huge public sector. 71 00:06:30.800 --> 00:06:37.840 I mean, under the first three, five-year plans, more than 50% of allocated investment was 72 00:06:37.840 --> 00:06:40.200 towards the public sector. 73 00:06:40.200 --> 00:06:45.800 And the public sector was built up in specifically these so-called, what Nehru called, mother 74 00:06:45.800 --> 00:06:51.520 industries or heavy industries, you know, machine tools, power, iron and steel, things 75 00:06:51.520 --> 00:06:54.520 like that. 76 00:06:54.520 --> 00:06:59.080 But at the same time, all private firms were not nationalized, I mean, it wasn't like the 77 00:06:59.080 --> 00:07:05.640 in the Soviet Union. It wasn't what Mises has called post-office socialism, where every 78 00:07:05.640 --> 00:07:11.680 form is nationalized and resembles the post-office. Instead, there was an extensive public sector 79 00:07:11.680 --> 00:07:16.120 and it co-existed with this private sector. I mean, I guess you could say India in some 80 00:07:16.120 --> 00:07:21.440 ways resembled more a command economy, what Mises would have called a zwangswehrschaft, 81 00:07:21.440 --> 00:07:33.440 Okay, but what the government did was it assumed vast powers of control over the private sector 82 00:07:33.440 --> 00:07:40.120 and the key, the most important power of control it had was it introduced this industrial licensing 83 00:07:40.120 --> 00:07:47.720 system under the Industries Development and Regulation Act. 84 00:07:47.720 --> 00:07:52.920 So under the Act, all private industrial undertakings had to register with the central government. 85 00:07:52.920 --> 00:07:58.160 Furthermore, no new industrial undertaking could be set up and no existing undertaking 86 00:07:58.160 --> 00:08:03.520 could be expanded without obtaining a license from the government. 87 00:08:03.520 --> 00:08:07.880 All licenses minimally specified the product and its maximum quantity. 88 00:08:07.880 --> 00:08:11.760 In addition, they could, I mean, the Act gave the central government the right to specify 89 00:08:11.760 --> 00:08:15.000 the minimum scale of the plant and the location of production. 90 00:08:15.000 --> 00:08:25.640 Over and above this, you had import and export licensing so that the central government could 91 00:08:25.640 --> 00:08:30.560 allocate scarce foreign exchange, you had capital issues control under the Companies 92 00:08:30.560 --> 00:08:37.400 Act of 1956, which is largely to do with how the private sector can raise capital from 93 00:08:37.400 --> 00:08:43.800 the markets and things like that, then there was price and distribution control, a whole 94 00:08:43.800 --> 00:08:50.440 Vast set of controls. Now, what is important to understand, and this is sometimes we missed 95 00:08:50.440 --> 00:08:56.680 in when people have dealt with India's economic issue under planning, was that these interventions 96 00:08:56.680 --> 00:09:02.400 and controls weren't ad hoc. They were all tools used by the planners to direct private 97 00:09:02.400 --> 00:09:05.720 production and investment. So, in a sense, the Indian planners were really smart. They 98 00:09:05.720 --> 00:09:09.800 realized that it's a poor country. We're not going to be able to do everything through 99 00:09:09.800 --> 00:09:39.800 The State had ultimate control over production and that the private sector was private you could say only 100 00:09:39.800 --> 00:09:48.760 In fact, the Ministry of Commerce and Industry of India, when it was describing the criteria 101 00:09:48.760 --> 00:09:54.800 on which these industrial licenses were issued, stated that the schemes submitted by the entrepreneurs 102 00:09:54.800 --> 00:09:59.400 under the Act are carefully examined, taking into consideration not only the technical 103 00:09:59.400 --> 00:10:04.040 feasibility of the schemes, but also certain factors such as the present and future demand 104 00:10:04.040 --> 00:10:09.040 vis-a-vis plan targets, availability of raw materials, appropriate location and the importance 105 00:10:09.040 --> 00:10:13.040 The importance of the item in the light of the priorities fixed in the plan. 106 00:10:13.040 --> 00:10:20.040 Well, just a short word now about GDP figures. 107 00:10:20.040 --> 00:10:27.040 Well, GDP figures measure the value of final goods and services produced in an economy over a given time period. 108 00:10:27.040 --> 00:10:33.040 And they therefore necessarily make use of data on prices and goods and services produced. 109 00:10:33.040 --> 00:10:36.040 Well, they are historical in nature. 