If international luxury brands like Fendi, Bulgari and Tod’s can renovate iconic landmarks in Europe and China, what is wrong with the Dalmia Bharat Group, an Indian company with a presence in cement, sugar, refractories and power manufacturing, paying for the upkeep of the Red Fort in Delhi?
The short answer: there is nothing wrong or unusual in a private company or a non-governmental organisation getting involved in heritage conservation.
Why then the hullabaloo over the Narendra Modi government’s decision to hand over this iconic 17th century monument built by Mughal emperor Shah Jahan to a private company for maintenance and provision of basic amenities?
It is tempting to see the issues being raised through the prism of a battle between those who see corporate cash as a solution for all woes and those who have reservations about this notion. The ground reality, however, is a lot more complicated.
There are no two opinions about India needing to do a lot more to preserve its rich cultural legacy. Few are also dogmatic enough today to say that the State alone can and must do everything. The real issues are about when and how the private sector can help in areas like heritage preservation.
For starters, the Red Fort is not any old monument; it has a special place in the national imagination. Every Indian Prime Minister, from Jawaharlal Nehru to Narendra Modi, has traditionally hoisted the tricolour every Independence Day from the Red Fort’s ramparts. INA officers Shah Nawaz Khan, P.K. Sehgal and G.S. Dhillon had their trials here in 1945-1946, as a red sandstone plaque inside the monument reminds visitors.
Many heritage activists are incensed that the government is no longer willing to take responsibility for the full upkeep of this world heritage monument. A visit to the Red Fort this week also revealed other issues. There is a whole community out there who spend the better part of the day inside the fort, and whose livelihoods depend on footfalls at the monument. They told me no one had asked them how they feel about the deal.
Jameel, a trinket-seller, was born inside the Red Fort. His father worked in the Army; the family lived in residential quarters inside the fort till some years ago. He is now concerned about reports of a possible hike in the price of entry tickets and its impact on the flow of tourists. If the entry ticket price goes up, would it mean the Red Fort would be beyond the reach of many people?
If heritage preservation is meant to involve the public, would not raising the price of tickets deter many members of the public from visiting, Jameel asked.
Uncertainties plagued the security guards and ticket-checkers too. With a new management, they worried about the loss of jobs and reduction in salaries.
Public-private partnership in heritage preservation was an abstract idea to these people.
Reading the comments on the social media about the deal, it is also clear that the really prickly issue is not so much private sector involvement in heritage preservation per se, but the opaqueness surrounding the deal.
Why is a company, which admittedly knows a lot about cement, power, etc, but has no demonstrated expertise in the upkeep of heritage monuments, entrusted to adopt a top-tier heritage monument like the Red Fort?
Why did almost no one object to the Aga Khan Trust’s involvement with heritage conservation in Delhi? The short answer — its track record. In India, the Aga Khan Trust started off by restoring the gardens of Humayun’s Tomb on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of Indian Independence. Then it went on to do an urban renewal project that comprised the adjoining areas of Hazrat Nizamuddin Basti, Sundar Nursery and the Humayun’s Tomb complex.
No one knows whether or not the Dalmia Bharat Group will be able to deliver what it has promised within the given parameters. But the controversy rages on because of fogginess on many fronts.
Members of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Tourism which went into the government’s “Adopt-a-Heritage” project say their panel did not give the green signal for adoption of iconic monuments by corporate houses. “We (the committee) made some concrete suggestions. The most important one was doing a prototype (pilot) on one or two of the around 100 monuments before proceeding at all with the idea. They (the government) never got back to us. And then the next thing we see is the Dalmia-Red Fort deal. How can they be so harebrained to make Red Fort the pilot project,” Trinamul Congress MP Derek O’Brien, who chaired the committee, told a newspaper this week. The Red Fort was not part of the indicative list of important monuments open for adoption in 2018, sources say.
Then there is the issue of aesthetics and sensibility. How unobtrusive would Dalmia and other corporates be in their promotional branding in these heritage sites?
Getting the private sector to fund the restoration of government-owned monuments is always a delicate matter that needs to be handled with care anywhere in the world. In Italy too, where so many luxury brands have come forward to rescue monuments, this has been a matter of heated debate.
When the Italian government first enlisted Tod’s sponsorship to restore the world-famous Colosseum in Rome, there were fears that the company would commercialise the project. However, as media reports pointed out, the Tod’s group only displays a small brand logo on its project’s exterior explanatory signage. Italian luxury brand Fendi also refrained from loud advertising during the 18-month renovation of the Trevi Fountain, and only displayed a small, logoed plaque there.
Though the Archaeological Survey of India will continue to do the traditional preservation and restoration work, and the Monument Mitras — in this case Dalmia Bharat — are expected to confine themselves to providing various amenities for visitors, the oversight committee has to be on its toes.
The Taj Mahal is next, and several blue-chip Indian companies are reportedly competing to adopt it.
The bottom line — can corporate cash save India’s cultural treasures? The jury is out. It all depends on what happens on the ground.
