Blog for Stock tips, Equity tips, Commodity tips, Forex tips: Sharetipsinfo.com

With just a few days to go until the opening of COP27 of the UNFCCC, and with every day marked by multiple climate disasters in some part of the world or other, developing and vulnerable countries are set to put the spot light on their demand to the rich world to deliver on the promised and new climate finance to help them mitigate, adapt, and survive.

In the lead is the V20 group of finance ministers, who have announced their intent to stop payment on a combined $685 billion in debt until the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank address Climate Change the way their nations see fit. Their goal is to create a plan to swap some of their debt for climate adaptation and conservation projects.

Formed in 2015, the V20 group of finance ministers is a dedicated co-operation initiative of 58 economies systematically vulnerable to Climate Change. It is currently chaired by Ken Ofori-Atta, Finance Minister of the Republic of Ghana.

The UN Conference on Trade and Development research shows that regions facing higher vulnerability to Climate Change are more likely to suffer from severe indebtedness. High debt payments mean countries have fewer resources for mitigating and adapting to Climate Change. Yet Climate Change is increasing their vulnerability, and that can raise their sovereign risk, increasing the cost of borrowing. Declining productive capacity and tax base can lead to higher debt risks. It’s a vicious cycle.

With the economic situation worsening in all developing economies countries, international organisations are talking about “debt-for-climate swaps” to help tackle both problems at the same time. UN Deputy Secretary-General Amina Mohammed mentioned debt-for-climate swaps ahead of COP27 as one option for refinancing countries’ “crippling” debt. Developed economies could write off a developing economy’s debts, unburdening them of repayments and interest, allowing them to redirect the money towards supporting their own loss, and damage costs.

A report by the European Network on Debt and Development (Eurodad) said 37 island and coastal countries that are home to some 65 million people, received just $1.5 billion in climate finance between 2016 and 2020. Over the same period, 22 of the nations paid more than $26.6 billion to their external creditors. Public debt levels in the island states had risen from an average of near 66 percent of gross domestic product in 2019 to nearly 83 percent in 2020, and were set to remain above 70 percent until 2025.

The average debt for low- and middle-income countries, excluding China, reached 42 percent of their gross national income in 2020, up from 26 percent in 2011. For countries in Latin America, and the Caribbean, the annual payments just to service that debt averaged 30 percent of their total exports.

One thing is clear, without substantial debt relief, debtor countries are forced to accelerate natural resource exploitation to pay the debt, side-lining these environmental ambitions, and hindering future economic security. It is, therefore, imperative to align debt restructuring with climate and development goals.

Debt-for-climate swaps allow countries to reduce their debt obligations in exchange for a commitment to finance domestic climate projects with the freed-up financial resources.

They have been used since the late 1980s to preserve the environment and address the liquidity crisis in developing countries, including Bolivia, Costa Rica, and Belize. Belize, for example, was able to lower its debt in exchange for committing to designate 30 percent of its marine areas as protected areas, and to spend $4 million a year for the next two decades on marine conservation under a complex debt-for-nature swap. While debt-for-nature swaps have been used mostly for conservation, the same concept could be expanded to Climate Change mitigation and adaptation activities.

A country’s debt rests with many creditors, ranging from multilateral funds to other countries. Each would have to be engaged and negotiated with to excuse the outstanding debt making difficult calls on which country receives debt relief first, and on what basis.

Some finance experts have suggested that debt-for-climate swaps could be structured in a way that could also encourage private-sector bond holders to exchange the national debt they hold for carbon offsets.

Debt cancellation mechanisms may bring relief to developing nations that are struggling with the impacts of Climate Change. However, rushing into such an ambitious policy could be disastrous without a rigorous feasibility study, and careful planning. Any agreement to cancel debt would likely require the excusing parties to be assured that the money will reach the most vulnerable communities on the ground and not be swallowed up by corruption or internal bureaucracies.

India's services sector picked up pace in October as the Purchasing Managers' Index (PMI) for last month edged up from September's six-month low.

Data released on November 3 by S&P Global showed the services PMI rose to 55.1 in October from 54.3 in September.

A reading above 50 indicates expansion in activity while a sub-50 print signals contraction.

The October print is the 15th month in a row that the services PMI has come in above the key level of 50.