110 00:10:36.040 --> 00:10:39.960 So when you look at a GDP figure, it's something which happened at a particular point of time. 111 00:10:39.960 --> 00:10:43.320 Those goods were produced at a particular point of time in a certain country. 112 00:10:44.280 --> 00:10:49.240 Now when they're used as indicators of economic progress, you implicitly assume, 113 00:10:49.240 --> 00:10:54.200 the analyst implicitly assumes that production aims to satisfy consumer desires or consumer 114 00:10:54.200 --> 00:10:57.640 preferences because I mean production is never an end in itself, it's only a means to an end. 115 00:10:57.640 --> 00:11:02.680 So when you say that the GDP, you know, of a country went up over a certain period of time 116 00:11:02.680 --> 00:11:08.680 And that's a good thing, you're saying that, yeah, those goods which are produced aim to satisfy consumer preferences. 117 00:11:11.680 --> 00:11:19.680 Well, so the question that then arises is, does the nature of economic activity, the nature of an economy, 118 00:11:20.680 --> 00:11:24.680 I mean, does that affect whether production is geared towards consumer preferences or not? 119 00:11:24.680 --> 00:11:31.680 I mean, can you say that a market-based economy as well as a centrally planned economy both cater to consumer preferences? 120 00:12:01.680 --> 00:12:08.160 The revenues that he can generate from that production plan will more than cover the cost 121 00:12:08.160 --> 00:12:15.280 that he has to incur on the factors of production. 122 00:12:15.280 --> 00:12:20.460 And then of course, if an entrepreneur succeeds in this, he is basically, and if he does make 123 00:12:20.460 --> 00:12:26.140 a profit, that means he has allocated resources to areas which satisfy consumer preferences. 124 00:12:26.140 --> 00:12:30.880 If he makes a loss, he hasn't and he's out of the market, another entrepreneur stepping. 125 00:12:30.880 --> 00:12:45.880 But Mises also pointed out that there are certain institutional preconditions which are required for this process to take place, for this profit loss system to be in place, for there to be what he called monetary calculation, which the entrepreneur uses. 126 00:12:45.880 --> 00:12:52.880 Now those institutional preconditions, the institutional precondition is the private property ownership of the means of production. 127 00:12:52.880 --> 00:13:04.880 Mises' second point was that when there is common ownership or when there is socialized means of production that there would be no way the planner would be groping in the dark. 128 00:13:04.880 --> 00:13:12.880 There is no cost accounting, there is no way for him to engage in cost accounting, there is no profit-loss system, he cannot calculate. 129 00:13:12.880 --> 00:13:18.320 Now I understand that these arguments apply to pure socialism, a socialist world economy 130 00:13:18.320 --> 00:13:24.680 where all economies of the whole world are socialist. 131 00:13:24.680 --> 00:13:29.920 When you apply it to countries such as India, you have to hedge the argument. 132 00:13:29.920 --> 00:13:31.440 I understand that. 133 00:13:31.440 --> 00:13:35.520 So, for example, India was just one country in the world economy. 134 00:13:35.520 --> 00:13:41.320 Even within India, as Murray Rothbard pointed out in Man Economy State, he said that you 135 00:13:41.320 --> 00:13:46.040 You generally tend to overestimate the socialization in, for example, a socialist country like 136 00:13:46.040 --> 00:13:47.040 the Soviet Union. 137 00:13:47.040 --> 00:13:53.960 There's black markets, there's the unorganized or the indigenous sectors in these economies 138 00:13:53.960 --> 00:13:58.100 which you're not able to take over. 139 00:13:58.100 --> 00:14:06.360 But you can say that to the extent that the state allocates scarce resources and capital, 140 00:14:06.360 --> 00:14:12.660 that there is huge irrationalities in the factor markets, especially in the market for 141 00:14:12.660 --> 00:14:19.080 capital goods, because while you have a black market or while you have an indigenous, they 142 00:14:19.080 --> 00:14:24.080 are all engaging in short processes of production, but definitely in the longer process of production 143 00:14:24.080 --> 00:14:31.440 in the capital goods, especially when a poor country like India is taking on rapid industrialization, 144 00:14:31.440 --> 00:14:35.080 the argument holds especially for those industries. 145 00:14:35.080 --> 00:14:40.780 But we have to remember that Mises' argument, I mean you could in that argument assume that 146 00:14:40.780 --> 00:14:44.040 planners are trying to satisfy consumer preferences. 