PIB Press Release - PIB release on new R & R policy of GOI

PIB Press Release
New R & R policy of GOI.

New R & R Policy -National Policy on Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill, 2007, and Land Acquisition (amendment) Bill, 2007

T he Union government on Thursday approved a new rehabilitation poli cy that promises alternative land and future employment to those displaced in various land-related projects, in a move that will alter regulations that have been in place for 103 years.

In an unrelated move, the Union cabinet, led by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, also decided not to pass on the burden of rising international oil prices to consumers, at least through March.

Both moves have significant political implications. One attempts to settle a fierce debate that has raged much of this year over displacement of people, especially farmers, from large industrial and export-oriented projects, including socalled special economic zones, or SEZs. The other simply avoids taking a fiscally prudent yet politically unpopular decision at a time when there is a possibility that India could be in for early elections.

The new rehabilitation policy also allows displaced people to hold a fifth of their compensation as equity in the new industrial unit that would come up on the acquired land, and maintains that acquisition of agricultural land for such projects should be kept to the minimum.

Among other decisions, the Union cabinet also announced a productivity-linked bonus to railway employees and cleared the outstanding dues of employees of 12 loss-making public sector undertakings.

The new rehabilitation policy will entail the introduction of a National Policy on Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill, 2007, and Land Acquisition (amendment) Bill, 2007, which will replace the existing 103-year-old Land Acquisition Act. Cabinet spokesperson and minister Priyaranjan Dasmunsi said the new policy will apply to those uprooted by development project as well as natural calamities. "The details of benefit will be worked (out) when the law is framed."

The benefits under the new policy include land-for-land, which implies that a landowner whose land is acquired by the government will be given another piece of land. Other benefits include suitable employment opportunities, financial support, training facilities for those seeking self employment, pension for those who cannot work, and help in building temporary workplaces and houses in the resettlement areas for all those who will be uprooted. The policy also lays down that in case a company is able to acquire 70% of the land it requires, the government will step up to help the company acquire another 30%. However, all these provisions are subject to conditions. For instance, land-forland is subject to the extent of availability of land in resettlement areas and employment opportunities are subject to vacancies.

Analysts were quick to dub this as an election gimmick.

"More than anything, the announcement of this policy is a clarion call for early elections," said Bidyut Chakrabarty, head of the University of Delhi's de partment of political science.

"Land acquisition has been the Left's Achilles heel more than any other party and the Congress has only highlighted this once again through this announcement."

Some of the biggest protests against SEZs have been in West Bengal, the bastion of India's Left parties, which also help the current Congress party-led government claim a majority in the Lok Sabha.

D. Raja, national secretary of the Communist Party of India, one of the four Left parties that lend critical outside support to the ruling United Progressive Alliance, said the government has taken too long in announcing this policy. "It's good they have finally announced it," he said. "We'll of course study it in detail but what's important now is how the government plans to implement it."

Jivabhai Ambalal Patel, a Lok Sabha member of the Congress and a member of the parliamentary standing committee on commerce, which submitted a critique of the SEZ policy, maintained "this (policy) will not have an impact on elections because the voters have other considerations.

Awareness levels are appallingly low in a majority of the country." Patel, a Gujarat based industrialist, however, added only barren lands should be acquired for industrial projects.

The policy elaborates that at least one person in every uprooted nuclear family will be given an employment opportunity subject to the vacancies available with the government.

Besides, there is a special provision for a monthly pension to the vulnerable section such as those above 50, disabled, destitutes and widows.

The government is also expected to provide training facilities for those seeking self employment and provide scholarships for students. Financial support will be provided to affected families to rebuild temporary housing, cattle sheds, working sheds, etc.

The government will also set up an ombudsman for redressal of grievances, a national rehabilitation commission and a national monitoring committees, supported by a national monitoring cell. All Union ministries with major projects will have to set up new internal oversight panels. It has also introduced a mandatory social impact assessment for projects which displace more than 400 families in plain areas and 200 in tribal and hilly areas.

In yet another people-friendly measure, the government put on hold a long-pending hike in the heavily subsidized petroleum prices that would have brought them more closer to international rates, where a barrel of oil is hovering around $77. The crude oil price in the Indian basket is $75.53 per barrel as against the all time high price of $78.46 per barrel on 28 September.

It also announced a threeyear extension of the subsidy schemes for kerosene distributed through public distribution scheme and domestic liq uefied petroleum gas through March 2010. Both are used by most Indian households.

The government did pitch in to reduce the financial burden on state-owned oil-marketing companies by announcing oil bonds of Rs23,457 crore. Similarly, it had issued oil bonds worth Rs24,121 crore in 2006-07 and Rs11,500 crore in 2005-06. "The finance ministry will work out the duration of the oil bonds along with their date of issue. Though the Reserve Bank of India issues these bonds on the government guarantee, they will only show up on the government books at the time when they become redeemable," said one government official who did not wish to be identified.

Companies such as Indian Oil Corp., Bharat Petroleum Corp. Ltd and Hindustan Petroleum Corp. Ltd have been absorbing the subsidy arising out of the difference between the higher international price and domestic prices charged to the consumer. Taking into account the new set of oil bonds that are being issued, this burden would reduce to Rs18,312 crore.

