DMK wants parliament to discuss former CAG official’s charge

Chennai, Nov 24 (IANS) The DMK, a key member of the union government, is planning to bring a motion in parliament to discuss a former chief auditor’s charge that the final CAG report on 2G spectrum was influenced by BJP leader Murli Manohar Joshi.

“The CAG report on 2G spectrum allocation seems to be influenced politically. There is political involvement in the preparation of the report. We are considering a motion in parliament to discuss the issue,” T.K.S. Elangovan, spokesperson for the DMK, told IANS.

Former chief auditor R.P.Singh in recent media interviews hinted that the final CAG report on 2G spectrum allocation, putting the presumptive loss to the state exchequer at Rs.1.76 lakh crore, was prepared after CAG officials met Joshi, who then headed the Public Accounts Committee of parliament.

Elangovan said the CAG report seems to be a non−independent report, influenced by a political party.

“We will take a final decision on what kind of motion to be moved in parliament,” he added.

DMK MP and former telecom minister A. Raja is the prime accused in the 2G case and Karunanidhi’s daughter Kanimozhi was an accused, tried in a Delhi court by the Central Bureau of Investigation.

On Friday, retired CAG director general Singh told the media that he only pegged the 2G loss at Rs.37,000 crore, but when the final report was brought to him for signing, it had the Rs.1.76 trillion as the loss figure.

Singh also claimed that Joshi had spoken to the CAG officials a day before the CAG report was made public, implying that the BJP leader influenced the final report on the loss figure.

“This loss figure (of Rs.1.76 lakh crore) did appear before me in a draft audit report submitted by my field office. I discussed it with them. I asked for supporting documents… on what basis they were saying these are losses. They said: ‘We are taking it as presumption’,” Singh told a news channel.

Singh said the loss figure, according to his report, was around Rs.37,000 crore and the amount was recoverable.

“These were presumptive losses; you can dispute these as they are not the actual losses,” Singh said.

IANS 2012-11-24 21:00:04