http://www.telegraphindia.com/1090803/jsp/bengal/story_11314325.jsp
Singur, Aug. 2: Mamata Banerjee today sprang on Singur a proposal for a railway coach factory, taking a symbolic pro-industry stride in the same spot where she had launched the agitation against the Nano.
The state government could do little but pledge support if a formal proposal was made but experts said Mamata’s plan could not be implemented without changing the law. Besides, the Tatas, who have renewed the lease, are holding the land where Mamata wants to set up the coach factory.
“I have spoken to various Union ministries and told them that if the Centre gives the land to the railways, we can set up a production unit with PPP (public-private participation),” Mamata said, flagging off a train to celebrate the agitation that had driven out the small-car project from Bengal.
Andolan Local connects Singur with Howrah.
“The land is lying with someone but no industry is coming up here,” Mamata said, iterating her demand that 400 acres from the Nano plant be returned to their original owners and the remaining 600 be used for industry.
“In Singur, we want both industrialisation and agriculture. If the Centre gives us the land, we will develop industry on 600 acres and return 400 acres to the farmers.”
Legal experts said the Centre could not “hand over” the plot to Mamata because “land acquisition is a state subject”.
“The Singur plot had been acquired by the state for the West Bengal Industrial Development Corporation (WBIDC). Tata Motors is merely a lessee and the Centre can’t interfere in this,” said lawyer Arunabha Ghosh.
“To start a new project by another owner, the WBIDC will have to auction the land after returning the lease amount paid by the Tatas and the plot will go to the highest bidder.”
To return the land to its erstwhile owners, the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, has to be changed.
Tata Motors paid Rs 1 crore this April and renewed its lease for its 647 acres for another year. Many of vendors earlier slated to set up shop in Singur have also renewed their lease.
At the commercial launch of the Nano in Mumbai on March 23, Ratan Tata had said the company had no plans to give up the land. “The factory sheds are still in place over there. We haven’t decided what to do with them,” he had said.
Official sources said if the Tatas had to give up their land, it had to be voluntary or there could be legal complications.
However, the Bengal government could not reject Mamata’s proposal. Industries minister Nirupam Sen said the government would think over it if she approached with “definite plans” and “proposals”.
“The land was meant for industrial activities and if she wishes to set up a railway coach factory, the state government does not have any objection to it. She should approach us with definite plans and proposals.”
The country’s first Kisan Vision project will come up in Singur, Mamata announced. “We have identified a two-acre plot adjoining the station. Agricultural produce will be sold here and a food-processing unit will also be set up,” she said.
Singur station has been granted Rs 50 lakh as a model station.
Monday, August 3, 2009
Mamata factory plan on Nano site- Trinamul chief sings industry tune
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Singur: Amnesty raps state govt
The Statesman
http://www.thestatesman.net/page.arcview.php?clid=2&id=289763&usrsess=1
Rajib Chatterjee
KOLKATA, 8 JUNE: The Nano project moved out of West Bengal eight months ago, but the Left Front government and the CPI-M continue to incur the wrath of international organisations for the manner in which land for the project was acquired and protests by agitating farmers were suppressed by police.
This time, the state government's procedure of land acquisition and subsequent police action against farmers spearheading the movement to reoccupy their agricultural plots have been severely criticised by human rights body Amnesty International (AI) which released its annual report recently.
The 2009 report said the “ruling party” had “violently” suppressed the protest of farmers and police failed to protect them. In the report, the AI has condemned the “forced eviction” of farmers from their farmlands in Singur.
The AI has clearly mentioned in its report that land was acquired for the Singur project without taking the consent of most of the farmers who owned it. In a veiled criticism of the West Bengal government and the ruling party, the human rights body has stated in its report that police authorities resorted to “baton charging” on “peaceful protestors” and detained many of them “without charge”.
Indirectly criticising the CPI-M, the AI stated in its report: “Police had failed to protect protesters when private militias, reportedly allied with ruling political parties, violently suppressed the protests. Authorities did not carry out timely or impartial inquiries into several of these incidents.”
The report further reads: “Local community protests continued over land acquisition and forced evictions. In some cases, police responded by baton-charging peaceful protesters and detaining them without charge for up to one week.”
The report also reads: “At least 30 people were injured in a six-month-long protests by farmers and Opposition parties in Singur. Subsequent negotiations between the protesters the state authorities failed, forcing the project to relocate to Gujarat.”
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Lok Sabha elections 2009
Modes of industrialisation -- the main issue on which the elections were fought in West Bengal (more specifically in Kolkata) http://www.telegraphindia.com/1090517/jsp/bengal/story_10980294.jsp
Revenge complete, cry for peace and lost land | ||||||||
| OUR BUREAU | ||||||||
Nandigram/Singur, May 16: Left a widow by “CPM goons”, Sayra Biwi will whisper a few words of thanks when she kneels down to pray tonight. “My revenge is complete,” said the 33-year-old, a mother of four, as news of Trinamul Congress candidate Subhendu Adhikary’s victory over the CPM’s Lakshman Seth in Tamluk reached Nandigram’s Bainchabari village. “Now we can hope there will be peace here after all.” Sayra’s husband had been killed during the CPM’s “recapture” of Nandigram in November 2007. Today, she played with abir outside her home. “I have been left to bring up my four children on my own, but at least the CPM goons who killed my husband have been defeated,” she said. “When I pray today, I will thank the Almighty for all that He has done for us.” If Nandigram, in East Midnapore, celebrated, so did villages in Singur, where the land war began. But unlike in Singur, part of the Hooghly Lok Sabha seat that Trinamul’s Ratna Dey Nag won and where many hope that their land will now be returned, all that the villagers in Nandigram want is peace. Nearly 1,000 pro-Trinamul villagers, who fled CPM strongholds and took shelter in Maheshpur High School after being terrorised by party workers for “daring” to vote, want to return to their homes. “We expect Trinamul will ensure peace so that we don’t have to flee our homes any longer,” said Sheikh Saidul Ali, 23, a farm labourer from Satengabari. Ali had left home on May 8 morning with wife Jahanara and one-year-old son. It was the third time he had to flee since the Red Army’s November 2007 assault. “I feel happy that the party that stood by us during our agitation against land acquisition has won,” said Abhijit Samanta, 32, who was injured in the March 2007 police firing. “To start with, it can bring peace in Nandigram.” Trinamul’s victory also meant a change in menu for those stranded in the refugee camp at Maheshpur. “For the past eight days we have been living on rice, pumpkin curry and dal. Today, for the first time, we were served rohu fish for lunch. Trinamul leaders came and distributed sweets,” said Sheikh Aksar Ali, 35, who lives in Ranichak. In Singur, Trinamul supporters burst crackers as victory processions wound their way through Beraberi, Ghoshpara, Sahanapara, Saterbheri and Bajemelia. But for the villagers, uppermost on their mind was the return of the land taken over for the Tata Motors project. “We want our land back,” said one as others nodded. “We want our new MP to ensure that,” said Paramita Das, 43, a housewife in Beraberi whose four-bigha land had been acquired. “We are farmers,” said Haripada Das, 65, another landloser. “We feel helpless without our land. We don’t need factories in Singur.”