147 00:14:44.040 --> 00:14:48.540 In fact that was a strength, I mean in my view of Mises' argument, he said even if 148 00:14:48.540 --> 00:14:54.400 planners are there saying look we want to satisfy consumer preferences, even then they 149 00:14:54.400 --> 00:14:59.480 wouldn't be able to do it because they don't have factor markets, you know, there is no 150 00:14:59.480 --> 00:15:02.080 cost accounting, there is no profit-loss system. 151 00:15:02.080 --> 00:15:09.000 But we see that in the case of, for example, India, that planners weren't even trying 152 00:15:09.000 --> 00:15:10.000 to be economic. 153 00:15:10.000 --> 00:15:12.160 They weren't, they were blatantly uneconomic. 154 00:15:12.160 --> 00:15:15.640 I mean, they were basically, they weren't saying that, yeah, we know there are consumer 155 00:15:15.640 --> 00:15:18.580 preferences, we know we have to produce and cater to them. 156 00:15:18.580 --> 00:15:22.080 The market is irrational, it's anarchic, we'll do our best. 157 00:15:22.080 --> 00:15:28.240 No, they were saying, what we need to do is to rapidly industrialize. 158 00:15:28.240 --> 00:15:33.320 We need to take a poor country which prior to independence was importing most of its 159 00:15:33.320 --> 00:15:37.760 capital goods and we need to convert it into this industrial superpower. 160 00:15:37.760 --> 00:15:41.320 So they are being blatantly uneconomic. 161 00:15:41.320 --> 00:15:46.160 I mean they are blatantly not even trying to satisfy consumer preferences. 162 00:15:46.160 --> 00:15:51.880 So I mean as a result you can see that in a command economy such as India's, the state 163 00:15:51.880 --> 00:15:57.320 makes production decisions, prices if they exist are mere parameters, profit-loss systems 164 00:15:57.320 --> 00:16:02.360 Breakdown, and most importantly, production becomes an end in itself, like it's no longer 165 00:16:02.360 --> 00:16:09.480 a means to an end, an economy is more like a machine. So that has implications for what 166 00:16:09.480 --> 00:16:14.600 we can say about GDP figures and whether we can interpret GDP figures to be indicators 167 00:16:14.600 --> 00:16:19.640 of economic progress or not. So, I mean, that's my basic thesis, that given the nature of 168 00:16:19.640 --> 00:16:24.680 the Indian economy, given that it was highly, more or less a command economy, given that 169 00:16:24.680 --> 00:16:30.280 There were planners of blatantly uneconomic in their proposed allocation of resources 170 00:16:30.280 --> 00:16:36.000 that you can no longer say that just because the GDP growth rate went up that it was good 171 00:16:36.000 --> 00:16:43.000 or it was a signified economic progress. 172 00:16:43.000 --> 00:16:46.600 I mean, in conclusion, what I'd like to say is, I mean, this is something I've not worked 173 00:16:46.600 --> 00:16:52.400 on enough, but that, okay, if you don't look at GDP, you need to try to look at something 174 00:17:22.400 --> 00:17:34.400 It's called India Progress or Poverty. It's a monograph issued by the IEA in 1971. 175 00:17:34.400 --> 00:17:41.400 I mean, it's a short book, but her breadth of historical knowledge about India is phenomenal. 176 00:17:41.400 --> 00:17:46.400 And in that she actually does a bit of what I'm hinting at. 177 00:17:46.400 --> 00:17:54.160 Hinting at, she looks at things like the food grain consumption per capita and the extent 178 00:17:54.160 --> 00:18:00.800 of cotton textiles or cotton yarn per capita and she looks at things like that and finds 179 00:18:00.800 --> 00:18:08.200 that through that period, they stayed more or less the same and there was no true development. 180 00:18:08.200 --> 00:18:09.200 Thank you for your time. 181 00:18:09.200 --> 00:18:16.200 applause 182 00:18:27.360 --> 00:18:34.360 Sorry, I couldn't get a question. 183 00:18:39.200 --> 00:18:46.200 and India means that the challenge is out of the realm of planning. 184 00:19:09.200 --> 00:19:15.480 or what they call the tier 2 or the tier 3 cities, not only the basic 4 or 5 metropolitans. 185 00:19:15.480 --> 00:19:20.540 It's because of the reduction in economic planning, because now more and more allocation 186 00:19:20.540 --> 00:19:23.200 of capital is in the hands of the private entrepreneurs. 187 00:19:23.200 --> 00:19:29.400 I believe that, yeah, I mean, you def without and that was the greater the extent of planning, 188 00:19:29.400 --> 00:19:37.980 the greater the extent of restriction of factor markets, the tougher you're going to have 189 00:19:37.980 --> 00:19:46.980 It's not that there's no planning, it's a question of who's to do the planning, politicians or participants in the market. 