The bureaucracy does not make commercial decisions, at least not to the extent of bankers, and therefore, there is a distinction between decision making in government and in government banks, though both are part of the 'sarkar' in the eyes of the common man. The issue to be addressed is 'post facto judgment' by agencies that do not have any idea whatsoever about credit decisions, trying to 'fix' accountability for 'losses' that might arise out of loans. In a career spanning, say 20 to 30 years, if an individual has been able to get it right 6 times out of 10, it could be said that he/she is 'excellent'. Anything lower should, at worst, be seen as 'less competent' in the absence of strong evidence of malafide. Nobody holds any brief for venality and corruption in credit decisions. But, unfortunately, prosecuting and related agencies such as the CVC have their imperfections and these impinge negatively on credit decision making. In the present circumstances, one needs to have the bravery of a soldier, not merely the astuteness of a banker, to take loan decisions because the CVC or the CBI could step in and question you, may be 10 or 15 years after the event. It is high time those at the helm, both in government and the regulatory bodies, thought of a thorough overhaul of our vigilance and CBI supervision of credit decisions. I have had to give statements before inspectors of police who cannot differentiate between a fund based and nonfund based credit facility and the concept of margin, not to speak of other nuances of loan proposals I signed 15 years ago. Of course, those who are accustomed to decisions will continue doing so, no matter what happens, because it is to your conscience that you ultimately have to answer. In the parables of Ramakrishna Paramahamsa, there is an incident of his trying to repeatedly trying to save a drowning scorpion, even as it tries to sting him. He said, 'It is the nature of the scorpion to sting when it is scared. It is my nature to help it. Should I give up my nature just because it sticks to its nature?' Those who are second natured to decide will continue to decide. But should we leave the culture and the system of credit decision making to the nature of men? It is time that a high powered committee is constituted to examine this paramount issue to suggest solutions before paranoia turns to decision paralysis. The bureaucracy does not make commercial decisions, at least not to the extent of bankers, and therefore, there is a distinction between decision making in government and in government banks, though both