Monday, September 03, 2012

OUR MPS ALWAYS HAVE A CONSENSUS ON PERSONAL GAINS AND DIFFERENCES ON NATIONAL IMPERATIVES!

Recently, a much awaited bill with respect to our honorable members of Parliament was given a nod! The bill seeking a three-fold hike in MPs’ salaries from Rs 16,000 to Rs 50,000 and increase of 200 per cent in their allowances was passed. Besides this, the daily allowance of every MP when he or she attended Parliament during session was doubled; constituency allowance and office expense allowance also saw a two-fold growth; and conveyance allowance saw a four-fold growth. In all, this hike entails an annual expenditure of Rs 146 crores and an expenditure of Rs 118 crore on payment of arrears!

However, a lot has been deliberated and written on this issue, and many arguments and counter arguments have been put forth with respect to this bill. Without getting into that argument, what I found most interesting was the manner in which the MPs built their consensus on this particular bill. It was amazing to observe how everyone got united, seemingly forgetting their personal and political differences, and lobbied for the raise. Political parties whose ideologies, in normal circumstance, rarely synchronize with each other, were seen singing the same tune. Rashtriya Janta Dal along with Samajwadi Party (SP), Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP), Janata Dal (United), Shiv Sena and Trinamool Congress were seen to be on the same side. While some other parties didn’t join this unison directly, they were not seen opposing the move either. In fact, despite the first round of salary raise (an increase of Rs 10,000 along with increased perks compared to the current allowance MPs receive), almost all members of the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), Samajwadi Party (SP), Akali Dal, Janata Dal (United), Shiv Sena and Bahujan Samaj Party demanded a further hike. Parties like Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and others refrained from participating in the debate.

It is no secret that our political parties – who generally are habituated to never come to any consensus on any given issue – were seen creating no fuss or roadblocks when the issue was all about their own personal interest. It reminds me of a similar phenomenon that happened a few years back, when the Supreme Court directed the Election Commission to frame stringent laws regarding rejection of nomination papers for people with criminal background. There again, our MPs were found voicing their protests – to the move of barring criminals from standing for elections – in unison! On being asked to reveal their criminal antecedents (for the uninitiated, we have more than a fourth of our Parliamentarians facing some form of criminal charge) along with their assets and educational qualifications while filing their election nominations, the entire political class came together, rejected the notification, and without much debate and discussion, sidelined the proposal. In the same lines, our parliamentarians got together when a proposal was mooted to nationalize the money kept by Indians in Swiss bank accounts – and blatantly ignored the same without any discussion, for all the possible obvious reasons!

Most interestingly, amidst all this, the much awaited and hugely important Indian Medical Council bill got passed without any debates or discussion. And why not, when almost all parties were on the same side of the field over salary rise, such debate would have diluted the momentary united spirit! And mind you, this medical council bill which got passed was enacted 76 years ago! Though it took a long time to pass this bill, even after knowing the kind of rampant corruption that exists in the Medical Council of India, not many bills are as fortunate. Almost every time, it is the same old story. Our honorable parliamentarians only wear their respective political ideologies when it comes to significant bills which directly or indirectly affect the most significant stake holders of the country – i.e its citizens. What is even worse is that with an average attendance of around 60%, the parliamentarians do not even feel the need to debate upon such significant bills which have been pending for years. Be it the pesticide management bill 2008, the seeds bill 2004, the coal mine amendment bill 2000, the communal violence bill 2005, the representation of people bill 2006, the insurance law bill 2008, the TRAI bill 2008, the railway property amendment bill 2008, the drugs and cosmetics bill 2007, the motor vehicle bill 2007, the National Road Safety and Traffic Management Board Bill, and numerous other bills – all are still pending just because of a lack of consensus!


Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

posted by Editorial at 3:31 PM

Thursday, July 26, 2012

UP’s Land Acquisition Policy - Any Surprises?

After rounds of Protests by Farmers and Opposition groups, The Ruling UP Govt. announced a New Land Acquisition Policy of The State. The Improvements as most did not expect, took many by Surprise. Is it a beginning-much-needed, or is it just another Political Gimmick?

Facing flak from the ruling coalition in the Centre over the stand-off between the Noida administration and residents of Bhatta-Parsaul village in Greater Noida, Mayawati, the Chief Minister (CM) of Uttar Pradesh, on June 2, 2011, announced a new policy for land acquisition in the state. Under the newly laid-out policy, all land transactions hereon, will now be struck using a consensual approach. This will happen through a direct dialogue between the private developers and the land owners.

