Please bear in mind, the interjected proposal, does not put the investor applicant on the automatic route, it still has to receive the FIPB’s discretionary nod.

However, amidst, opposition uproar, the Government has remained firm. Spotlight is on India on this one.

The enthusiastic investor has to meet minimum investment requirement, invest inback end infrastructure within stipulated time frames, procure raw material from the small enterprises and still be restricted to cities which adopt the policy and have a populace of 10 lakhs. Given the cultural and political diversity India has, maybe it isn’t a thing to rejoice.

With having retained first right to procurement from farmers (investor would like to read as ROFR (right of first refusal) as opposed to the RFOP (right of first procurement)), the conditional policy seems to be creating sufficient traction to boost India’s fragmented retail economy, it recognises the potential of organised andunorganised retail sectors which can coexist. What it does not do, is achieve critical mass for the unorganised sector to flourish.

In a country where coke and sharbat-eazam co-exist so can kirana shops and Tesco/Carrefour if Government walks the talk for sustainability and co-existence. Evidently, the FDI will operate through the organised sphere through licensed retailers, corporate-backed hypermarkets, creating opportunity space for the unorganised retailers. The solution is in infusing innovation in this space.

Legible fine print on the policy, regulatory and implementation oriented environ committed to prevention of unfair practices, affordable institutional credit to unorganised retailers, proactive assistance to small retailers to upgrade and central enactments addressing the fiscal and social aspects of retail are all aspects worth debating. FDI in retail can be that valuable tool, for India in many ways, provided, over the opposition’s din the Government subscribes to an unfettered commitment for unified, sustained growth. Will it?