190 00:19:46.980 --> 00:19:54.980 There's an American law and economics scholar named Bernard Sagan, the late Bernard Sagan, who wrote a book called Land Use Without Planning, 191 00:19:54.980 --> 00:20:03.980 and a part of it is a case study of Houston, about 100 decades without any zoning laws, and they didn't find that Houston was still there, 192 00:20:03.980 --> 00:20:05.980 and so on. 193 00:20:05.980 --> 00:20:07.980 So it's still not known yet. 194 00:20:07.980 --> 00:20:11.980 So it's a myth that government planning for urbanization. 195 00:20:11.980 --> 00:20:17.980 Bring in the previous talk. 196 00:20:17.980 --> 00:20:21.980 One of the things that happen in India is that they allow capital to come in. 197 00:20:21.980 --> 00:20:23.980 Is that correct? 198 00:20:23.980 --> 00:20:27.980 Now there's people on capital, you can buy stocks in India. 199 00:20:27.980 --> 00:20:29.980 Yes, yes, much, much, yeah. 200 00:20:29.980 --> 00:20:31.980 Sure. 201 00:20:31.980 --> 00:20:44.980 How transparent is this thing? Do we need these international accounting things to help reassure investors in the United States about this one? 202 00:21:01.980 --> 00:21:17.980 I'm paraphrasing here, he said that he asked Mises this question, that if you line up all economies from the most market based, the most socialist, what is the one feature which swings it one way or the other, and Mises replied the existence of a capital market. 203 00:21:17.980 --> 00:21:30.980 So in that sense, the Indian stock market is alive and kicking post-91 as compared to pre-91, so in that sense I guess you have a lot more transparency that comes with greater trade. 204 00:21:30.980 --> 00:22:00.980 Just to tie that comment also, the idea that many people have that, let's say there's an Indian firm seeking capital on foreign capital markets, there are outside investors who might be willing to make that investment, if only they receive pieces of information A, B and C, the idea that the Indian firm would be unwilling to provide that information in the absence of a state mandated disclosure system implies that these firms and investors are leaving huge amounts of money on the table. 205 00:22:00.980 --> 00:22:11.980 but are there obvious incentives for private planning, so to speak, or for the degree on standards of information disclosure that will be mutually beneficial? 206 00:22:11.980 --> 00:22:24.980 My question is, to what extent are you aware of literature or have you looked yourself at the actual compilation of GDP statistics in India, 207 00:22:24.980 --> 00:22:44.980 which obviously is done by a bureau which has incentives to supply the information that the planners want and also to what extent are they able to gain the historical numbers from pre-planning funds? 208 00:22:54.980 --> 00:22:59.560 My argument, basically, what I feel is that I don't need to get into that. 209 00:22:59.560 --> 00:23:02.980 Even if the figures are right, it doesn't matter. 210 00:23:02.980 --> 00:23:06.900 Even if all the figures were collected, you know, honestly by all government officials 211 00:23:06.900 --> 00:23:11.080 and there's nothing you can, you know, you can't raise a finger about that, it still 212 00:23:11.080 --> 00:23:12.080 doesn't mean anything. 213 00:23:12.080 --> 00:23:15.780 You still can't interpret it as, you know, as indicators of economic progress. 214 00:23:15.780 --> 00:23:18.060 And that's why I didn't get into that. 215 00:23:18.060 --> 00:23:19.060 That's why I didn't get into that. 216 00:23:19.060 --> 00:23:20.060 I'm aware of it. 217 00:23:20.060 --> 00:23:38.060 I'm just curious, I'm just wondering if India used to have an inter-application between the producer and the company, and whether they might actually consider __________ 218 00:23:50.060 --> 00:23:56.060 They still come out with five-year plans. I think we're on the 11th or the 12th right now. 219 00:23:56.060 --> 00:24:07.060 They do come out with it, and it's more now towards social welfare programs, such as poverty alleviation and things like that. 220 00:24:07.060 --> 00:24:17.060 But while that's there, I don't think that those input-output, the state is not allocating capital on the basis of those input-output, 221 00:24:17.060 --> 00:24:24.060 on the basis of the cyber plans anymore because they have basically reduced the extent of control over the private sector. 222 00:24:28.060 --> 00:24:30.060 Okay, thank you very much.