[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
dam-l LS: Narmada Clashes at World Water Forum
--------------------------------------------------
Source: The Times of India, March 19, 2000
Patkar, Roy clash with minister on Narmada
Parul Chandra
The Times of India News Service
THE HAGUE: The protest may not have been as dramatic
as when two streakers disrupted the inaugural proceedings
of the Second World Water Forum meeting here on Friday
to protest against the construction of the Itoiz dam in Spain.
But, noted author Arundhati Roy and `Narmada Bachao
Andolan' leader Medha Patkar made themselves heard
during a session that saw Gujarat's minister for Narmada
project, Jay Narayan Vyas, hold forth on the need for the
dam. While the two sides tried to counter each other's
facts, at times the arguments seemed to degenerate into a
battle of verbal one-upmanship.
So much so that Roy and Patkar accused Vyas of lying and
he responded in equal measure. While the two maintained
that Vyas had once called the SSP project a ``death
noose,'' a visibly irritated Vyas dismissed the accusation as
``nothing but utter lies.'' At another point, Vyas told Roy, ``
You write novels and say houses are scattered like peanuts.
It is a one-sided story.'' He asked Roy, `` Why don't you
have one tribal representative?'' To which Roy retorted,
`` You're the minister, not I. You should have brought them.''
Patkar hadn't planned to participate in the deliberations of
the six-day forum meeting and ministerial conference which
has scores of water specialists, experts, politicians and
bureaucrats participating. But she did when she learnt about
the Indian government's plans to put up a forceful pro-dam
presentation. As for Roy, she said came ``to counter the
pro-dam propaganda and hear what they had to say.'' Also
to ``see what power smells like'', adding, `` it stinks.''
Setting the tone for the combative discussion was Vyas
himself who, armed with a detailed slide presentation, drew
attention to the acute drought conditions in Gujarat, the lack
of surface water availability (but for the Narmada) and the
sinking water table level which in turn was causing fluorosis.
Lending strength to Vyas was Union water resources
secretary, Z Hasan, who said the rehabilitation package of
the government was being improved and would be
implemented properly.
Roy responded later by telling Vyas: `` For heaven's sake,
first sort out the miseries you've created or at best stop
being critical. For the greater common good, why don't you
say you have no money for the dam.''
----------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Source: The Hindu, March 19, 2000
Gujarat-NBA battle continues abroad
By Kalpana Sharma
THE HAGUE, MARCH 18. The opposition to dams and privatisation
of water resources, which triggered the theatrics that disrupted the
opening ceremony of the World Water Forum on Friday, inevitably
emerged in a session on Water and Energy as the Gujarat Minister for
Narmada, Mr. Jai Narain Vyas, and those opposed to the dams on
the Narmada river got into a heated debate. The differences of
perspective, already well-known to Indian audiences, and the extent of
hostility between the two sides surprised many in the international
audience.
Through a slick power-point presentation, the Minister argued that
there was no alternative to harnessing surface water to deal with the
acute water shortages faced by 80 per cent of Gujarat. He said
energy, an expensive component of development, was being
squandered as farmers used diesel pumps to extract water from
receding water tables in much of the State. As a result, in some parts
of the State, water levels had dropped to 800 feet, resulting in fluoride
contamination and saline ingress into underground aquifers. The impact
of this was being felt on people's health with increasing incidence of
kidney stones and other problems.
Mr. Vyas said Gujarat had no option but to tap the enormous
resources of surface water represented by the Narmada which were
presently being wasted. He gave the instance of just four days in
September last year, when the river was in spate, when an estimated
24,700 million cubic metres flowed into the sea. Though rainwater
conservation was a possible alternative, it was not dependable
because there was insufficient rainfall in several parts of the State.
Perhaps expecting criticism on the issue of resettlement of communities
displaced by the Sardar Sarovar dam, the Minister emphasised that
the tribals actually benefited from the dam. He showed slides of
tribals employed in road construction because forests had receded, leaving
them with no option. The dam, he suggested, left them better off as
they got concrete houses as part of the compensation. ``Don't be
misguided by the word tribal. These people are not aborigines. They
are as much a part of our democracy as anyone else. Tribals are not
those incapable of defending themselves,'' he said.
Most points made by Mr. Vyas were countered by Ms. Medha
Patkar of the Narmada Bachao Andolan. She pointed out, for
instance, that benchmark studies had established that the tribal
populations in the Narmada valley actually migrated out much less than
other similar populations because they were able to survive on the
forests and the river.
She also questioned the Minister's assertion about the financial
soundness of the Sardar Sarovar Project. She pointed out that the
drinking water supply part of the project did not figure in the
financial plan and that costs had escalated not just because of the case still
pending in the Supreme Court but due to a number of other reasons.
Ms. Patkar also quoted from a report of the Gujarat Water Supply
and Sewerage Board which had found that the quantity of utilisable
water in Kutch, the most parched part of the State, which could be
harnessed at a low cost through participative methods, was equivalent
to the total amount the State would get from the Narmada award.
Under the present arrangement, even if the SSP is completed, Kutch
has been allocated just two per cent of Gujarat's share of nine million
acre feet.
The debate illustrates the on-going differences of perspective that are
already beginning to emerge at this meeting on a whole range of water
issues. While the engineers and bureaucrats discuss technical details
about solving water problems, the civil society groups continue to
emphasise issues of equity, distribution, and people's rights.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------