"Favourable demand for services continued to underpin increases in new business and output at the start of the third fiscal quarter. Moreover, rates of expansion quickened from September's six-month lows. Buoyed by the ongoing recovery in new work, service providers again took on extra staff, with an improvement in business confidence also supporting hiring activity," S&P Global noted.

Click Here:- Get Live Share Market Tips From Sharetipsinfo

The price of commercial liquid petroleum gas (LPG) cylinders was slashed by Rs 115.50 on November 1. A 19-kg commercial LPG cylinder will now cost Rs 1,744 in the national capital.

This is the first price fluctuation in commercial LPG cylinder prices by oil marketing companies (OMCs) since the prices were last raised in May. OMCs usually announce LPG price change at the beginning and middle of each month.

There is no change in the price of the 14.2 kg domestic LPG cylinder, which now cost Rs 1,053, as per the price notification from state-owned fuel retailers.

The price of a 19-kg commercial cylinder will now be Rs 1,846 in Kolkata, Rs 1,696 in Mumbai and Rs 1,893 in Chennai. You can look for the price in each city and district here.

Meanwhile, CNBC Awaaz reported that OMCs may also cut petrol and diesel prices by 40 paise from November 1.

According to the report, a reduction in oil prices by 40 paise is likely to occur daily for the next five days. That will bring a total reduction of Rs 2 in petrol and diesel prices in instalments.

OMCs suffer losses

Indian Oil Corporation had on October 29 reported a net loss of Rs 272.35 crore for the July-September quarter (Q2) despite booking over Rs 10,800 crore of government LPG subsidy, on the back of selling petrol, diesel below cost.

The net loss of Rs 272.35 crore compares to a profit of Rs 6,360.05 crore in July-September 2021, according to a company's filing with the stock exchanges.

The decline comes on the back of a Rs 1,992.53-crore loss incurred in the previous April-June quarter. This is the first time that IOC has booked losses in two straight quarters as it sold petrol, diesel and cooking gas (LPG) at rates below cost.

IOC, as well as other state-owned fuel retailers, had booked heavy losses in the first quarter of the current fiscal and did not revise petrol, diesel and cooking gas LPG prices in line with the cost to help the government contain runaway inflation.

The three firms, who are supposed to revise petrol and diesel prices daily in line with the cost, did not change rates for over six-and-half-months now – the longest freeze in rates since fuel pricing was deregulated.

Click Here:- 98% Sure Share market tips | Stock Market Tips - Low Fees and High Return

The unscheduled meeting  of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI)’s Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) called on November 3 will likely be a non-event for the markets in the near term, but for the long term this meeting can lay down some healthy precedents.

First, the near-term impact. A section of the market fears that an unscheduled meeting can always include a mid-term rate action. I beg to differ. The press release announcing the meeting makes it clear this meeting has been called only because the MPC has failed to achieve its mandate of keeping inflation between 2 percent and 6 percent for three quarters in a row.

The press release says an additional meeting of the MPC is being scheduled on November 3 under the provisions of Section 45ZN of the RBI Act, and Regulation 7 of the RBI Monetary Policy Process Regulations. Section 45ZN was included in the RBI Act in 2016, by the amendments which created the MPC, and gave it the mandate to keep inflation within bounds decided by the government (currently 2-6 percent).

Two Provisions

Section 45ZN is titled: Failure to maintain inflation target, and states, ‘Where the Bank fails to meet the inflation target, it shall set out in a report to the Central Government — (a) the reasons for failure to achieve the inflation target; (b) remedial actions proposed to be taken by the Bank; and (c) an estimate of the time-period within which the inflation target shall be achieved pursuant to timely implementation of proposed remedial actions.’

The other provision under which the meeting is called is Regulation 7 of the MPC Regulations. Regulation 7 is titled: Process to be followed in the event of a failure to meet the inflation target. The clause reads: ‘The Secretary to the Committee shall schedule a separate meeting as part of the normal policy process to discuss and draft the report to be sent to the Central Government under the provisions of Section 45ZN of the Act. The Report shall be sent to the Central Government within one month from the date on which the Bank has failed to meet the inflation target. The Bank shall send the report to the Central Government in the event of a failure to achieve the target as specified by Rules of the Central Government, in this regard.’

From the above two clauses it is clear that this meeting has been called only to draft the report to the government to explain why the MPC failed to keep inflation under 6 percent for three quarters. The September CPI number was announced on October 12. Coming at 7.41 percent, it became the ninth consecutive month of the CPI over 6 percent. Now, as per Regulation 7, the RBI has to send its explanatory report to government in one month, i.e. by November 12.

