| Published on 10-08-2007 In National |
| Viewed 2250 times |
| Is Tata's project jinxed? |
|
|
Written by
S. Murari |
Is Tata's Rs 2,300-crore titanium dioxide project jinxed? With all parties barring the Congress opposed to it and Chief Minister M Karunanidhi putting it on hold pending a public enquiry by a team of Ministers, the future of the project remains a big question mark. A look at the project's chequered history shows it is jinxed.
The first memorandum of understanding signed by the Tatas with the previous Jayalalithaa Government in 2002 never took off. A second m.o.u., signed with the present DMK government on June 28 this year has been put on hold by Mr Karunanidhi in the face of concerted attempts by all political parties in Tamil Nadu to create another Singur in Sattankulam.
The only difference is the protests in West Bengal against Tata's Rs 1 lakh car project in Singur started after the State Government acquired land for it. Here, the protestors are against the project taking off with PMK, a key ally of the ruling DMK, making it clear that it will not accept it under any circumstances and Leader of the Opposition and AIADMK general secretary J Jayalalithaa threatening an agitation if the Government goes ahead with it.
A look at the players ranged against the project shows how deeply politicised the issue has been. Leading the pack is Ms Jayalalithaa who is anyway dead set against the government.. Film star Sarath Kumar, who plans to float a political party, has vital stakes as the local Nadar community was the first to raise the banner of revolt and he himself hails from that area. Marumalarchi DMK leader Vaiko, who also hails from Tirunelveli, wants to protect his turf. Even the Puthiya Tamizhagam of Dr Krishnaswamy, which has some following among Pallars of these two districts, has made common cause with the AIADMK.
The PMK, which has taken on the role of 'constructive opposition' despite its alliance with the ruling DMK, has also thrown in its towel in the ring. The two communist parties are muted in their protests what with the West Bengal Government itself having rolled out the red carpet to the Tatas for the car project.
Forget the agenda. It is difficult to separate facts from fiction with charges flying thick and fast. Take Ms Jayalalithaa for example. Initially, she said she allowed the project to lapse because of adverse feedback she got from the local people and the district collectors. Mr Karunanidhi, quoting from files, has said the then district collectors had in fact identified 15,000 acres of land for it. Then why was the project dropped?
According to him, it was to favour Mr Vaikundarajan, whose V V Minerals is among 59 firms engaged for the last several years in mining of ilmenite and garnet stone in the Tirunelveli and Tuticorin districts.
In support of this charge, he quotes a high-level meeting called by the then Industry Minister Nainar Nagendran, in November 2005, in which Mr Vaikundarajan rubbed shoulders with officials from the Government and the Tatas.
The outcome: the government decided to allot 1,000 acres out of the land earmarked for the project to Mr Vaikundarajan. He has also said Mr Nagendran sent the file to the Chief Minister's office in 2005 and it lay there until the change of government in May 2006. Neither Ms Jayalalitha nor Mr Nagendran has effectively countered this specific charge.
Since Mr Sarath Kumar was the first to send a fact-finding team and thereby started the process of public hearing in which all parties have since joined, let's hear his objections. In a letter to Mr Karunanidhi, he has said the then district collectors of Tirunelveli and Tuticorin, as well as the Pollution Control Board, were against the project. It is not known whether Mr Sarath Kumar has cited letters from the collectors as published reports are silent on this.
Pattali Makkal Katchi founder S Ramadoss has cited a report sent to the government by the then Tirunelveli collector that if mining to the depth of eight metres was carried out, it would turn the land arid. The Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board and the forest department have also taken a similar stand, he has contended.
At stake are 10,000 acres of land needed for the project which also involves deep mining. Mr Karunanidhi contends that that Tatas are not the first to do mining in the area. Tirunelveli, Tuticorin and Kanyakumari, according to him, have rich deposits of ilmenite, rutile, zircon and silmanite and these minerals are being mined since 1968. Contrary to what critics say, the mining has not turned agricultural land barren, he has contended.
He has also said the project will come up only in seven of the 468 revenue villages in Tuticorin district. These seven villages cover an area of 27,800 acres out of which only 10,000 acres will be acquired for the project. Of the 10,000 acres, only 345 acres are cultivable wet lands, he has contended. More importantly, he has said the company itself will acquire the land directly from the owners at market rates and the Government will have nothing to do with it.
But Dr Ramadoss counters that the presence of small mining concerns is no justification for putting up a mega project. He also argues that the place identified for the project is full of vegetation, including mango, coconut, palm and cashew trees besides cultivable and rain-fed land.
There can be no faulting Mr Karunanidhi's argument that the project will boost the development of industrially backward southern Tamil Nadu. By appealing to the people to fearlessly express their opinion to the committee of Ministers, he has shown the issue is wide open. However, dropping the project will send a wrong signal to investors. The right way forward is to win over the people by addressing their legitimate concerns.
|
|
|
|
|
| Social Web |  |
| |
|
|
| |
Processing please wait ...
Top Stories