 http://www.telegraphindia.com/1090517/jsp/nation/story_10969760.jsp
|
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Mamata threatens to resume land fight
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1090512/jsp/bengal/story_10951932.jsp
Mamata threatens to resume land fight | ||
| OUR SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT | ||
Calcutta, May 11: Mamata Banerjee threatened to launch a fresh agitation in Singur after the polls demanding return of the land that she claimed was forcibly acquired, on a day the chief minister sought her apology for the flight of the Nano project from Bengal. “We shall start a movement after the polls demanding that the land forcibly acquired in Singur be returned to farmers,” the Trinamul Congress chief told a news conference at her Kalighat house today. At an interaction with jo- urnalists earlier in the day, Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee had said: “The Opposition deliberately stopped the project and compelled the Tatas to leave… the Opposition… should apologise.” Mamata said: “Instead of advising me, Buddhababu should himself apologise for his undemocratic actions in Singur… I shall see to it that farmers who have not collected their cheques get back their land.” She iterated the charge that the chief minister had “forcibly acquired” land for the small-car project. “A day will come when Buddhababu will have to carry a poster on his back telling people that he will never grab farmland to fulfil his whims. He will have to return 400 acres (which she says was forcibly acquired) in Singur at any cost,” she added. A Trinamul general secretary said a blueprint had been drawn up for the renewed agi-tation. “We shall call a meeting of the Save Farmland Committee after the polls to re-launch the Singur movement.” Told that the chief minister had termed her party “indisciplined”, Mamata flared up. “I don’t like to take a lesson from Buddhababu about what is discipline and culture. He is a dangerous man who is encouraging violence by asking his police and cadres to unleash terror on the Opposition. A chief minister who does not stick to his oath of office should be sacked.” Reacting to the chief min- ister’s remark that he would not talk to the Opposition on Singur again, Mamata said: “I don’t feel like talking to him.” Bhattacharjee had accused Mamata of indulging in divisive politics because of her repeated claims that Muslims were being persecuted and their land was being grabbed. Mamata said: “If Muslims are being murdered, how can I change their religious identities? Of the 11 people killed since the second phase of the polls in the state, nine were from the minority community. Eleven Muslim brothers were massacred by CPM men in Nanoor in 2000. How can I keep my eyes shut?” | ||
 |
Thursday, April 9, 2009
No political space outside the CPI(M)-TMC binary
A large majority of the people of Singur in no way condones the Left Front government’s recent policies of industrialisation, development and land acquisition yet they are wary of the new TMC-led panchayat in Singur.
For instance, some villagers in Dobandi, an SC village of landless farm labourers (and owing to existing caste discriminations and economic conditions this village has been the hardest hit ever since the land was taken away for the Tata project), received the rare subsidy from the government for making brick houses under the Indira Abasan Yojana (Indira Housing Scheme). Yet, this sum of about Rs. 35,000 came with several riders. Madhabi, a resident of Dobandi, says “First, we did not get this money as such. We had to go to Bulda’s shop in Beraberi where a panchayat member made us buy the construction materials.” The second rider, Madhabi says is that “the TMC-led panchayat members asked for a bribe of Rs 1,500 from each family that received this grant as it is through the panchayat that the money reached these people. The panchayat members are demanding extra money from the electorate for doing their duty. However, none of us finally paid this bribe. As a result, the panchayat members have stopped speaking to us now.” Another resident of Dobandi who had also received this grant under this housing scheme denied when we asked him about the demand for bribe but when Madhabi spoke up and said that the panchayat members had asked everyone who received the grant, for a bribe, this man also admitted to being asked for a bribe, which he didn’t pay, like the other villagers. Therefore, the electorate is being forced to shell out extra money in buying bricks and cement from a certain specified supplier who is taking full advantage of the situation by selling goods at an inflated rate. The panchayat, it seems, is getting a commission from this hardware supplier for getting an unofficial government deal.
When it comes to the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS), the situation remains the same as before. The previous CPI(M) panchayat was abysmal in its record. The scheme assures every adult member of any rural household willing to do unskilled manual work one hundred days of employment in every financial year at the statutory minimum wage. However, under the CPI(M) panchayat, most villagers in Khasherbheri (another village in Singur) did not even have the NREGS job cards required to submit an application for work. When we asked villagers in Khasherberi in May 2008, one of them said “I had gone to the panchayat and submitted my application form. But I haven’t got my card as yet. When on repeatedly asking the panahcyat members, I realised I wasn’t going to get it, I asked them to return the application form so I could take it to the BDO and complain about it. But they did not return the form either.” One of the villages where most people had job cards was Dobandi. However, the people got their job cards mostly due to the efforts of Anuradha Talwar and Paschim Banga Khet Majoor Samity, an NGO rather than due to the efforts of the local panchayat members. “Didi (referring to Anuradha Talwar) helped us make our job cards. No one from the panchayat took any initiative,” confirmed Kali, a resident of Dobandi. The CPI(M) panchayat made little effort to publicise the scheme. However, on an average no one had received paid work for more than seven days in 2008. Demand for hundred days of work from the authorities had been met with the dodge that there are no work openings available. While most people had not received any work at all, those who had told yet another story – that in many cases, the amount of work they were expected to do in a day was not such that was normally humanly possible and that that inability has often translated, come pay time, to a claim that the work has not been done to requirement, and therefore is undeserving of pay and also that the worker is unskilled and hence cannot be given any further work.
Most people in Singur had wholeheartedly thrown themselves behind the TMC in the panchayat elections of 2008. The victory was seen as their victory against the oppressions of the CPI(M) government. Yet, post-elections, little changed. Even in July 2008, Sukumar Pakira, elected TMC member of the Beraberi panchayat in Singur told members of the Citizens’ Initiative “Do not incite the people about the NREGS. The NREGS is the duty of the panchayat. The panchayat is looking into this. We shall soon start work under the NREGS. Our panchayat members have not yet got down to actual business. We shall start soon.” However, even in January 2009, there was little work under the NREGS scheme being initiated by the new TMC panchayat. The latest from Dobandi, informs local resident Kali, is that “people had worked for 12 days under the NREGS in January 2009. Yet the panchayat has paid some people for 5 days, some for 7 days, the rest of the money is gone. The reason the panchayat is giving is that it was due to errors we made while filling in the job application forms and we had entered wrong bank account numbers. But what I can’t figure out is that if we had indeed provided the wrong bank account numbers, why would we be paid at all and if we are being paid, then why only for a fraction of the actual number of days that we had worked.” Neither could we at the Citizens’ Initiative figure out! Kali had more beans to spill. “They were supposed to paid us Rs. 82 per day but they have only paid us Rs. 76 per day. We wonder what happened to the other Rs. 6 per person per day.”
Villagers in Khasherbheri had finally got around to getting NREGS cards made and they had received about 18 days of work on an average under the NREGS in February 2009. They have been paid Rs.80 out of the Rs 82 per day that they are supposed to receive.
Talk turns from economic matter to the forthcoming Lok Sabha elections. What do you think will happen, we ask some of the villagers in Dobandi. Will this failure to perform on the part of the TMC swing votes once again towards the CPI(M)? “No way,” says one of the residents of Dobandi, “CPI(M) did a cardinal mistake. We can never again vote for the CPI(M) but we plan to boycott the elections this time round and not vote for the TMC either.” Kali, the enigmatic youth, is more skeptical. “Just before the elections, the TMC panchayat members will make some token gestures and announce sops and everyone will again vote for the TMC,” he taunts the first speaker. “You wait and watch. We won’t be fooled that easily,” replies the first speaker gleefully.
The speaker lives in a group of concrete houses which have been built just outside one section of the boundary wall of the factory. Contrary to the claims of Ravi Kant, MD of Tata Motors, who had said that no homesteads were acquired for the Tata plant, several people had indeed been uprooted from their homes. They were then bundled up in tiny concrete houses (with abysmal living conditions such as lack of even a functioning tube well, no toilets to speak of and the monsoons submerging their houses almost up to their knees). These people were no longer being taken care of by the panchayat under which they used to belong before they had been uprooted. Now, even though they fall within the Beraberi panchayat, the Beraberi panchayat (both pre and post panchayat elections, i.e. both CPI(M) and TMC panchayats) have refused to recognise them though they fall within their jurisdiction.
Now with the Congress and the TMC joining hands, the old binary of CPI(M) and TMC is further re-inforced. The people have little choice between Scylla and Charybdis, it seems.