Timing Of The Meeting

The market’s worry stems in part from the timing of the meeting. Why didn’t the committee meet earlier? Why only a day after the FOMC meeting.

Here’s why: Immediately after October 12, the top brass of the RBI was away in Washington to attend the IMF-World Bank meetings. Then came the Diwali holidays. Hence the first week of November.

The day after the FOMC meet, is most likely a coincidence. The November 1-2 FOMC meeting dates were known well in advance, and the fact that it will most likely be a 75 bps hike was also known on September 22, when the US Fed published its dot-plot. Which means, the RBI and the MPC were aware, during their September 30 meeting that the US Fed would hike rates by 75 bps in November. Why call an unscheduled meeting to react to known data.

Also the inflation in the latest US Personal Consumption Expenditure (PCE) data — the measure that the US Fed follows for setting rates — came in at 5.1 percent, a tad lower than the 5.2 percent anticipated by the street. This is expected to make the US Fed confirm that it will step off the 75 bps hikes rhythm, and slow to a 50 bps hike in December. If that is the case, again, why should the RBI call for an unscheduled meeting? In any case the PCE data came on October 28, after the RBI had put out the November 3 meeting press release. Finally, the RBI and the MPC members have re-iterated that they don’t let external events influence their rate action. The rates are set to respond to domestic inflation only.

Therefore, to repeat, the MPC won’t take any rate action at its November 3 meeting. The meeting will merely discuss the report to be sent to government explaining reasons why CPI could not be kept below 6 percent for nine months. In all probability, this part of the report is easy to guess. The RBI will refer to the supply side constraints due to COVID-19, and the Ukraine war. It may also argue that inflation in most other countries is running way above their targets. The US CPI has been at 8-10 percent in 2022, versus a mandate of 2 percent. Likewise for the Eurozone, and the United Kingdom.

Point C

As for remedial measures, the RBI is again on firm ground: it can state that it has mostly rolled back excess liquidity provided during the pandemic, and even front-loaded the rate hikes. It may well say with some certainty that inflation will fall below its tolerance band of 6 percent by March.

For me the most interesting part is the point ‘c’ of the Section 45ZN, as per which the RBI has to state by when inflation will fall to ‘target’. This means the RBI will not only have to say when the CPI falls below 6 percent, but when it will come down to 4 percent — the given target. The governor has said in some interviews that this may take up to 2024. But it will be interesting to see what the RBI writes in the official report.

This report would have been more important if the MPC members, especially the external members, are extremely upset by the failure to keep the CPI within the mandate. Then one would have expected fiery rate hikes. But the last minutes of the MPC show that at least two members — Jayant Varma and Ashima Goyal — are the most dovish of the six. Varma is actually asking for rate hikes to stop at 6 percent. This also demolishes any speculation that there may be a rate hike on November 3.

Long Term Impact

The bigger question is, will the report be made public. The RBI Governor has stated that the contents are privileged, and meant for the government only. So, to be sure, the RBI won’t release the report. It will be interesting to see if the government releases the report.

Herein lies the long term impact of the November 3 meeting. The government making the report public will greatly add to transparency, and will be a healthy convention for the future. If the report is not divulged, the market will continue to speculate on its contents, and it may get volatile. It can raise doubts about the RBI’s independence, and the efficacy of the entire inflation-targeting mandate. Divulging the contents of the report can lead to a healthy debate on whether the RBI and the MPC were behind the curve, and hence missed their mandate, or whether they were sensible in not getting bogged down by the letter of the law, but give more weight to the macro realities of weak growth due to an unprecedented pandemic.

Hence, in the near term, for the markets, the November 3 meeting is likely to be a non-event. But in the long term, it can be an occasion to establish some healthy precedents.

The unscheduled meeting  of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI)’s Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) called on November 3 will likely be a non-event for the markets in the near term, but for the long term this meeting can lay down some healthy precedents.

First, the near-term impact. A section of the market fears that an unscheduled meeting can always include a mid-term rate action. I beg to differ. The press release announcing the meeting makes it clear this meeting has been called only because the MPC has failed to achieve its mandate of keeping inflation between 2 percent and 6 percent for three quarters in a row.

