Dear Mr. Tata,
I welcome your joining this debate. It is an important one and needs to be settled in full public view. Unfortunately, your response is a typical one that ducks the main issues and instead attempts to shoot the messenger!
I am only disappointed, but no longer surprised, that in sharp contrast to my efforts to go out of the way to keep this debate relating to facts and policy discussions – your letter is intensely personal, attributes feeble motives (including amusing Political ones) and most unbecoming of the House of Tatas. I can only think that this is a lapse in good judgment. I particularly find your self-appointed defence of the Prime Minister and Government very irrelevant.
Nevertheless, I promise to keep my response dignified and steadfastly refuse to fall to your level of personal attacks.
On facts, your letter is not just exceptionally weak, but in fact, refuses to engage on the issues that I had raised – the yawning gap between what you say in public and what your companies do. While those remain unanswered, I will certainly reply shortly with my response. I promise to rebut your allegations, claims and innuendo – chapter and verse in the public domain.
Member of Parliament
09 December, 2010
For in-depth, objective and more importantly balanced journalism, Click here to subscribe to Outlook Magazine