"This (the bonds were) the next best option after a price hike," said Sarthak Behuria, chairman and managing director, IOC, India's largest oil marketing company. "We are happy, as the bonds will help us improve our bottom line."

The oil marketers lose around Rs4.35 and Rs6.90 on the sale of a litre of petrol and diesel respectively. The losses are Rs16 per litre of kerosene and Rs174 on every consumer gas cylinder sold.

sangeeta.s@livemint.com Ashish Sharma contributed to this story.

POPULIST REWARDS New rehab policy: affected families to get land-for-land and employment guarantees No hike in oil prices till March 2008; Government to issue oil bonds to underwrite subsidies Clears payment of outstanding dues to employees of 12 loss-making PSUs Payment of productivity-linked bonus to railway employees

The Pioneer > Home -Medha Patkar's foreign links

The Pioneer > Home

Probe Medha's foreign links, MPs urge PM

Navin Upadhyay | New Delhi Documents reveal attempt to woo judiciary Two Members of Parliament from Gujarat have urged Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to order an inquiry into the shocking evidence suggesting Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) leader Medha Patkar tried to influence the Government and the judiciary to obtain a favourable verdict in a case against her NGO in the Supreme Court.

Senior Congress leader Urmilaben Patel and Ratilal K Verma of the BJP, both MPs, have submitted identical evidence to the Prime Minister to establish that Patkar was in touch with a foreign agency, who wanted to oblige even a judge of the Supreme Court after he, along with another judge, dismissed a PIL against NBA. The PIL was filed by the National Council for Civil Liberties, a Gujarat-based NGO alleging that NBA was engaged in anti-national activities.

The MPs have enclosed email correspondence between Patkar and Patrick McCully, former director of the International Rivers Network at Barkley in the US. The correspondence shows Patkar claiming she had put pressure on the UPA Government, which was also served a notice by the court to respond to the charges of NBA's involvement in anti-national activities to stop construction of work at Sardar Sarovar Project in Gujarat.

The sequence of email correspondence between McCully and Patkar is revealing. Minutes after the SC dismissed the NCCL's PIL on July 10, 2007, McCully was informed of it by one Phillip through Patkar's email address.

Next day, McCully wrote back to Patkar, "You have mentioned in your message (email) that Judge Thakkar (CK) is ex-chief justice of Gujarat and anything can happen. How you manage this. What was the second judge?"

In reply, Patkar wrote back on July 13, "Phillip made a mistake in quoting Thakkar as the ex-chief justice of Gujarat. He was initially judge there. Justice Altamas Kabir wrote the judgement."

Patkar also wrote that many eminent persons wrote to the UPA Government and her advocates supported them. "We dealt with the press very selectively and ensured that pressure was kept all through."

"Along with this, the petitioner's case was so weak. Its triviality was obvious. Legally it was non-maintainable," she added.

To this, McCully responded on July 17, "I was keeping a constant watch on this case. I was actually disturbed after reading written submission of Saxena (VK Saxena, chairman NCCL, the petitioner), which he had posted on his website. Not a shred of reference in the judgement. You have managed it very effectively."

McCully's email underlines the fact that Saxena's petition had disturbed him and he was happy to see that the charges levelled against him were not even touched upon in the judgement. The reference to "managing" the whole thing is significant.

McCully added they would like to honour those people who supported Patkar in the case. "You can send a list of 5-6 people with their very brief background in 2-3 lines. The function can be organised in London instead of the US through other groups. With his strategy these people could be more committed to your cause."

And then he added this bit of shocking offer: "We must honour Judge Kabir for supporting you. Please explore the possibility. He will retire in 2013 -- a very useful man for your further battles."

It is well known that Justice Kabir is a respected judge with impeccable career record. While there is nothing to show he obliged Patkar, McCully's mail clearly showed a sinister design to woo him to help NBA in future.

In her reply sent to McCully on July 22, Patkar felt that openly obliging her benefactors would be counter-productive. "Thanks a lot. Other than advocates, no one would like to be acknowledged for writing to pressurise the Government. That might boomerang."

Referring to the email, both the MPs asked the Prime Minister to order an inquiry into the whole episode.

Verma has pointed out to the Prime Minister that the exchanges between Patkar and McCully are "explosive and dangerous to the extent that they show foreign interest and support to a group that is indulging in obstruction to the country's development. It carries blatant suggestion that July 10 Supreme Court judgement was managed."

Urging the Prime Minister to order an inquiry to identify those who tried to put pressure on the UPA Government and the judiciary to favour NBA, Verma asked, "When even the thought of influencing the judiciary at any level is contemptuous, is it not a case of sedition against the NBA -- a group working with foreign aid?"

Echoing similar views, Urmilaben Patel has asked the Prime Minister that "the Government should immediately inquire as to how Medha Patkar managed a favourable verdict And take appropriate action against Patkar for bringing disrepute to the Government and to the Hon'able Supreme Court and halting the process of national development with foreign support."