IN
its first year, Narendra Modi’s government has been true to form, proving right
apprehensions that environmental concerns will not be on its agenda.
Indications of this position on the environment came early in the day. After
taking office, Prakash Javadekar, the Minister in charge of the newly named
Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC), referred to the
stringent environmental clearance processes put in place by the United
Progressive Alliance (UPA) government as “roadblocks” and “speed breakers” that
caused “loss of face” to the nation. He promised swifter resolution of issues
and made the now famous statement:
“Decisions
are in. Delays are out.” He chalked out a ready reckoner time frame of two
months for environmental clearances. And true to his word, he cleared 240
projects in the first three months (including raising the height of the Sardar
Sarovar Dam), leading the environmentalist Ashish Kothari to call it the Ministry
for Ensuring Fast Corporate Clearances.
It
is deeply ironical that the portfolio of climate change has only now been added
to the Ministry of Environment and Forests. Who can forget Modi’s infamous
words: “Climate change? Is this terminology correct? The reality is that in our
family some people are old and they say the weather is colder… and people’s
ability to bear cold becomes less.” His indifference to environmental issues
was also on display when he refused to attend the United Nations’ Special
Summit on Climate Change. Further proof that the Ministry is inconsequential—in
the government’s very first Budget, its allocation for 201415 was cut by more
than 50 per cent.
Javadekar’s
promise of quick decisions reeks of poor understanding. An environment impact
assessment (EIA), which is part of the environment clearance process, takes a
minimum of one year to complete as the site in question is observed through all
seasons. How, then, can clearances be given in two months? Perhaps, he was just
sticking to his party’s election manifesto, which promised to “frame the
environment laws in a manner that provides no scope for confusion and will lead
to speedy clearance of proposals without delay”.
For
the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), it is fashionable to blame environmental laws
for poor economic growth. In February, Union Finance Minister Arun Jaitley said
growth rates had “radically gone down” under the previous government owing to
delayed project approvals. But while it is trendy to say this, it is factually
incorrect.
The
Economic Survey 2014-15 says: “It is clear that private projects are held up
overwhelmingly due to market conditions and non-regulatory factors… Perhaps
contrary to popular belief, the evidence points towards over exuberance and a
credit bubble as primary reasons (rather than lack of regulatory clearances)
for stalled projects in the private sector.”
When
faced with irrefutable, data based logic, the BJP turns economic growth into a
subject of nationalist pride, where to question growth at any cost or to be
proenvironment
is
to automatically be branded antinational. This is what happened to Greenpeace
when
the organisation
was barred from receiving foreign funds and its licence suspended in April under
the allegation that it had “prejudicially” affected the country’s economic
interests.
The
same thinking was apparently being applied when the BJP decided to decimate the
National Board for Wildlife (NBWL). Independent experts were removed (thereby
flouting a requirement of the Wildlife Protection Act) and replaced with
retired forest officials nominated by the government. The new board tried to
push through a 22kilometre canal of the Sardar Sarovar Dam Project and a road
through the wild ass sanctuary in Kutch district, both in Gujarat.
Simultaneously, the government made it easier for projects within 10 km of
sanctuaries to get clearances by ensuring that such applications were made to
the NBWL and not the State wildlife boards. With the newly constituted NBWL,
the probability of these projects getting “cleared” is high.
The
Forest Conservation Act is also being decimated for the benefit of mining and
other industries. The criteria for deciding the use of forest land are being
eroded, making it easier to exploit it for non-forest purposes. Under the guise
of national security and growth, even more forest areas are being opened up.
Felling of trees is allowed for infrastructure projects and the status of
eco-sensitive zones becomes secondary along the Line of Control and in so
called naxal areas.
Since
May 2014, when the BJP came to power, the MoEFCC has been gnawing away at
existing laws to shape them into instruments that can be used for expediting
economic growth at the cost of the environment and human rights. In June 2014,
the Ministry amended its EIA notification of 2006 to exempt irrigation projects
from environmental clearances. This means that the projects do not require the
seeking of permission from the people who will be affected by them.
Furthermore, State governments have been allowed to clear similar projects
affecting areas up to 10,000 hectares, with Ministry clearance needed only for
projects affecting larger areas.
