Shantanu Bhadkamkar questions the purpose of attracting private participation and asks whether it has resulted in efficiencies and better logistics infrastructureWhen there was a government body, there was a redressal mechanism and now there is none. Privatisation of our logistics hubs has not resulted in any kind of new systems and processes, particularly in international transportation. The government model revolves around revenue sharing model rather than service oriented model, and the infrastructure is the same as before rather than ensuring it is 10 years ahead of the requirement. Optimal use of infrastructure is 60 per cent, while anything beyond that level of use creates bottlenecks. Our infrastructure, including railways and roads, is used at 120 per cent capacity.Private participation in infrastructure needs to be a long-term investment, and I do not see that in the current model. The model should be for players with a long term vision in infrastructure, people who are committed to infrastructure development as a core business, and people who want to have long positions with big investments in creating facilities which government cannot produce. The highest revenue bidder concept is fallacious. Therefore, the model itself has to be addressed. While an airport needs to be profitable, every activity within it has to be sustainable. Currently, handling facilities are primitive, using 30-40 year old technologies. They do not have any specialised handling, for example, of odd-dimension cargo. They insist on side loading when top loading is preferable, simply because they do not have facilities to load from top.For growth of international trade, the infrastructure related to international trade has to grow and that should be the fundamental of the policy and not PPP alone, where the whole purpose of privatisation stems from the fact that the government does not have or want to put in the investment.The author is the Chairman of Federation of Freight Forwarders Associations in India (FFFAI).