Showing posts with label MoEF. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MoEF. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 6, 2010

Who will save Goa?


By Hartman de Souza
03 Oct 2010


Wild rush to mine Goa has almost ruined the once beautiful coastal state. Alarmed by the widespread destruction, citizen groups have come together to bring some sense to the government’s development planning, but politicians continue to give a hoot to their concerns for nature.

Goa has seen unparalleled exploitation of natural resources

While the Expert Panel appointed by the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) to look into the status of the Western Ghats had its day-long meeting at a conference hall in the National Institute of Oceanography, Goa on September 27, there is every likelihood that the strong attack launched by citizens' groups and others against the mining industry will be diluted if not waylaid.

At the outset it must be said that the possibility of this bleak outcome must be set against the major gain of this day, which was that Goa-based scientists, architects, writers, scholars and several citizens' groups formed a consortium of common interest that is sure to torment several Goan politicians who depend on mining to fill their coffers. This is not as far fetched as it may sound.

Many of these politicians have made billions through legal and illegal mining operations in Goa but in the process have killed innumerable forests, springs and aquifers of the state. Not to be left behind, the remaining netas have also bought huge tracts of agricultural land and forests, and now wait for the environmental clearances to come through. The story doesn't end here.

When some Goan economists claim that mining is the backbone of the economy, in reality they mean that either politicians and influential officials have turned mining barons or running companies that lease out mining machinery, or own a fleet of barges; or that every Goan official from Road Transport Officer to Police Inspector's level probably owns a few trucks to haul out the ore.

But to come back to the MoEF's Expert Panel that heard what Goans not dependent on mining had to say:
In a 100-minute presentation that drew the expected frowns from those in the industry, they set before the Expert Panel, perhaps for the first time in Goa, the most comprehensive and damning of cases against mining in Goa.

At least one of the panel members, Dr. V.S. Vijayan, a distinguished agricultural scientist, maintained that there should be a total moratorium on mining activities. He echoed Goan claims that a detailed social audit of the mining industry be the need of the day, and certainly not the Chief Minister's much flaunted 'new' Mineral Policy that was conceived to ensure the mining in Goa continues unabated. Lest it be forgotten citizens' groups have long been clamouring that regulations be honestly enforced, and that the extensive damage of earlier mining operations be repaired before any new activities are even contemplated.

Will this be the case? That is a moot point.
Professor Madhav Gadgil, an eminent scientist with the reputation to back him, while chairing the proceedings of the Expert panel admirably, appeared less than willing to disclose either his cards or his heart. He began the morning with a rather long-winded regurgitation of his past achievements in negotiating the terrain between the environment and that magical word, 'development'. However, considering his own admission that the Konkan Railway Corporation totally disregarded the changes he had painstakingly suggested, we may not have the most potent advocate for our magnificent Ghats.

While the morning session provided fact and figure by way of enlarged Google-generated maps, an exhibition of photographs of mining-devastated areas, elaborately marshalled writing, impassioned argument, and a dossier of all this in each panel members hands, the afternoon alas, was given to spin-doctoring.

In a power-point presentation redolent of fake public meetings in the mining areas, the industry's young representative, blissfully ignored figures and statistics given in the government's own Draft Regional Plan, and trotted out reasons that are both painful and false. According to them:
75 per cent of the state population is employed in the mining industry; major tax paying industry giving 25% of Goa's GDP; environmental measures will be taken care of by the new Mineral Policy; social programmes by way of bus stops and clinics and water tankers; planting five to six million trees every year.

Their solutions to the problem of mining in Goa are ridiculously simple and predictably enough, backed by the politicians. That illegal mining be curbed by government, that wider bypass roads be cut through forest lands for higher capacity carrying trucks with air-conditioned cabins. Right now ore from Karantaka coming into Goa has made life around the Anmod Ghat and below a living hell of trucks. The mining industry wants a railway in! As if on cue, a senior member of the industry reminded one and all that if the mining would stop, as it did in Kudremukh, it would fan a Naxalite movement!


In the discussion that followed, Professor Gadgil, before he left for a meeting with the Chief Minister, took pains to tell those concerned with the effects of mining to tone down their rhetoric and give suggestions that could improve the mining industry. While those in the industry opened their notebooks and duly took pen in hand, one trusts that both they and Professor Gadgil got an understanding of the only suggestion that was really made, namely, that a moratorium against mining be enforced and earlier leases cleared under false circumstances, be revoked.

Professor Gadgil perhaps, is not to know that nearly every single one of the Environment Impact Assessment studies mandatory for clearance have been fabricated by one Hyderabad-based laboratory with an office in Goa now; or how independent scientists who have scrutinised these have laughed at the pathetic job made of even fudging data, of 'Siberian salamanders' given home in Goa, or even, 'rivers of Gujarat' for that matter. Professor Gadgil is certainly not to know that the bulk of new clearances in the virgin foothills of Quepem and Sanguem were given by the MoEF panel headed by the infamous Dr. Majumdar, a scientist on the board of at least two mining and mining-related companies, who was then forced to resign. It is because of this obvious conflict of interest if not chicanery, that environmentalists, their lawyers and civil society ask that those earlier leases cleared, be revoked.

Whether one dwells on whether this destructive industry will be caught out or not, the scene perforce shifts to whether the Expert Panel, given their eminence and standing, are inclined to see the trees and water before the state and the central governments see the low grade ore beneath just waiting to be sent to China.