Meanwhile, the 997 acres cordoned off for the Tata factory hang precariously in the balance. Whereas some residents of nearby households have been taking away some of the bricks which used to line the boundary wall running around the 997 acres, the people of Dobandi were never landowners anyway, they only used to work on that land that is now no longer anyone’s, it seems. The landowners of Khasherbheri though have never really given up hope. It is perhaps difficult to break down people’s convictions and their sense of propriety which have been built not only over years but over generations. “We are still hoping that we will get the land back,” a resident of Khasherbheri had told us in September 2008. If the lands are to be returned and due compensation paid for all the days of work lost and also the time required for the land to regain fertility (as most of the local farmers have been demanding), then such steps must be taken soon before the local farmers who were dependent on the land literally die out.
(Names have been changed so as to protect identity).
Citizens’ Initiative
March 2009
Election 2009: The Singur Issue
The Statesman
Suhrid, a bother for CPM
http://www.thestatesman.net/page.news.php?clid=22&id=250506&usrsess=1
Rajib Chatterjee
KOLKATA, April. 9: With the murder of Tapasi Malik (in picture) still fresh in the memories of the people of Singur, the CPI-M Singur zonal committee members are battling unwelcome queries that cropped up after they engaged Mr Suhrid Dutta, the prime accused in Tapasi murder case, in party's poll campaign.
Mr Dutta is leading the party's poll campaign in Singur for CPI-M contestant from Hooghly parliamentary constituency.
After Mr Suhrid Dutta, CPI-M Hooghly district committee member and prime accused in Tapasi Malik murder case, took over the charge of party's zonal committee, local Trinamul Congress leaders in Singur are wasting no time to earn sympathy votes by roping in Tapasi's parents ~ Mr Manoranjan Malik and Mrs Malina Malik in their poll campaign.
To get maximum political mileage, the Malik couple are holding rallies at various places in Singur and describing how their daughter was murdered allegedly by “henchmen hired by Mr Dutta”.
“Being a father of a martyr, I urge the people of the state to pull down Mr Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee from his chair. He is one who backed the man who murdered my daughter. My innocent daughter was killed by Mr Dutta's henchmen for daring to oppose the CPI-M. I can never forgive him. He is roaming freely in Singur and delivering intellectual speeches. I want to see him behind bars,” Mr Malik had said in a poll campaign of Trinamul Congress at Bhadreswar a few days ago.
Mr Becharam Manna, Trinamul Congress leader and convener of the Singur Krishi Jomi raksha Committee said: “The CPI-M will realise shortly that it has made another blunder by engaging Mr Dutta in poll campaigning. People of Singur are not one with the CPI-M's decision. Local CPI-M leaders are facing unwelcome questions for using Mr Dutta in poll campaign. In election rallies, we are highlighting how the CPI-M leader had hired killers to murder Tapasi.”
“With Mr Dutta leading the party's election rallies, a section of CPI-M cadres in Singur apprehend that the existing support base of the party would be hit hard. Some senior CPI-M leaders of Singur have reportedly opposed the decision of the party to engage Mr Dutta in poll campaign. Since it was the decision of the party's state committee, local CPI-M leaders are not opening up in the public,” said a CPI-M insider.
Mr Dibakar Das, CPI-M Hooghly district committee member from Singur, however claimed: “There is no controversy within the party over the issue. People are not raising any questions because they know it very well that Mr Dutta was framed. He is neither a rapist nor a murderer.”
http://www.thestatesman.net/page.arcview.php?clid=22&id=282427&usrsess=1
Pranesh Sarkar
KOLKATA, April 6: Though Singur sparked off nationwide controversy after the small car project of the Tata Motors moved out of the state owing to stiff resistance put up by the Trinamul-led Opposition over “forceful acquisition of farmland”, the CPI-M has decided not to use the issue as a major campaign tool.
The decision has come at a time when it was being predicted that the CPI-M could leave the Opposition in an uncomfortable position, especially in the urban areas, ahead of the Lok Sabha polls. It was also being assumed that the CPI-M would leave no stone unturned to “expose” the “anti-development” stand of the Opposition and Singur could be a major weapon for this.
While replying to a question posted in its election campaign website, the CPI-M leadership made it clear that it would focus on the failure of the UPA government to address the concerns of common people during its regime. This apart, the party would also focus on the threat of communal politics of the BJP and the alternative politics advocated by the CPI-M and the Left parties to address the challenges faced by the nation.
Regarding Singur, the party leadership said: “What happened in Singur can only serve to illustrate the bankruptcy of forces like the Trinamul Congress which would be referred to as and when appropriate.”
However, experts said the party has intentionally kept the issue out of campaigning agenda as it would invite fresh controversies over acquisition of farm land to set up industries which could hit its rural vote bank. It can also be recalled that the Left partners had also raised their voices against forceful acquisition of farm land in Singur. If the controversy is raised again, it won't be very comfortable for the party.
It can also be recalled that the Left partners had initially opposed inclusion of Singur and Nandigram issues in the joint appeal of the Left Front. However, the issues were later mentioned in the appeal very briefly avoiding all controversial points. However, though the party decided not to use Singur issue as a major tool in the Lok Sabha polls, it has admitted that a mistake had been committed in Nandigram. Replying to another question, the party leadership said in West Bengal, there is a constant fragmentation and division of land holdings. And as a high proportion of rural populace is dependent on agriculture along with a high proportion of landlessness, it is essential that these people find avenues for employment which could be provided by industrial development.
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Nano frenzy
Hindustan Times
Singur Drove Nano away, now it wants to drive it
They want to ride the Nano because they want to show to their pro-farming leaders what they have missed.
Congress worker Ranjit Chatterjee was in a hurry on Thursday. He was not in a mood to miss even a second to apply for the Nano. He went to the State Bank of India branch here early in the morning to be the first to procure the application form.
He reached even before the bank had opened.
“Nano means technological advancement. Nano means moving forward. So, I have decided to gift it to my nephew who is studying computer engineering,” said Chatterjee, expressing sorrow over the Nano project's departure from Singur.
But Arun Das, the Congress candidate from the Singur Assembly seat in the 2006 elections, was unhappy even though he managed to procure an application form. He had wanted to be the first. “I was one of the first persons to give up my land for the Nano project. Though the plant is no more in Singur, I wish to be the first person from Singur to bag the Nano,” Das told Hindustan Times after receiving his application form.
“I want to ride the car because I want to show to our pro-farming neighbours what they have missed,” Das said.
According to State Bank of India sources, 25 application forms were distributed from its Singur branch. “The response was good. We expect more applicants in the days ahead,” P.K. Chandra, branch manager, said.
However, there was not much enthusiasm among general villagers in Singur about the Nano.
Peasants, who had protested against the Tata plant in Singur and had led to the project's withdrawal from there, however, seemed unperturbed. “It means nothing for us. Are we going to eat it?” Sahadeb Das, a septuagenarian from Khaserveri village, said.
Indian Express
Many Nanos rev up to roll into Singur
http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/many-nanos-rev-up-to-roll-into-singur/445346/The small wonder wows Kolkatans too, with huge crowds turning up to book the car
The Nano may not have rolled out from Singur, but it is certain to roll into the area in good numbers.
The response was overwhelming from the farmers and other residents of the area on Thursday, when the booking opened for Nano.
Naba Kumar Pal, who lives at Beraberi Dakshinpara in Singur, which was once the hotbed of the agitation against the land acquisition, was among the many who booked a Nano today.
According to officials of the banks collecting booking forms in Singur, there was an incredible response from people, which included the likes of Zairul Haque, who had given up his land for the Tata project.
In Kolkata too, the response was great. Twenty-one-year-old Divya Hans, a resident of Russel Street, is praying hard she is among those to get the car in the first phase of Nano allotment. Incidentally, this is going to be her first car, and her mother wants to gift the small wonder when she finishes her college.
On Thursday, Divya rushed to the nearest Tata Lexus showroom at AJC Bose Road and was busy filling up forms with her mother Seema Hans. “This is my first car. I hope I get selected in the first allotment. My mother is buying it since I will be completing my college this year. This car is good for girls as it is compact, small and looks elegant,” said the BA final-year student.