“The role of the government now would be that of a facilitator only, limited to issuing a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894,” said the Chief Minister while briefing the media in Lucknow at a press conference organised to announce the new Land Acquisition Policy of the state. This is the second such policy to be announced by the Mayawati regime in the past nine months. The previous one was declared on September 3, 2010. The new policy will be implemented with prospective effect and will not apply to land acquired during the time period when the previous policy was active. The announcement of the new policy followed a “kisan panchayat” addressed by the Chief Minister. The panchayat was attended by farmers’ representatives from Bharatiya Kisan Union, including its general secretary Rakesh Tikait, and those from Tappal and Bhatta-Parsaul.

According to Mayawati, the new policy had been devised after elaborate discussions with the farmers’ representatives. Describing the new policy, the CM claimed it would be better than the “proposed land acquisition policy of the UPA government”. The Congress, which a few days back had slammed the UP chief minister for alleged atrocities in the process of acquiring land for the Yamuna Expressway project and had spoken volumes against the state’s policy, did not respond to her claims. Mayawati claimed that the issue of land acquisition policy would be raised by the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) in the monsoon session of the Lok Sabha and if the Centre’s policy was not announced, the BSP would ‘gherao’ the Parliament.

Voices from the industry have been divided on this issue. The two major industry bodies, Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI) and the Confederation of Indian Industries (CII), have expressed dissenting views on the matter. The major point of contention appears on the role of the government. While CII has found support with the National Advisory Council’s (NAC) suggestion that the government should play a prominent role in the process of all land acquisitions, FICCI believes otherwise. Speaking to B&E on the role of the government, Chetan Bijesure, FICCI’s Additional Director, says, “In the case of UP, the role of the government has changed from that of an acquirer to one of a facilitator. We are not saying that the government should be absolved of the entire process. We are advocating a model that ensures better results for farmers as they will have the option to negotiate better rates.” Further, he adds, “The past instances where the state government has acquired land, we have seen the [unsatisfactory] results (in West Bengal, UP, Orissa). Also, the option of the developer meeting the farmer directly reduces the possibility of vested interests influencing the process at any given stage.” B. Muthuraman, President of CII, however had a different explanation for recommending a greater government involvement. As per him, the government cannot absolve its responsibility in land acquisitions. “We are pleased to note that NAC is also of the similar view on this critical issue. The State must fulfil its responsibility for economic development and play a critical role in acquiring land for industrial projects, as planned industrialisation is essential for job creation and inclusive growth,” says Muthuraman.

The mass agitations which had become synonymous with land acquisitions in the state could only be dealt through innovative solutions, and the confidence with which the UP government has doled out the fresh land acquisition policy, is backed by the reforms that it proposes to bring out.

Government sources told B&E that the new policy on land acquisition has broadly been categorised into three parts. The first part deals with direct transfer of land from farmers to private developers, with the state (district administration) merely playing the role of a facilitator. The policy underlines that the compensation package against the acquisition of land will be prepared only after the terms and conditions have been approved by 80% of the farmers or land owners whose land is to be acquired for a particular project. Failure of the private parties to woo 80% of the farmers would result in reconsideration of the project proposal. Additionally, the farmers have been given the option of taking 16% of the land developed for the project along with annuity at the rate of Rs.23,000 per acre for a period of 33 years. The farmers will also have the option for cash component in lieu of a portion of the 16% developed land. Furthermore, farmers who wish to forgo annuity will be entitled to a rehabilitation grant at the rate of Rs.276,000 per acre. [The rehabilitation grant in the September 2010 policy was fixed at Rs.240,000 per acre.]

The second part of the policy states that farmers whose agricultural land has been acquired for building state highways and canals will be entitled to all the benefits accruing under the state’s Relief and Rehabilitation (R&R) Policy, 2010. Apart from the rehabilitation grant, 25% shares of the developer company will be allotted to the farmer and one member of each farmer’s family will also be given employment in the company. In the third part of the policy, where land has been acquired by the development authorities under the master plan, the deal will be executed only abiding by the terms of agreement through a consensual approach, sources told B&E. Mayawati’s new land acquisition policy has definitely set a benchmark for the Centre to better (when it brings its bill to the monsoon session of Parliament). The events could also, actually translate into the UPA coming out with a more farmer-friendly Land Acquisition Bill.


Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

posted by Editorial at 4:47 PM