Too many intellectuals in Goa are now disturbed with the regularity that some scientists and environmentalists in Goa have shifted their allegiance to the mining industry, taking on board the myth that mining is the backbone of the Goan economy, and then, rationalizing this outrage in casuistry that would make even a Middle Ages monk blush with shame.
More @ http://www.d-sector.org/article-det.asp?id=1379

Friday, May 14, 2010

Real estate SEZs flourish courtesy MoEF

By Kanchi Kohli
13 May 2010


The ministry of environment and forests has diluted and ignored its own rules and regulations to favour real estate developers in the SEZs.

The Ministry of Commerce and Industry claims that the existence of Special Economic Zones (SEZs) is not new to India, which, they say, has the history of setting up its first Export Processing Zone (EPZ) in Kandla, Gujarat way back in 1965. But, from April 2000 with the announcement of the SEZ policy, the Government of India set into motion a new trade promotion model to attract larger foreign investments in India. Subsequently, the SEZ Act came into being in 2005 and its Rules in 2006.

In practice this new age SEZ model is critically different from the erstwhile EPZs. SEZs of today are integrated zones which allow for construction of educational, residential and leisure facilities along with trade development areas. These areas are also open to private developers who through single window clearance, enhanced tax benefits and fewer procedural "hurdles" have set themselves to work their way towards an institutionalised land grab.

The SEZ Act is in operation with five critical objectives, generation of additional economic activity; promotion of exports of both goods and services; promotion of investment from domestic and foreign sources; creation of employment opportunities in the trade realm; and development of infrastructure support to facilitate all of the above.

Since its enactment, both Indian and foreign investors have sought to benefit by bringing contiguous tracts of land up to 5000 hectares under various kinds of SEZs, be it petrochemical, information technology, or multi-product. As of 1st May 2010, 580 SEZs have received formal approval and another 150 have in-principle approvals. But all this has not been without a backlash from affected communities and people's movements. Their struggle has been for continuing of access, rights and land use that has been sought to be compromised by the pushing through of SEZs in India.

Despite widespread criticism and people's struggles around SEZs, this lucrative option for 'global trade wallahs' is continued to be pushed around in India. While the promotion of exports of goods and services, employment generation and infrastructure remain important, the most enticing aspect of an SEZ for investors is the availability of numerous tax benefits. Any project once accorded an SEZ status gets tax exemptions related to import procurement, income tax, central and service tax and so on. This has made the SEZ model attractive not only for goods and services sector, but also for construction companies and real estate giants.

For most urban Indians, signposts, advertisements and propaganda for new and upcoming constructions promoted by real estate companies have become routine. Vast amounts of cultivated or wild land uses have been 'converted' through huge financial transactions. Big investors, after having bought the land, convert it into commercial or residential areas. It would not be an exaggeration to say that this urban built up mindset continues to spread its extent.

While we digest this overaching reality, it is also important to note how SEZ and real estate projects have come to play themselves out within India's environment regulation. The Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) notification, 2006 deals with SEZ and construction projects separately. SEZs are listed as Item 7(c) requiring environmental clearance only after following the full procedure of public hearing and preparation of EIA reports. While this is true for the entire SEZ, the individual units within the SEZs are exempted if they are for the same purpose for which the SEZ was first granted approval.

Real Estate and construction projects are listed as Items 8 (a) and 8 (b) in Appendix I of the EIA notification. Item 8 (a) is for building and construction project > 20,000 sq. mtrs and < 1,50,000 sq. mtrs built up area. 8 (b) is township and area development projects covering an area of > 50 ha and/or a built up area of > 1,50,000 sq.mtrs.

The EIA notification also distinguishes between Category A and Category B projects, with the first requiring approval from the central government and the second at the state level. These have their own screening, scoping and public consultation requirements which have to be followed before appraisal for approval. Building and township related projects enjoy a special status under the EIA notification. Termed as B1 they don't require to carry out an EIA or a public consultation, and only need to submit a specially designed form.

This privilege was a result of substantial push and lobbying by real estate developers at the time the EIA notification was being revamped. In their response to the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF), many large and small developers had argued that their operations were not as polluting or environmentally degrading as other industrial units. In fact it has been argued in a comment to the MoEF that the real estate industry does not cause any damage to the environment since the "occupants emit only human breath and human solid waste is treated."

Even though the promoters of these projects had sought a complete exemption, the amendments had led to a partial reprieve, but one that makes the process of building and construction project clearances miniscule as compared to others projects. Once the ball was set rolling, the MoEF put in to place other intriguing exemptions not in word of law but through practice.

Today there is a unique understanding within the MoEF for the clearances to real estate or construction projects which also enjoy an SEZ status. Information on this was revealed through a response to a Right to Information (RTI) Application. The applicant had asked as to how many SEZs had been granted approval by the MoEF and how many of them were exempt from the requirement of the mandatory public consultation. The background to this was a reading into the minutes of the meetings of the Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) dealing with SEZ projects where it was said that a particular project was considered by the committee and exempted from public hearing.

The response from the MoEF dated 24th December 2009 is intriguing. The total number of SEZs granted environmental clearance by the MoEF as of December 2009 was 28. Quite interestingly half of these (14 projects) were from the state of Tamil Nadu. Karnataka state is second with having granted approval to 6 SEZs.

The response further adds that while no proposal covered under Item 7(c) has been granted exemption, there are some SEZs which have been considered under Item 8 (a) and 8 (b). What this implies is that building, construction and township projects have managed to circumvent the EIA notification in such a way that despite being SEZs, they are treated differently by the environmental regulation. Ironically, the procedural requirement for SEZs as per the EIA notification is much more lengthy and stringent than for construction and township projects.

So, before we even begin to fathom this, the real estate giants and construction companies have figured this one out in their favour. Of course, with a little help from our Ministry of Environment and Forests.