The
Forest Rights Act, 2006, is also in the BJP’s sights. The Act requires that
gram sabhas give prior informed consent to projects coming up in their areas.
With increased awareness, especially in the coal belt, gram sabhas are wary of allowing
industries in. In July 2014, the MoEFCC, in an effort to bypass gram sabhas,
said documentary evidence of settlement of claims would no longer be required for
proposals relating to prospecting in forest land. And in October, the Ministry
said that in cases where the recent Census did not show the presence of tribal
communities, gram sabha consent would not be required for forest land to be
used for non-forest purposes.
The
conflict between coal and the environment is an old one. After the 2012 mining
scam expose, certain amendments became law. Unfortunately, while the business
end of things was looked into, the environmental and human rights aspects were
not. memorandums issued in May and June stated that existing mines with an
annual production capacity of less than 16 million tonnes were exempt from
conducting public hearings with project affected communities before expansion.
And mines that were already at this capacity could ramp up their production to
an extra six million tonnes a year.
Coal
is found in heavily forested areas and mining it destroys the forest and its
denizens. A 2012 Greenpeace report titled “How Coal Mining is Trashing
Tigerland” points out that “Central India’s forests are home to 35% of India’s
tigers…. India’s tiger population is critical—there are just 1,700.” Greenpeace
analysed 13 coalfields out of over 40 in central India and found that at risk
was “1 million+ hectares of forest… that’s almost twice the area of India’s top
5 metros combined”. Greenpeace estimates that of these, at least 180,000
hectares are inhabited by tigers, 55,900 hectares by elephants and 277,600
hectares by leopards. Also, at least eight tiger reserves will be affected. A
minimum
of
one third of India—about 33 per cent—should be under forest cover to ensure the
natural balance of things. According to the official “State of Forest Report
2013”, “the total forest and tree cover of the country is 78.92 million
hectares, which is 24.01 per cent of the geographical area of the country”.
The
report claims that there has been an increase of 5,871 sq. km since the 2011
report but also goes on to say that the majority of this has been observed in
the open forest category, that is, areas where there is no continuous closed
cover of trees. It is a fine point but technically this does not count as
forest cover. Much of the country’s forest cover is in central India and a
significant part of this is included in the 3,800 sq. km of forest that has
been destroyed in the past year. The fate of about 5,000 sq. km more hangs by a
slender thread—the MoEFCC may clear a proposal from the Prime Minister’s Office
to allow five to 100 hectares of forest land to be used for industrial
development.
Pollution
index When the BJP came to power, it inherited an ongoing reassessment of the
Comprehensive Pollution Index that the UPA government initiated. There was a moratorium
on new industries in 43 critically polluted industrial areas. This is a
crucial gauge used in project clearance.
Javadekar’s
Ministry interrupted the review and lifted the moratorium on eight key polluted
areas, including the notoriously contaminated Vapi in Gujarat and Ghaziabad in
Uttar Pradesh. In August, three months after he entered office, Modi set up a
highlevel committee to review environmental laws. The committee’s mandate was
to look at the Environment Protection Act of 1986, the Wildlife Protection Act
of 1972, the Forest Conservation Act of 1980, the Water (Prevention and Control
of Pollution) Act of 1974 and the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act
of 1981. In less than three months, it recommended a dilution of the laws and
single window clearances, something that would be welcomed by Corporations.
The
committee suggested eliminating all external monitoring of environmental norms
and letting companies monitor their own environmental record. In an article in Counterview,
an online platform, Ritwick Dutta, Debi Goenka and Himanshu Thakkar debunked
the committee’s report, saying it was “prepared in great haste, is replete with
factual inaccuracies, wrong and misleading conclusions and the incorrect
interpretation of the laws it was meant to review…. The recommendations, if
accepted, would dismantle the foundation of environmental rights in India and
only lead to an increase in environmental conflicts, and should therefore be rejected
in its entirety.”
The
final frontier for the BJP’s onslaught on the environment is for the government
to strangle the National Green Tribunal (NGT). This body of judicial and expert
members views all challenges to environmental clearances before they can go on
to the Supreme
Court.
Until now, the NGT has not been touched, but given the blatant disregard the
BJP has shown for environmental
concerns, any change for the worse would come as no surprise.
No comments:
Post a Comment