Alauddin Master, who has come all the way from Hooghly to book his Nano, is waiting to own his first-ever car at the age of 47. With his wife and daughter, Alauddin, a primary school teacher, thanks the Tatas for giving people like him a chance to own a car which is reasonably priced.
“This is the first car for me and my family. Its affordability is the main reason why I want to book it. My daughters are more excited than me. For people like us, such cars priced at such rates, are a blessing. Now I can proudly drive around in my brand new car, which I hope to get soon,” Alauddin said.
At showrooms like Tata Lexus Motors and KB Motors, the crowd said it all.
At the SBI outlets, the response was mixed with only a few centres getting drawing people in huge numbers, but officials expect it to swell from Monday. “Till 7 pm, there has been a very good response, with almost 103 bookings at our outlet alone,” said an official of the Tata Lexus showroom in the city.
For some like Poulami Majumder, the Nano booking has given her an excuse to learn to drive. Newly-wed Poulami was seen preparing to enroll herself with a driving school while her engineer husband, Mainak, was busy booking the car for his wife.
“My husband often goes on tours. He is gifting me a Nano, which I want to drive,” said Poulami, her excitement written on her face.
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1090402/jsp/calcutta/story_10758021.jsp
Nano champion books ‘dream’ car | |||||||
| MEGHDEEP BHATTACHARYYA | |||||||
Palash Mukherjee, 38, had dreamt of seeing his hometown, Singur, become an icon of Bengal’s industrialisation. But the dream was dashed with the Tata pullout last year. On Wednesday, the member of the Nano Bachao Committee had to be content with becoming one of the first to book a Nano in Calcutta. Mukherjee, a small-scale trader in medicines, left his Kamarkundu home in Singur early on Wednesday and took the 8.45am Burdwan-Howrah local to reach the city at 10am. He was one of the first to queue up outside a Tata Motors showroom in south Calcutta. “I couldn’t hold back my tears when I first touched the Nano. It’s a lovely car. It’s a dream come true but the dream isn’t ours anymore,” he told Metro. “But the joy in booking my first car fades into insignificance whenever I think of the deserted Singur factory,” he added. Mukherjee’s family had willingly given up around four bighas for the project and collected a cheque for Rs 11 lakh. “I felt proud that a part of the mother plant would come up on my land. We grew a little rice on our land but were ready to forego it for the small-car project,” Mukherjee said. “My cousin and I were involved with the factory canteen and also in supplying building material to the site. Those were the happiest days of our lives,” he sighed. Then, of course, Mamata Banerjee and Krishi Jomi Jeebika Rakkha Committee happened and the dreams ended. Mukherjee is one of the founder-members of the Nano Bachao Committee — formed a day before the October 3, 2008 pullout — and is its working secretary. He was also a part of the delegation that met governor Gopalkrishna Gandhi and chief minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee last year to try and save the project. “I begged with the governor. I did everything possible,” he said. But Mukherjee hasn’t given up on the Tatas yet. “The situation in Singur has improved since October. Ratan Tata is socially responsible, he won’t let us down. Security can’t be the sole issue, otherwise he would’ve closed down the Taj Mahal hotel in Mumbai (after 26/11),” he pointed out. So why was Nano his choice for the first car? “The Singur emotion overrides everything else. Also, it’s a great car, affordable for people from the lower-middle class. I can finally discard my old motorcycle and take my family out in our own car,” he smiled. http://www.telegraphindia.com/1090410/jsp/frontpage/story_10802398.jsp
|
Monday, April 6, 2009
Artful no to anti-CPM drama group
http://www.thestatesman.net/page.arcview.php?clid=22&id=282324&usrsess=1
Statesman News Service
KOLKATA, April 5: A group of artistes and intellectuals belonging to the Group of Rural Alternative Movement (Gram) ~ a social organisation ~ were prevented from performing a street drama in Chanditola yesterday, allegedly by Hooghly police officers. The drama was based on the alleged CPI-M sponsored terrorism in Nandigram and Singur.
Members of the organisation having been performing street dramas in various places across the state. They also sell CDs and cassettes based on the movement in Nandigram and Singur.
“We don’t belong to any political outfit. We never urge people to vote for the Trinamul Congress or any other political party. We were only highlighting the plight of the people of Nandigram and Singur. When we were performing the drama at Nababpur near Chanditola yesterday afternoon, a police team arrived and prevented us from performing. Police said that a complaint against us was lodged by a political outfit for disturbing the peace in the area. We were not allowed to perform the drama,” said Mr Manik Mondal, a member of the organisation.
"In protest against the incident, we went to Serampore police station today to lodge a complaint. But policemen didn't register our grievance. Ultimately, we submitted the complaint to the SDPO of Serampore. Eminent intellectuals and litterateurs will issue a statement shortly, protesting against the incident," Mr Mondal continued.
He further alleged that the artists have been facing resistance from CPI-M cadres while performing street drama. “We faced tough resistance in Asansol and Barasat a few days ago, while performing a street drama on the Nandigram carnage,” Mr Mondal said.
Have Nano, will travel
Have Nano, will travel
http://www.thestatesman.net/page.arcview.php?clid=4&id=282245&usrsess=1
The statements by three protagonists of the Left Front government’s industrialisation overdrive during the past three weeks tend to confirm the suspicion that there are wheels within wheels in the Tata Motors’ small car project at Singur that ended in a fiasco. It was believed that a full stop had been put to the venture after it was shifted to Sanand in Gujarat, but it seems the murky automobile saga is not yet over.
First, let’s examine how the three ~ chief minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee, industries minister Nirupam Sen and principal industries secretary Sabyasachi Sen ~ by their statements sought to create an impression that they were talking at cross-purposes. But the way things unfolded during the past few days it became clear that the three were working to a meticulous plan.
It was Mr Bhattacharjee who, rounding up the debate on the Governor’s address for the Budget session, told the state Assembly that no part of the acquired land at Singur would be returned to the farmers as was being demanded by the Trinamul-led Opposition. He asserted that he couldn’t just betray the farmers of Singur by not setting up industries on the land acquired from them. He announced that the process of setting up industries on the land had started and it was likely to be completed in about a year.
The state government, he clarified, would, during this period, go through the motions of getting the land back from the Tatas who were given it on lease, while the Tatas wold move away whatever equipment they had installed there. In other words, the chief minister told the Assembly that the Tata episode at Singur was over for good.
Then came the dramatic launch of the “wonder car”, Nano, in Mumabi. Within minutes, the state industries minister called a Press conference to bemoan the loss of the Nano project. He squarely blamed the Trinamul and its allies for having brought this “misfortune” to the people of West Bengal, and asked why the LF government was accused of not being transparent in its deal with the Tatas.
He even asked “intellectuals” and social activists, who had put the state government in the dock for the deal why they were not seeking information under the Right to Information Act on the Gujarat government’s deal with the Tatas for the relocated project at Sanand.
The fact is, it was the LF government which had blocked every attempt to seek information on its deal under the RTI Act.
Nano has been turned into a major election plank for the LF with which it castigates the Trinamul Congress. The abortive venture is being projected by the LF as an example of Trinamul’s anti-development and anti-people politics. Hence, the launchng of Nano gave the LF’s Lok Sabha poll campaign the much needed extra firepower to slam Trinamul.
When one thought the remarks of the chief minister and the industries minister were merely part of poll rhetoric and a desperate attempt to turn public opinion against the Trinamul, which had already reaped huge political dividends from the Singur and Nandigram turmoil, the principal industries secretary used the safety and distance of Kuala Lumpur to announce that the Tatas are to stay at Singur and that West Bengal would be the second assembly line of Nano if only the state had been denied the pride of place of being the first stable of the small car.
