Congress on Monday sought to take credit for the controversial bill on Polavaram project to be set up in Andhra Pradesh and appreciated the current government for taking it forward as it is, saying it reflects the democratic politics.
Congress member and former Union Minister Jairam Ramesh said the project, which involves submergence of large areas and resettlement of lakhs of people, is not an easy one to implement and would require a “democratic, sensitive and humanistic” approach.
“This is an important commitment made by the erstwhile UPA government which has been continued by the present government. The continuity in policy reflects democratic politics,” he said initiating a discussion on the bill in Rajya Sabha.
“I have no hesitation in saying that the amendment bill moved by the present government is word by word same as decided on March 1st. Contours of the draft made by UPA-II have been included in the bill,” he said.
The previous government in a cabinet meeting on March 1 had decided on a third option that some mandals and villages of Telangana will be transferred to Seemandhra. However, an Ordinance in this regard could not be issued in view of elections and was left to the successive government, he said.
The third option was decided as Telangana had opposed the first option of transferring seven mandals, while Seemandhra had opposed second option of transferring some villages, he said.
The Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation (Amendment) Bill, which paves way for the Polavaram project in Andhra Pradesh by merging some villages and mandals of Telangana with Seemandhra, was passed in the Lok Sabha on July 11. The bill was brought for approval in the Rajya Sabha on Monday.
Mr. Ramesh spoke in favour of the bill amid opposition from his party colleagues V. Hanumantha Rao and Ananda Bhaskar Rapolu as also TRS member K. Keshava Rao.
Taking strong objection to it, he said, “I do not need sermons from my colleagues from Telangana. This decision was taken in difficult circumstances. Please remember, the issue of Hyderabad was a litmus test for Telangana. For Andhra Pradesh, this project is an emotional issue.”
Stating that the Polavaram project is “not an easy project” to implement, Ramesh said: “It involves massive resettlement.
It is on par with Sardar Sarovar Dam (in Gujarat) and Indira Sagar project in Madhya Pradesh. It brings major benefits, it also involves substantial resettlement.”
The project involves relocation of about 45,000-50,000 families especially in Khammam, East Godavari and West Godavari districts in Andhra Pradesh, besides 2,000 families in Odisha and Chhattisgarh, he said.
Ramesh said the country has “poor track record on rehabilitation and resettlement issue” and appealed to the new Andhra Pradesh government to implement the Polavaram project as per law in a “democratic, sensitive and humanistic manner”.
He emphasised that the resettlement should be done as per the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 much before implementing this project.
Before introducing the bill in the Rajya Sabha, K. Keshava Rao (TRS) sought separate discussion on the bill on Polavaram project and resolution to oppose it.
Moving a resolution, Mr. Rao said the ordinance (on Polavaram) was passed when Parliament was not in session. The cabinet took a call on the Ordinance on May 29 when it had met to decide on the date to begin the current Parliament session.
“This practice does not go well for the government. There has to be a direction from the Chair,” he said.
On this, Deputy Chairman P.J. Kurien said, “Resolution and the bill will be taken for discussion together. When voting comes, it can be done separately.”
Participating in the debate, Kalpataru Das (BJD) opposed the bill saying, “We are are not opposed to Polavaram project. We are opposing the way it is pushed.”
Noting that Odisha will be worst affected by this project, he suggested that the government should call a meeting of chief ministers of Odisha, Chhattisgarh, Seemandhra and Telangana to find a solution.
Supporting the bill, C.M. Ramesh (TDP) attacked TRS for taking “political mileage” by opposing the bill on Polavaram project. “We are not making politics, they are. All that we want is that there should not be any hurdle for the project.”
He also suggested setting up of the Polavaram Development Authority to ensure the project is completed in three years.
Voicing their opposition to the Bill, several members demanded “re-designing” of the project as it threatened the livelihood of lakhs of tribals.
They included D Raja (CPI), P. Rajeev (CPI(M)), Pyarimohan Mohapatra (Ind) and K. Keshav Rao (TRS).
Mr. Rao said even the Supreme Court has asked the government to revisit the project. The government should call all the states affected by the project for discussions as the issue demands a “humanitarian” approach, he said.
Opposing the Bill Renuka Chowdhury (Cong) demanded an alternative solution as the project will displace lakhs of tribals and inundate several taluks.
“This Bill should not be passed at the cost of tribals of Telangana and the Khamman district. The entire Bhadrachalam town and the temple of Lord Ram will also be submerged,” she said, wondering whether the project has been scientifically endorsed or not.
Claiming there is a political-contractor nexus behind the decision to raise the height of the project, Pyarimohan Mohapatra (Ind) stated a walkout, pleading that parties should not play games with the people in the name of the project.
Wondering what was the hurry in passing the Amendment Bill, he said the “tribals are scared with the project“.
Urging the government against taking any decision that creates a wedge in the society, Naresh Agarwal (SP) said the move to break Uttar Pradesh should also be desisted.
K.C. Tyagi (JD-U) demanded reconsideration of the Bill and giving special category status to the eastern states along with Andhra Pradesh.
Ananda Bhaskar Rapolu (Cong) said all the expert committees were against the Polavaram project. The project was not in the interest of both Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, he said.
D Raja (CPI) suggested that the new Land Acquisition Act should be applied for resettlement and rehabilitation of the affected people.
