4.11 Cross-cutting PPP laws are not needed in India to permit central or state governments to enter into PPPs. Both the center and many states have done so without such laws. Sector specific legislation has of course been used to restructure industries, introduce competitive markets and set up new institutions, such as sector regulators.
4.12 In Section 2 it was argued that one of the benefits of cross-cutting PPP legislation is that it allows the consolidation of relevant legal provisions into one law, and also allows the government to legislate the use of certain processes for the development, procurement and regulation of PPP projects. While not strictly necessary, the use of new processes might be better enforced if given the force of law. This might be more important at the state level, where checks and balances and oversight are not as strong as at the center.
4.13 Particularly at the state level, therefore, consideration should be given to the development of cross-cutting PPP legislation. The legislation already passed by Gujarat, Andhra Pradesh and Punjab provides possible models for other states. One important aspect that could be addressed by such legislation is mechanisms for dispute resolution. The national legislation in telecommunications provides one model of how such as process and institution can be created that leads to a quicker and more efficient process of settling disputes. Legislation could also establish alternative dispute resolution procedures that could be used to efficiently settle differences between the parties.
4.14 The development and passage of legislation also allows for consultation and open debate about the government's policy for pursuing PPPs, including the expected benefits and rationale. This could be an important mechanism to help increase the public legitimacy of PPPs.