For the first time, the principal industries secretary disclosed that Tata Motors had plans to produce Nano from four factories in the country. All along it had been bruited about that not an inch of the 997 acres could be returned to the agitating farmers as the project area had been conceived to be large enough to accommodate a whole automobile cluster so that Nano could be made available at the unbelievably cheap price of Rs 1 lakh.
The principal industries secretary had once even sounded grateful to the Tatas for their “sacrifice” of Rs 16,000 for each car they would produce as they would have got this money by way of sales tax exemption had they set up shop in Uttaranchal!
All these reveal that the Tatas must be regretting their decision to move out of Singur. This implies the undisclosed benefits that they were offered by the state government were too great to be thrown away. The Marxists lent their voice to Tata Motors’ inflexible demand for the entire 997 acres at Singur because conceding Trinamul’s demand for return of 400 acres would have been too big a political price for them.
Now, perhaps business is trying to get the better of politics.
Trinamul would let the Singur small car project be revived only if it comes up on 600 acres and the rest of the land is returned to the unwilling farmers from whom it had been forcibly acquired. This has been their stand from the beginning.
If the Marxists accept this stand and hope to make whatever political gain is possible from the actual production of cars in the state, Singur can be the second address of Nano as wished by the principal industries secretary.
Saturday, December 20, 2008
http://www.mainstreamweekly.net/article1077.html
Mainstream Vol XLVI, No 51
Please Pay Your Bill Before You Leave, Mr Tata!
by D. Bandyopadhyay, 12 December 2008
(The author was the Secretary to the Government of India, Ministries of Finance (Revenue) and Rural Development, and the Executive Director, Asian Development Bank, Manila.)
On October 3, 2008, at a press conference at Kolkata, Ratan Tata formally announced his decision to move out the Nano Project from West Bengal squarely blaming the agitation led by the Trinamul Congress for his decision to relocate the plant. This statement clearly reflected
some of the discussions that he had with the Chief Minister of West Bengal with whom he was closeted for two hours before the press conference. He spoke persuasively with unwarranted venom.
One cannot blame Tata for his lack of knowledge of the character, trait and heritage of the popular upsurges in West Bengal. Singur was one of the epicentres of the Tebhaga movement in the late forties of the last century led by the old and unsullied Communist Party of India. There is a famous story by Manik Bandyopadhyay called "Chhoto Bakul Purer Yatri" on that episode. Its locale was Bara-Kamalapur in Singur. A blue-blooded bourgeois totally alienated from the common people cannot have any perception about any popular movement against gross violation of their basic right to life and livelihood. He cannot be faulted for it.
After all, the Tatas made their primary accumulation of capital through opium trade in China in the nineteenth century. Use of opium was prohibited under law in China. The East India Company and its minor trading partners, among which the Tatas were one, started
illegal importation of opium into China from India. The Chinese Government strongly objected to this. The British waged the first Opium War (1839-42) in which China lost resulting in the Treaty of Nanjing, 1842. It imposed insulting and highly unfavourable conditions against China and in favour of the British. Then there was a second Opium War in 1856-60 wherein the British triumphed again and forcibly legalised contraband trade in opium in China. The Tatas and a few
other Indian traders made enormous profit from this trade in a contraband commodity in China. Wealth creates hauteur. Hence we may excuse Tata for his slightly less than civilised behaviour in slandering Ms Mamata Banerjee at the press conference. He did not show any concern for or kindness to the land losers of Singur but it is reported that he donated US$ 50 million to Cornell University only recently.
But what about the Communist Party of India-Marxist? Did it not take a Royal Charter of monopoly for representing the "oppressed" who stood in constant opposition to the "oppressor" and who are in a constant fight, "a fight that each time ended, either in a revolutionary
reconstitution of society at large, or in the common ruin of the contending classes"? The Chief Minister of West Bengal, Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee, while opening a SEZ project at the New Town Rajarhat on October 5, 2008, declared that he had "lost a battle, but not the war". A question naturally arises: for whom is he waging this war?
While commenting on the adverse economic effects of SEZs, Professor Amit Bhaduri observed: "The devil in angel's guise would soon appear when large populations in rural areas would be rendered landless, jobless, homeless, incomeless, rootless and displaced making way for SEZs, the so-called epitomes of economic development." Bravo Mr Chief Minister, for so transparently exposing the class affiliation of yourself and your party! You have openly promised to wage a war in favour of the oppressors and against the oppressed. It is only to be hoped that it ends in the reconstitution of the society in favour of monopoly capital. In ensuring this objective, the CPI-M would fulfil its historic mission of total subjugation and annihilation of workers and peasants making the world safe for the bourgeoisie. It perhaps validates the saying "Money Speaks"!
The Government of West Bengal (GOWB) published 13 notifications under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 in July 2006 declaring its intentions to acquire roughly 1000 acres of land in five mauzas of Singur abutting the Durgapur Express Highway. All the 13 notifications had the same common clause. It stated that land mentioned in the Schedule blow is likely to be needed to be taken by Government/Government Undertaking/Development Autho-rities, at the public expense for a public purpose (emphasis ours), viz., employment generation and socio-economic development of the area by setting up of Tata Small Car Project, etc., etc.
Since the government cannot acquire any land for a private company except through the procedure laid down in the Chapter-VII of the Land Acquisition Act, the GOWB openly committed a fraud on the law and on the public by acquiring the land in the name of the West Bengal Industries Development Corporation (WBIDC-a government company) for
leasing out the land to Tata Motors Ltd (TML). This chicanery on the part of the GOWB enabled the Tatas to get hold of 643 acres of land on lease without paying a paisa. But under this procedure land could be acquired only for a "public purpose". Section 3(f) of the LA Act
defines "public purpose". There are eight items under it. But the caveat to this definition is very significant. It says "but does not include acquisition of land for companies". Thus the acquisition of land for the TML was totally illegal. The issue is now pending before the Apex Court. For the exercise of the doctrine of eminent domain a "public purpose" is essential. Hence the GOWB deceitfully tried to make out a case by stating that the small car factory would generate
employment and result in socio-economic development in the area. There is no basis for this assertion. Firstly, it did not disclose how many direct jobs would be created in the factory. Secondly, it did not specify how many land losers would get direct employment. Thirdly, the
promise of the process of economic development and the resultant prosperity was a rehash of the discredited and discarded "trickle-down theory". Hence it was an exercise in falsehood. Though not conceding the point, let us accept these contentions for the sake of argument.
The whole thesis is predicated by the fact that the TML would set up a small car factory. Now that they have decided to move out and are relocating the factory outside West Bengal, the whole thesis vanishes into thin air. There is no small car factory. There would be no
employment generation. There would be no socio-economic development of the area. Therefore, there would be no "public purpose". Thus the expenditure of public funds for this non-existing project was a total waste and, therefore, fully unjustified. It calls for criminal action.
This has very grave and serious consequences. The whole exercise of acquisition of 1000 acres of land through the use of force, building up of infrastructure for the project which does not exist, supply of free electricity and water, round the clock police protection for two years, construction of an 18.75 km of eight feet high boundary wall with watch tower at regular intervals, were done for nothing. Who would bear this cost? Even with a contrived and convoluted argument of
"public purpose", there could have been a fig-leaf of justification of such enormous public expenditure. With the withdrawal of the Tatas all these expenses lose all validity. Some heads should roll.
The Tatas withdrew from Singur on their own volition. Therefore, they would have to pay for the cost. That is the logic. That is also the ethics. In fact, the Comptroller and Auditor-General (CAG) of India should conduct a due diligence audit of the WBIDC, Commerce and Industries Department, West Bengal Housing Infrastructure Development Corporation (HIDCO), Bhangore-Rajarhat Area Development Authority (BRADA) and the Police Directorate to compute exactly the loss to the public exchequer due to this abrupt decision of the Tatas to move out from Singur. The CAG should also fix responsibility for this wanton waste of public funds. It would be a slightly time-consuming process but it has to be done for the sake of public accountability, transparency and good governance.
