The Hindu : Opinion / Letters to the Editor : Rural bank branches

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Saturday, Mar 29, 2008
ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version

Opinion

Opinion - Letters to the Editor

Rural bank branches

That the number of rural branches of commercial banks has gone down over the last 15 years (March 28) is disappointing but not surprising because it is a logically predictable outcome of our banking reforms process. Rural branches could, for various reasons, never do enough for priming the economic development of rural India. What is regrettable is that like most other problems of rural India, an alternative and appropriate model for rural banking has only been talked about extensively over the years but has not been matched by action at the ground level.

M. Hanumantha Rao,

Hyderabad

* * *

The data revealed in the report reinforce the crocodile-tears-shedding syndrome of our governments while addressing rural distress. Instead of attacking the root of the problem which is increasing impoverishment of a majority with unmanageable riches for a privileged few, an insensitive trivialisation of the same is exhibited by the privileged in branding the suggestions to resolve these anomalies as attempts at distribution of poverty.

Kasim Sait,

Chennai

* * *

There are about six lakh villages in India and we are grappling with the problem of delivery of services in every sector, be it banking, telecom, education or healthcare. For some services such as banking, the opening of a branch in each village will not necessarily translate into better delivery of services. The wide network model is a failed model. The rapid increase in bank lending to the agriculture sector despite the closure of rural branches proves this point. Of course, what has been done so far is not enough. The banking sector is trying to find innovative ways to deliver services to rural India. Micro-finance and self-help groups are pointers in this direction. The public sector too could do better than what it is doing now but it will not. That is because trade unions will not accept practices such as outsourcing which are essential to provide urban amenities to rural areas.

Suresh Krishnamurthy,

Chennai

* * *

The comparative figures quoted in the report refer to the number of rural branches in 1993 and 2007. Many of the branches treated as ‘rural’ in 1993 would have become ‘semi urban’ because the population of the centre would have crossed 10,000 (cut-off population for rural branch) in the 20-year period from 1981-2001.

V. Rajan,

Thiruvananthapuram

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

News Update

Stories in this Section

Adjusting to ground realities

Trouble in Basra

Look back in anger: the five-year folly in Iraq

A range of issues and imperatives in the higher education sector

Hillary Clinton and embroidered memories

Corrections and clarifications