The press release says an additional meeting of the MPC is being scheduled on November 3 under the provisions of Section 45ZN of the RBI Act, and Regulation 7 of the RBI Monetary Policy Process Regulations. Section 45ZN was included in the RBI Act in 2016, by the amendments which created the MPC, and gave it the mandate to keep inflation within bounds decided by the government (currently 2-6 percent).

Two Provisions

Section 45ZN is titled: Failure to maintain inflation target, and states, ‘Where the Bank fails to meet the inflation target, it shall set out in a report to the Central Government — (a) the reasons for failure to achieve the inflation target; (b) remedial actions proposed to be taken by the Bank; and (c) an estimate of the time-period within which the inflation target shall be achieved pursuant to timely implementation of proposed remedial actions.’

The other provision under which the meeting is called is Regulation 7 of the MPC Regulations. Regulation 7 is titled: Process to be followed in the event of a failure to meet the inflation target. The clause reads: ‘The Secretary to the Committee shall schedule a separate meeting as part of the normal policy process to discuss and draft the report to be sent to the Central Government under the provisions of Section 45ZN of the Act. The Report shall be sent to the Central Government within one month from the date on which the Bank has failed to meet the inflation target. The Bank shall send the report to the Central Government in the event of a failure to achieve the target as specified by Rules of the Central Government, in this regard.’

From the above two clauses it is clear that this meeting has been called only to draft the report to the government to explain why the MPC failed to keep inflation under 6 percent for three quarters. The September CPI number was announced on October 12. Coming at 7.41 percent, it became the ninth consecutive month of the CPI over 6 percent. Now, as per Regulation 7, the RBI has to send its explanatory report to government in one month, i.e. by November 12.

Timing Of The Meeting

The market’s worry stems in part from the timing of the meeting. Why didn’t the committee meet earlier? Why only a day after the FOMC meeting.

Here’s why: Immediately after October 12, the top brass of the RBI was away in Washington to attend the IMF-World Bank meetings. Then came the Diwali holidays. Hence the first week of November.

The day after the FOMC meet, is most likely a coincidence. The November 1-2 FOMC meeting dates were known well in advance, and the fact that it will most likely be a 75 bps hike was also known on September 22, when the US Fed published its dot-plot. Which means, the RBI and the MPC were aware, during their September 30 meeting that the US Fed would hike rates by 75 bps in November. Why call an unscheduled meeting to react to known data.

Also the inflation in the latest US Personal Consumption Expenditure (PCE) data — the measure that the US Fed follows for setting rates — came in at 5.1 percent, a tad lower than the 5.2 percent anticipated by the street. This is expected to make the US Fed confirm that it will step off the 75 bps hikes rhythm, and slow to a 50 bps hike in December. If that is the case, again, why should the RBI call for an unscheduled meeting? In any case the PCE data came on October 28, after the RBI had put out the November 3 meeting press release. Finally, the RBI and the MPC members have re-iterated that they don’t let external events influence their rate action. The rates are set to respond to domestic inflation only.

Therefore, to repeat, the MPC won’t take any rate action at its November 3 meeting. The meeting will merely discuss the report to be sent to government explaining reasons why CPI could not be kept below 6 percent for nine months. In all probability, this part of the report is easy to guess. The RBI will refer to the supply side constraints due to COVID-19, and the Ukraine war. It may also argue that inflation in most other countries is running way above their targets. The US CPI has been at 8-10 percent in 2022, versus a mandate of 2 percent. Likewise for the Eurozone, and the United Kingdom.

Point C

As for remedial measures, the RBI is again on firm ground: it can state that it has mostly rolled back excess liquidity provided during the pandemic, and even front-loaded the rate hikes. It may well say with some certainty that inflation will fall below its tolerance band of 6 percent by March.

For me the most interesting part is the point ‘c’ of the Section 45ZN, as per which the RBI has to state by when inflation will fall to ‘target’. This means the RBI will not only have to say when the CPI falls below 6 percent, but when it will come down to 4 percent — the given target. The governor has said in some interviews that this may take up to 2024. But it will be interesting to see what the RBI writes in the official report.

This report would have been more important if the MPC members, especially the external members, are extremely upset by the failure to keep the CPI within the mandate. Then one would have expected fiery rate hikes. But the last minutes of the MPC show that at least two members — Jayant Varma and Ashima Goyal — are the most dovish of the six. Varma is actually asking for rate hikes to stop at 6 percent. This also demolishes any speculation that there may be a rate hike on November 3.