Meanwhile to present a provisional bill to the Tatas an attempt is being made here to compute a figure based on the facts and figures as published in the print media about this issue. The Tatas caused enormous loss of public funds for their misadventure in Singur. This provisional figure would be altered once the CAG's report is made available. But it is fair that the Tatas should have an indication of how much they would have to pay back.
In the first place, but for the fraud perpetuated by the GOWB the Tatas would have to pay upfront the estimated cost of land acquisition under Chapter VII of the LA Act 1894. Now that there is not even a fig-leaf of public purpose, they would have to reimburse to the State
Government a sum of Rs 200 crores, the paid out cost of compensation for the acquisition with some visible overheads.
Secondly, the WBIDC or some other State agency constructed an 18.75 km long boundary wall along the outer periphery of the acquired property. We do not know its specifications. It is locally said that the wall is eight feet high with a two-feet foundation underground. Estimates made
by a couple of A-class CPWD contractors indicated that it would cost Rs 275 per running metre for a wall of this type with supporting pillars at regular intervals. Thus the estimated cost of construction of this wall would not be less than Rs 51,56,250, that is, roughly Rs 51.56 lakhs. With this one has to add the cost of five big gates. At a conservative estimate that would cost not less than Rs 25 lakhs. Thus the wall with gates would cost not less than 76.56 lakhs.
Thirdly, the government provided round-the-clock police protection both during the process of acquisition and after the land was leased out to Tatas. Newspaper reports indicate that approximately 2000 policemen were deployed day and night for the last two years and
several months for the protection of the property of the TML. The government did not come out with any fact about it. But the Police Directorate of West Bengal has a standard formula of cost for deployment of 1000 policemen (one battalion strength) including ASI and SI but excluding the salaries of officers of the ranks of Inspector and above. The salary cost per month comes to Rs 80,70,000 which is 83.01 per cent of the actual cost. To this one has to add the cost of uniform, boots and some other basic equipments which would come to Rs 16,51,100 constituting 16.99 per cent of the total monthly cost. Thus the total comes to Rs 97,21,800 per month. This figure does not include the expenses of vehicles, POL, and other heavy equipments without which a police force cannot function. Excluding these items the annual cost of deployment of a battalion of police men comes to Rs 11.67 crores. For two battalions deployed to protect the Tata property the cost would be Rs 23.33 crores. For two years it would be Rs 46.66 crores. This is basically the salary component. The actual cost is much higher.
Fourthly, the GOWB committed another act of deception to give financial benefit to the Tatas. The Principal Secretary, Commerce and Industry Department of the GOWB wrote a letter on 12.10.2006 to the Managing Director of the WB Housing Infrastructure Development
Corporation (HIDCO) in which, inter alia, he mentioned: In order to bring investment (obviously NANO Unit) in West Bengal, we had to face competition from other States, in particular, Uttaranchal which enjoys zero excise duty benefit in a car proposed to be priced at Rs 1 lakh, the exemption of 16 per cent excise duty makes a major difference. Therefore, in order to make the investment attractive to the TML, the State Government has to offer significant support in the
form of upfront infrastructured assistance.
So the Tata Housing Development (THDC) would enter into an agreement with the WBIDC to form a joint venture company. Five hundred acres of land belonging to Bhangore Rajarhat Development Authority (BRADA) would be given at a concessional rate to the THDC+WBIDC combine. And 50 acres of high-value land of New Town Rajarhat should also be given to that combine. The letter clearly mentioned 20 acres should be given for commercial purpose and 30 acres for residential purpose at rates which were half the prevailing rates. The letter went on to state that the profit generated by the WBIDC would be used by it "to meet its commitment of infrastructure assistance to the TML project without having resort to budgetary support". The term "infrastructural support" was deliberately used to hide the real intention of giving
subsidy to the TML. This directive of the C and I Department violated several laws apart from being ethically unsupportable. But we are not going into it here.
In one stroke, HIDCO suffered a loss of Rs 60 crores for 20 acres of commercial land and a loss of Rs 75 crores for the residential land making a total loss of Rs 135 crores.
On the 500 acres of BRADA land, one could make some conjecture in the absence of hard facts. Assuming that price of land per cottah was Rs 1 lakh and that BRADA had to sell it at Rs 50,000 to ensure the profitability of the TML, BRADA lost Rs 150 crores straightway. (1 standard acre = 60 Cottah)
Two separate companies/authorities had been ordered to suffer loss to ensure profitability of the TML. The whole idea is preposterous apart from being totally illegal and unethical. A future Commission of Inquiry on "La Affaire Nano" would have to untangle the knots within knots of these totally unwholesome and messy transactions to assess the damage and fix responsibility. It was as well that the Tatas have left, otherwise most of these worthy gentlemen would have got
themselves further entangled in illegality verging on corruption that they might have resulted in spending their residual tenure of life in some State Correctional Homes. Incidentally, with due diligence audit followed by a Commission of Inquiry, the possibility of their short-term stay in these Homes is not beyond the realm of possibility. It would be good if they improved the living conditions of these Homes when they were still in service. Now let us get back to the point.
The provisional exit bill of Tatas would be: (i) Rs 200 crores (LA cost) + (ii) Rs 76.56 lakhs (cost of wall) + (iii) Rs 46.66 crores (police protection) + (iv) Rs 135 + Rs 150 = Rs 285 crores (subsidised land transferred from HIDCO + BRADA) = Rs 532.18 crores (excluding all
indirect and invisible costs) = Rs 532.18 crores (excluding all indirect and invisible costs). The final bill would be computed only after the CAG's audit.
II
This episode cannot be ended unless some tit-bits of the parleys that took place on September 5-6, 2008 at the Council Chamber of Raj Bhavan, Kolkata, are recorded and made public. Since the GOWB unilaterally and unethically repudiated the agreement it entered into with the Opposition, the writer has no moral compunction now to mention some of the inner stories.
In the beginning the Facilitator set the ground rules. There should be no personal attacks. The attempt should be to find an amicable solution of the Singur impasse for the benefit of the "unwilling farmers", agriculture, industry and the general well-being of the people of West Bengal. It must be admitted that both sides adhered to the ground rules and carried on the discussions in a civilised and polite manner.
The discussion centred on the amount of land that could be made available within the project area for resettlement of the "unwilling land losers" on a land-for-land basis. Incidentally the
"land-for-land" principle of R&R has been recognised in the National Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy, October 2007. The Leader of the Opposition made it clear initially that, though debatable, his side would not discuss the merit or otherwise of letting out of 643
acres (approx.) for the mother plant of the TML. It was a major concession and it created immediately an amicable ambience for negotiations. Thus discussions centred on the residual 350 acres (approx.).
The government side pointed out that this area 294 acres has been set apart for ancillary units. After an hour of discussions it was found that the matter was not progressing. It was going round and round.
At this stage the Commerce and Industries Minister suddenly offered 40 acres of land in the project area for non-agricultural avocations on the basis of five per cent of the land cost per land losers. He also introduced the concept of R&R "in and around" the project area. With 40 acres already declared in favour of the land losers, there was an attempt to find out how much more land could be made available from the vacant but not yet utilised land in the project area,
particularly, from the land earmarked for the ancillary units. Whatever proposal came from anywhere the stock reply of the Commerce and Industries Minister was: "The Tatas will not agree." It was like the repetitive refrain of a song in a cracked voice of a scratched HMV
78 RPM paraffin record. I counted this phrase 11 times before I gave up in disgust.
The Facilitator, a suave, charming and elegant gentleman, did not show any sign of displeasure, but very sweetly he asked the Commerce and Industries Minister "who had acquired the land". The reply was: it was the government. Then there was a further query that if the GOWB had
acquired land under the LA Act forcibly, should not it have some view as to how the land should be utilised by the ancillary units? Did anyone ascertain the real requirement of each unit? To that the scratched record croaked: "The Tatas will not agree."
