The thinking behind this method is that it will be both a more realistic and more market sensitive approach. Undoubtedly, this is a step forward – just as it was recently when PSA international won its court battle to stop tariffs at Tuticorin Container Terminal being slashed.

Both developments can in fact be viewed as a victory of common sense over excessive bureaucracy and red tape.

It is clear that India needs investment and foreign expertise in its port system so why fly a “flag” that signals a potentially hazardous experience to inward investors? India has gained a reputation for this and what it should be doing is recognising that this is a potential roadblock to progress. It has to create an environment where its goals complement those of inward investors and not create a culture that leads to a struggle between incoming investors and government.

If, in any given respect, it is unsure of how precisely to achieve this then there is enough experience around the world to provide clear pointers to how this can be done. Indeed, the early privatisation models have evolved considerably to the benefit of both inward investors and government. There is a lot that can be learnt and the benefits are considerable.

Government should be enlightened and clear-sighted enough to read the warning signs such as the view offered recently by senior consultants at Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu that the pace of port infrastructure development is too slow to cater for port demand. It should provide the framework in which development can proceed in a positive fashion. If it does not, then presumably the accusation can be levelled at it that it is not doing its job well enough and it is time to review strategy.