Long Term Impact

The bigger question is, will the report be made public. The RBI Governor has stated that the contents are privileged, and meant for the government only. So, to be sure, the RBI won’t release the report. It will be interesting to see if the government releases the report.

Herein lies the long term impact of the November 3 meeting. The government making the report public will greatly add to transparency, and will be a healthy convention for the future. If the report is not divulged, the market will continue to speculate on its contents, and it may get volatile. It can raise doubts about the RBI’s independence, and the efficacy of the entire inflation-targeting mandate. Divulging the contents of the report can lead to a healthy debate on whether the RBI and the MPC were behind the curve, and hence missed their mandate, or whether they were sensible in not getting bogged down by the letter of the law, but give more weight to the macro realities of weak growth due to an unprecedented pandemic.

Hence, in the near term, for the markets, the November 3 meeting is likely to be a non-event. But in the long term, it can be an occasion to establish some healthy precedents.

97% Accuracy Share Market Tips - Low Fees and High Return

Vikas Garg, Head of Fixed Income at Invesco Mutual Fund

Year 2022 is proving to be yet another year dominated by unprecedented events causing heightened volatility across global financial markets. While the year started on a positive note with many countries moving out of Covid-led disruptions, it was soon eclipsed by un-anticipated Russia-Ukraine conflict leading to a significant surge in global commodity prices and multi-decade high inflationary pressures in many developed countries.

Central bank US Fed has embarked upon aggressive monetary policy tightening led by steep policy rate hikes and quantitative tightening to tame inflation, thereby triggering massive dollar rally and forcing many other so-called safe haven currencies to go into tailspin.

Other key central banks are also undertaking fast paced rate hikes to control domestic inflation/currency. Consequently, global interest rates have remained extremely volatile during the year with an upward bias as market participants have struggled to gauge the inflation trajectory.

India has also seen a paradigm shift in interest rates during the year. RBI has already undertaken 190 basis point rate hike in policy repo rate and has withdrawn systemic liquidity to a great extent in response to the elevated inflation trajectory. Debt investors have been adversely impacted with high mark to market hit as domestic interest rates have hardened sharply during the year with a flattening bias.

Global backdrop continues to worsen with more rate hikes expected by the US Fed over the next few months. Indian fixed income has remained largely insulated to global spillovers on the strength of domestic stability, although the safety cushion has depleted rapidly with forex reserve falling to $524.52 billion and as India’s current account deficit remains high.

Further with FPI outflow of more than Rs 2 lakh crore year-till-date, rupee has depreciated sharply and crossed 83 against USD for the first time even as the RBI intervened to smoothen forex volatility. Much awaited inclusion of Indian G-Sec into global bond indices will now be reviewed by index providers in 2023 only as some of the operational aspects still need to be resolved with the India government.

RBI Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) has clearly articulated its concern on inflation which is reflected in retention of inflation forecasts at 6.70 percent for FY23. Domestic CPI inflation touched the 7 percent mark again in August 2022 compared with 6.71 percent in July, marginally higher than market expectations led by sharp rise in select food items such as cereals, pulses, and milk.

Core inflation remained elevated and came in at 6.1 percent YoY versus 6 percent in previous month. Supply side disruptions, geopolitical tensions, erratic rainfall, commodity prices & improving domestic demand conditions pose risks to inflation outlook, while growth seems to be fairly supported by domestic factors.

Also read - High Accuracy Share Market Tips - Plan Your Investments Today

With challenging global backdrop as many central banks tighten the monetary policies to tame inflationary pressures, huge fiscal supply and RBI’s expected rate hikes, we expect interest rates to remain volatile with an upward bias.

Nonetheless, risk-reward is looking favourable for the investors as absolute yields have risen considerably over the past 6 months and now give a reasonable safety cushion to absorb mark to market volatility. For instance, a 3 – 4 year G-Sec at 7.30 percent - 7.40 percent levels is up from the lows of 4.75 percent in December 2020 and is now similar to the levels last seen almost 4 years back.

Also read - RBI rate-setting panel plans unscheduled meet on November 3

Against the backdrop of still many uncertainties, we prefer using the conventional wisdom to contain interest rate risk with a moderate overall duration of debt investment portfolio. A much flatter yield curve gives an opportunity to investors to cut down on duration risk and still continue to maintain high accrual.