Then the Facilitator sought the permission of the Commerce and Industries Minister to ask a few questions to the MD of the WBIDC. The Minister promptly agreed. The Facilitator then asked the MD who had selected the ancillary units. The reply was-the Tatas. Then he
enquired as to who had decided how much land one unit would require. The reply was-the Tatas. Thereafter, he wanted to know who decided where would that parcel of land be located. The answer was-the Tatas. Getting, perhaps, a bit perplexed, though not showing any sign of it,
he politely asked to whom did the land belong. The reply was-the WBIDC. To this he further queried: "In that case should not the WBIDC have some say regarding areas to be allotted and their location?" This time the Minister replied: "The Tatas will not agree." The MD
supplemented the answer by adding that the WBIDC did not have the technical competence to assess the requirement and, therefore, it depended entirely on the Tatas.
Never in my service career of more than three-and-a-half decades both in the State and at the Centre had I seen such shameful subservience of a government to a business house. One felt ashamed to be in the same company.
It is time to relate an anecdote about Dr B.C. Roy. In 1951 he received a proposal from Morris Motor Co. of England for technical collaboration with an Indian entrepreneur for the manufacture of Morris cars in India. After studying the proposal, one day he told his
personal staff: "Call him (Oke dako)." Totally confused his personal staff left his chamber not knowing whom to call. Then it occurred to someone that it could be G.D.Birla who had sought an appointment earlier. So they rang up Birla and fixed the appointment at 3 pm on the same day. Birla arrived at the appointed hour. Dr Roy was informed. He told his staff "Request him wait for a while (Oke boshte balo)." After a while Birla went in and stayed with Dr Roy for almost
an hour. That was the beginning of the Hindustan Motors at Konnagar, the first motor car factory in Asia after the WW-II. The Chief Minister of Bengal did not kow-tow to any business tycoon to locate an industrial unit in the State.
III
Now what happens after the exit of Ratan Tata from West Bengal. Firstly, to the best of our knowledge on October 4, 2008, the earth went round its own axis at its usual speed of 24 hours per round. Further, the sun rose on that day in East and went down in the west as usual. There was no media report of heaven having fallen or the earth cracking up. The general populace went on their business in the usual manner, so much so that the "bandh" called by the CPI-M collapsed much before time. Life continues in West Bengal in its normal pace and stride since October 03, 2008.
Second, since an area of more or less 643 acres was let out to the TML for setting up a car factory, now that they have decided to go, a notice has to be given for the cancellation of the lease. Similar notices have to be given to all the ancillary units because they were captive to the TML
Third, it appeared from the media reports that about 200 to 250 acres of land where heavy construction had already taken place, agriculture would not be possible without enormous capital cost to restore its original fertility. Hence that area could be kept reserved for a future motor car factory. In fact advice of a reputed consultant should be obtained to ascertain how much land would be required to set up a manufacturing facility of 500,000 small and medium cars per year. On the basis of his assessment an area of, say, 350 or 400 or 450 acres of land could be set apart for the future factory. This should include the built up area of the TML.
Fourth, instead of any sweet-heart agreement with any crony capitalist there should be world-wide advertisement for Global Expression of Interest for setting up of small/medium car factory in Singur. The government should openly advertise what benefits and/or facilities it
would offer. Respondents should be requested to indicate what terms and conditions they would offer for the well being of the land losers and for the State in general. After appropriate technical and financial assessement the party whose offer would be best should be selected to set up the manufacturing unit. The agreement should be open and transparent and there should be no secret annexures as in the case with the TML.
Fifth, the rest of land should be returned to the land losers. The Commerce and Industries Minister had been repeating like an untrained parrot that land once acquired cannot be returned. This is not correct. There are various processes of restoring the land. There is
Section 21 of the General Clauses Act 1897. Its heading reads as follows: "Power to issue includes power to add, to amend, vary, or rescind notification, order, rules or bye-laws." Under this section lands to be returned could be denotified.
If one wanted to stay within the four corners of the Supreme Court judgement in the Bhaskaran Pillai case (1997- 5 SCC.432), the surplus land should be handed over to the Singur Panchayat Samity for "planned development or improvement of existing village sites". Five mauzas
have been devastated by reckless land acquisition proceedings. These villages should be developed in a planned manner as provided for under section 3(f)(I) and (v) of the LA Act, 1894. Land losers should be initially given a 999-year lease.
In due course, a local amendment should be made in the LA Act, on the lines of the Tamil Nadu Amendment to return land to the original owners. It may have to wait for the change of government.
The CPI-M requires to be cautioned that it would be totally illegal to go on a fishing expedition to find out a project which could fit into the definition of "public purpose" to utilise this land. The acquired land has to be used primarily for the purpose for which it was initially acquired.
It is said that "there comes a time in the history of any State when its hypocrisy must be exposed and its crimes against God and man must be proclaimed and denounced". It was time we did it in West Bengal.
IV
It is a polite submission to Mr Tata. Please do not misunderstand us. We are not begging you to foot the bill. We are not putting pressure on you to pay the bill either. We would only like to remind you of a common saying: "A gentleman always settles his bill before he leaves."
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Where the situation in Singur stands now
http://www.thesouthasian.org/blog/archives/2008/under_development_singur.html
Under Development: Singur
Dibyajyoti Ghosh
The 1-lakh Tata Nano is in trouble. While most people protested against State-sponsored violence in Nandigram – the proposed site for Salim group’s 10,000 acre chemical hub (which is now supposed to come up in Nayachar) – Singur and the Tata Motors plant was already one step ahead in the path of industrial re-development in West Bengal. State-sponsored violence in Singur had been far more effective as no one had died (except for Tapasi Malik, a teenager who was raped and murdered by cadres of the ruling party, the CPI(M) for having taken part in the protest movement against the Nano factory). Farmers who committed suicide because they had been deprived of their livelihood because the government had forcibly taken away their land, did not obviously make it to the tally of deaths caused by the factory.
Singur was never really opposed in the popular media. The largest media house in West Bengal wrote editorials urging the state government to quell any protests in Singur, as the Tata Nano plant, it said, would magically revitalise the state’s economy and bring about development for all. The atrocities in Nandigram (because the people there had learnt lessons from Singur and had dug trenches around their own land so as to prevent potential acquirers from forcibly coming in and evicting them from their lands) were of a greater magnitude to arrest the attention of the masses. A hundred thousand people (according to the leading English daily in Kolkata) came out on the streets on 14th November 2007 to protest against the violence in Nandigram, yet Singur, it seemed, never affected so many people to make any such token gestures.
The absence of large-scale bloodbaths (except for the ones on 25th September and 2nd December 2006) seems to have given a no-objection certificate to the displacement of several thousand people and deprivation of their livelihoods as it was all for the greater good of the state of West Bengal.
Though the protests against the Singur plant were initially started by local residents of Singur, the Singur Krishi Jomi Rokkha Committee (Singur Save Farmland Committee) was soon appropriated by the Trinamool Congress (TMC) and most protests by local residents were under the TMC-led SKJRC banner. The independent voices of the local farmers of Singur were soon swallowed up in the larger, state-wide, TMC fold.
The construction of the factory went on at its own pace till the panchayat elections of 2008 when, buoyed by the victory in Singur and Nandigram, the TMC decided to lay siege outside the factory demanding the return of the 400 acres (of the 997 acres in total) of farmland that had been acquired forcibly from unwilling landowners. Work within the Tata Motors factory was impeded because of the siege immediately outside one portion of the factory. After a discussion between the CPI(M)-led Left Front government and the TMC-led opposition, mediated by the governor of West Bengal, where the opposition’s main demand (among many others) was that the 400 acres be returned and the government’s assurance that about 47 acres would be returned at least and much bargaining over the exact quantum of land, the discussions went into one of its prolonged indecisive moments like several others since the issue broke out in 2006.
Ratan Tata decided to shift the Nano plant out of West Bengal and to Gujarat. This was heralded by most as the death knell for industry (which is naively equated with development) in West Bengal and much hue and cry has been raised over the destructive nature of the TMC’s protest movements. With the TMC proposing to continue its protests if the land that is no longer going to be used to supposedly build the Tata Nano factory is not returned to the original landowners, things still appear to be stuck. The government, who agreed to pay a much larger compensation (though still deemed too little by many including most importantly, some of the farmers who were dependent on the land) after the meetings mediated by the governor, was forced to be less harsh and unjust on the farmers dependent on the land and this coming down from its high arrogant position was again seen by many villagers of Singur as a small symbolic victory for them. The government is now citing the archaic 1894 Land Acquisition Law to point out that it cannot return the land on technical grounds (though some lawyers have pointed out that certain technicalities allow the land to be returned). However, going by the WB chief minister’s way of doing things, such trivialities are hardly an issue since he had said that all wrongs could be set right if the land acquisition notice in Nandigram was torn up and thrown away.
The Singur issue has again reached a crucial juncture as with the exit of the Tatas, issues such as whether to return the land or not, how to ensure that the fertility of the land (which has been covered with cement and been rendered uncultivable) is restored and how much compensation (whether to compensate for all the work lost since 2006 when the land was acquired) are all burning issues which need to be sorted out quickly and fairly so that the local farmers of Singur dependent on the land do not suffer any longer. Larger issues of industrialisation and development need to be talked about as it is this which will decide whether the multi-crop and highly fertile land of Singur needs to be used for industry or whether it ought to be restored to its previous cultivable state.
Public pressure seems to have firmly gone up against the TMC. Though some (such as the leading media house in West Bengal) have been consistently against any opposition to the Singur factory, others accept the unfairness and brutalities of the government in forcibly acquiring fertile land, rendering several thousands jobless and setting up a car factory over there. Yet, some who were opposed to the setting up of the car factory thought that the best compromise in a situation where such a factory had already been started to be made would be to let it happen and the TMC protests and Ratan Tata’s decision to shift the project to Gujarat has left things in the middle of two chasms. Neither have the farmers been adequately compensated as yet and the factory been made to operate giving jobs to a chosen few from across the world. Nor has farming been allowed to exist peacefully so that the local populace could have gone on with their lives as before. They feel that the TMC’s protests were ill-timed and the protests should have acquired this magnitude earlier before the factory construction started or it should not have happened now at all and the factory should have been allowed to continue.
The problem with this argument is that the protests had indeed been quite fierce following the State-sponsored violence on 2nd December 2006. In spite of the TMC’s gestures such as breaking furniture in the state Assembly, several protest marches by non-partisan bodies had been organised at that point of time. But, they did not acquire the magnitude of a 100,000-strong force such as after the CPI(M) recapture of Nandigram. And the TMC’s protest then was albeit of a very different nature, instead of a siege, there were frequent strikes or bandhs in the city and its most histrionic extreme was the fracas in the state Assembly. Thus, the TMC, as the leading opposition, cannot be said to have stepped on the gas too late though it is obviously milking the situation for political mileage.
Till the West Bengal panchayat elections of 2008, the factory came up with very little opposition such as the occasional breaking down of the boundary walls or torching of security watchtowers by disgruntled and exasperated farmers. Meanwhile, a meagre compensation had been allocated for the landowners and though the chief minister had publicly said that landless farm labourers would get 25% of the compensation given to the landowners, no such information was officially communicated to the landless farm labourers by the panchayat or other local government officials. Secrecy was practiced and encouraged, the exact agreement between the government and Tata Motors being the most notable one in the Singur project. The factory was coming up and while the leading English daily of Kolkata was publishing imaginary shopping lists for the festive season where the lists included both the iPod Nano and the Tata Nano, the question of what was to happen to those who had not yet collected their compensation cheques and the landless farm labourers who were not even being told that they were supposed to get any compensation at all, was not being discussed in the mainstream media at all. In alternative media and discussion circles, people were speaking about the futility of giving a one-time large compensation to people who are not accustomed to handling large amounts of money as they tend to burn it up instead of investing it properly. Moreover, the compensation being offered by the government was so meagre that the farmers of Singur were saying that the money would run out in a few years whereas they could make a living (however modest that may be, it was sufficient) off the land for ever.
The TMC siege, propelled the Singur issue to the front page of every newspaper and prime slot on every TV channel in West Bengal. More money was in the offing in the form of compensation that the government was forced to agree upon after the meeting mediated by the governor. The exit of the Tatas have however, complicated the compensation for permanent surrender of the land.
It will be naïve to think that no industry will ever come up in West Bengal again any time soon as industries come up wherever more subsidies are offered. Had the people of Nandigram not defended their land in a martial manner, there would not have been large-scale bloodbaths to outrage the public at large and another industrial unit would have come up in Nandigram. It is because the people of Nandigram defended their land and expressed their opinion in a more violent manner, did there ensue the process which led to most people’s strong opposition to the project, though the chief minister disapprovingly admonishes the people there for having lost the chance to develop themselves and which now the people of Nayachar, he claims, have the golden chance to do. It is this same golden chance which a large section of the media thinks Singur had and which it has lost.
It is also quite convenient to tag people opposing the Tata Nano plant as belonging to the TMC camp. For opinion, in the present political milieu, is usually categorised in neat political binaries. By clubbing together all opinion against the Tata Nano plant at all its stages (inception in 2006 or even after it withdrew in 2008) in the TMC camp, one can conveniently label such opinion as being associated with the TMC’s political actions such as the fracas in the state Assembly in 2006 and term it as anti-State and unproductive or even destructive. Most local farmers in Singur are part of the SKJRC and thus also of the TMC because that is the only channel they have for expressing political opinion but they are not naïve enough to prioritise the TMC’s concern (political mileage for one) over their own. The fact that they still are part of the TMC-led SKJRC gives some validity to the agency of the TMC-led SKJRC as representative of the voices of the local farming population dependent on the land. It is because of the existing political setup in West Bengal now that people rarely have a loud voice outside the binary of the CPI(M) and the TMC. Voices outside this binary do exist but are feeble.
Many feel that the Tatas are the big losers in this battle between the CPI(M) and the TMC. The Tatas are seen as a cleaner group compared to the Ambanis. Maybe it says more about the Ambanis than about anyone else for the Tatas have had a recent history of not paying any heed to the voices of the people which it publicly claims it is trying to improve the lives of. The Dhamra port in Orissa has been strongly opposed for several months by Greenpeace activists who warn of the environmental hazards that it will cause but it is still planned to be built. The Tata Steel SEZs in Kalinganagar and Gopalpur in Orissa have also been fiercely opposed by the local residents but they continue to be constructed despite Ratan Tata’s publicly proclaimed desire to improve lives of local communities.
It is now that larger questions of development and governance, of whether predatory industrialisation through the SEZ model and removing subsidies from agriculture and converting agricultural land to industrial land is sustainable or whether such actions will lead to a food crisis in India, need to be discussed. Questions about whether the country needs more cars and more flyovers to make space for the greater number of cars or a limit on the maximum number of cars in every city need to be put into place; and whether the Land Acquisition Act and its carte blanche to the government to acquire land for ‘public purpose’ (which now the Court has ruled can also mean earning money for the country) needs to be modified so that the landowner can choose to surrender or not surrender the land owned.
There is no point in saying that no plan of development is ever all-encompassing and fair to all sections of the society, and the local residents of Singur must take a compensation amount and leave their homesteads as part of the ‘necessary cost’ of development of the State. These are issues that need to be discussed and a consensus reached among all very fast so that the local farmers of Singur who were dependent on the land are not left to die out. If the land is to be returned and an adequate compensation paid for all the days of lost work and for the healing time that the land will require to regain fertility (as a lot of the local farmers are demanding), then it must be done soon.
Dibyajyoti Ghosh can be contacted at dibyajyotighoshATyahooDOTcoDOTin