The 2 to 4 year segment of the yield remains well placed from carry perspective for medium to long investors, as it has already priced in more aggressive rate hikes and also lesser impacted by the rate volatility.

Credit environment remains healthy, however, current narrow spreads of AA / AA+ over AAA bonds do not provide favourable risk adjusted reward opportunities and we expect illiquidity premium to increase sharply over a period of time thereby posing mark to market challenges for this segment.

As per NSO (75th round), private sector accounts for 55 percent of patient care, public sector 42 percent, and 3 percent patents are treated in medical charitable trusts. Given this, for the private sector to be trustworthy partners in healthcare delivery, regulatory framework, and its mindful implication is imperative.

Recent news reports show that investigations by the Competition Commission of India (CCI) have found that some super-speciality hospitals of well-known chains that operate in the Delhi-National Capital Region abused their positions of dominance by charging “unfair and excessive prices” for renting rooms, medicines, medical tests, medical devices, and consumables.

The COVID-19 pandemic also highlighted the requirement for regulation with widespread complaints of over-charging, unnecessary procedures, issues in quality, denial of admission without advance, opaqueness in treatment protocols, and so on. At the same time, one must acknowledge that without the participation of private hospitals, India’s fight against COVID-19 was not possible. During the testing times, many states requisitioned beds in private hospitals, centrally allocated them at fixed charges, and the private hospitals willingly co-operated.

The Clinical Establishment Act 2010 and the Clinical Establishment Rules (2012) — which provide for registration and regulation of all clinical establishments in India with a view to prescribe the minimum standards of facilities and services provided by them — have been adopted by 11 states, and came into force in most union territories except Delhi. This is because states are free to enact their own Act.

The Indian Medical Association (IMA) has not been supportive of this Act. They object to the Act requiring private hospitals and clinics to provide standard facilities, and yet charge minimum fees. The law also requires hospitals and clinics to stabilise patients, who are in a critical condition; this may not be possible for small establishments not having specialists, they argue. It is true that healthcare establishments have to comply with multiple regulatory requirements.

The Report on the Working Group on Clinical Establishments, Professional Services Regulation and Accreditation of Health Care Infrastructure for the 11th Five-Year Plan highlights this issue while stating that, health regulation in India encompasses a variety of actors, and issues. These include promulgation of legislation for health facilities and services, disease control and medical care, human power (education, licensing, and professional responsibility), ethics and patients’ rights, pharmaceuticals and medical devices, radiation protection, poisons and hazardous substances, occupational health and accident prevention, elderly, disabled, and rehabilitation family, women and child health, mental health, smoking/tobacco control, social security and health insurance, environmental protection, nutrition and food safety, health information and statistics and custody, civil and human rights to enumerate a few. The Consumer Protection Act also covers healthcare services.

Private healthcare entities are not a homogenous lot. Ranging from super-specialty chains of hospitals, you have nursing homes, single-specialty hospitals of varying sizes, urgent care clinics, birth centres, hospice homes, ambulatory surgical facilities, rehabilitation centers, radiology and imaging centers, et al. The book ‘Perils in Practice: The Prevention of Violence Against Healthcare Professionals aptly points out another complexity: While doctors are held to ethical standards, hospitals and corporate health institutions are accountable to industry regulations. Regulatory arrangements, therefore, have to keep in mind the diversity and complexity of healthcare service delivery.

As the first step to transparency and accountability, hospitals can post on their websites, or on association websites, outcomes (for example, average duration of length-of-stay, readmission, and mortality rate), and patient feedback on quality, safety, and cost of care. This will help build confidence, and also dispel any doubts about patient care.

Health is a public good; hence the regulation is not only about enforcement but also but timely intervention by the concerned to ensure fair play and justice on both sides. Since health is a state subject, states will need to take the initiative with all stakeholders on board. An independent regulator with enabling single-window clearances for different forms of healthcare establishments is perhaps the practical way forward. Appointing a healthcare ombudsman by states could also help. The ombudsman could act as an arbitrator enabling fair play for all stakeholders.

With the government encouraging initiatives like ‘Heal in India’ and ‘Heal by India’, a well-laid out, implementable, facilitatory, regulatory framework with the underlying principle of acknowledging health as a public good is a must.

Click Here:- Get Live Share Market Tips From Sharetipsinfo