|
|
A Tribune Special
The two-pronged divide in Europe |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Regulating the media
On Record
Profile
|
A Tribune Special Need to fix deficiencies in the Nuclear Liability Bill, says Bhaskar Balakrishnan
Months after the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) clearance and the Indo-US nuclear agreement, comprehensive reforms of the policy framework for nuclear power remain stalled. The fuel shortage for the operating nuclear plants has been relieved, enabling indigenous fissile material to be available for the strategic programme. One suspects that the main short-term objective of the nuclear deal was to access nuclear fuel while maintaining state monopoly over the sector. Otherwise, it is difficult to explain the tardiness in addressing key policy issues in this sector. The hastily and poorly drafted nuclear liability bill remains stalled after many of its deficiencies were pointed out. The plan to achieve 20 GW of nuclear power (since scaled up to 45 GW, post the Indo-US deal) by 2020 requires a Herculean effort. At about $2 million per MW, the financial outlay alone would be some $30 billion, or $80 billion if the more ambitious target mooted by the Prime Minister is considered. This is a conservative estimate, based on efficient implementation, no cost escalation or delays. Experience in many countries indicates that the costs could well be more than this. Putting up one 1000 MW plant takes 5-7 years after the site has been obtained. Under Indian conditions, one can be realistic and expect cost and time overruns, especially if we go in for the latest European Pressurised Reactors of 1600 MW each. Clearly, the government alone cannot implement such a programme. Nor should it. It has other heavy responsibilities such as the strategic programme, Thorium fuel cycle development, and regulatory, safety and security. The private sector should be the key participant in our future nuclear power development. To do this we have to move away from a narrow dog-in-the-manger approach and make comprehensive reforms to open up the sector to private participation, both Indian and foreign. Experience of the Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) process shows that administrative ministries usually protect their PSUs from competition and loss of market share by opposing Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in their sectors. Therefore, it is hardly surprising that the Department of Atomic Energy opposes FDI in the nuclear power sector. We have seen this before in sector such as power generation, civil aviation, where eventually reformers have prevailed, and the sectors have been released from the shackles of PSU domination. Given the enormous financial and technical requirements of our nuclear power programme, we must allow FDI into the sector, up to 100 per cent as in the case of other power subsectors. Fair competition between the NPCIL and new players, and with other power producers must be ensured. Balance between the concerns of producers and consumers must be struck. This is the challenge before the regulatory system which must be faced. Only then will large-scale investment flow into the nuclear power sector. The government seems to take the line that all future power projects must have the NPCIL as a majority equity partner. This means at least 50 per cent equity stake (if not more), and if one allows for a reasonable debt-equity ratio, the NPCIL would have to cough up some $ 5 billion for the lower target, and some $ 14 billion for the higher one. Do we really want the entire nuclear power sector to be dependent on the NPCIL alone? Is it not better for the NPCIL to have to compete with other private players? Our experience with Air India should provide some food for thought. There should be no difficulties in allowing 100 per cent FDI for nuclear power projects, subject to security, safety and regulatory requirements being met. The nuclear liability regime needs to be clarified to encourage private players into the sector. The deficiencies pointed out in the present Bill need to be fixed. Best practices followed in the European Union should be taken into account. The US practice may be somewhat unbalanced in favour of business interests. Should we allow FDI into the sector, a system of security clearances for the foreign participant will be needed. In addition, there should be clear security guidelines and clearance procedures for all personnel involved in the construction and operation of nuclear power plants. This should be a uniform requirement, for all plants and not nationality specific. Nationality alone cannot be the basis for security assessments. Many countries have adopted such systems for sensitive installations and there are plenty of examples to follow. Safety is a prime consideration in the nuclear industry. The Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) is understaffed and needs to be strengthened to meet its increased responsibilities. A culture of openness and dialogue with the public will go a long way in removing apprehensions and objections to nuclear power. While the government has selected sites for nuclear power complexes, already there are groups opposing such plans. Concerns of local stakeholders are important and must be met by highlighting and maximising specific benefits accruing to them. Overall, the scenario for Indian nuclear power is gloomy, with a timid government, clinging on to outdated monopolistic policies, in spite of the momentum generated by the NSG clearance and the Indo-US nuclear deal. It is time for policymakers to wake up if they are really serious about
targets.
The writer is a former Ambassador of India to Greece and Cuba. He has a Ph.D in Particle Physics and has dealt with investment, energy and technology-related issues
|
|
The two-pronged divide in Europe
LAST year the British government published a slew of secret documents on the response of the big powers to the fall of the Berlin Wall. Only weeks after the Wall had come down, says one document, Francois Mitterrand’s exasperation was clearly visible when he told Margaret Thatcher during a meeting in Strasbourg that a restored Germany would “dominate” Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungary, leaving “only Romania and Bulgaria for the rest of us.” German Chancellor Angela Merkel has blamed the feckless Greeks and Latins for the euro debacle. Apparently, Berlin prides itself on German wage discipline and work culture, insisting that others should do the same. According to the World Economic Forum’s competitiveness report for 2009, Finland, Germany, Netherlands and France are the euro zone’s most competitive countries while Greece, Italy, Spain and Portugal are the laggards. The north-south divide has grown steadily since the introduction of euro in 1999, says the European Central Bank’s competitiveness index. The cracks are even more clearly visible along the old Berlin Wall. Last year, Hungarian Prime Minister Ferenk Gyurcsany even spoke of “New Iron Curtain” in exasperation. In the past two years, several east European countries have witnessed wide protests against the austerity measures. Several heads of government have either lost elections or been forced to resign. Gyurcsany too resigned. Of course, there is no going back on the days of the old Communist era. But some people may be getting nostalgic about the era of stability which the Soviet power and Marxian economics had provided. Sometime ago, Mojmir Hampl, vice-governor of the Czech National Bank, said what was indeed quite revealing. He said, “While the East has already managed to shed its prejudice that everything in the West is just great, the West should get rid of the opposite prejudice.” Hampl further said that “the East knows much more about the West than vice versa.” In other words, the divide between East and West too is still very much a reality. But there is a difference. This Iron Curtain is made of economics, not politics. Europe has been plagued for centuries with dividing lines. And this divide can hardly be bridged with the motto, “all for one and me for myself”. Some right wing groups are already in favour of saying goodbye to Greece and are advocating a union of strong economies and creation of Franco-German euro. George Soros recently told the Die Zeit weekly that “a collapse of the euro and the European project cannot be ruled out.” If the far right is pleading for Franco-German euro, Portuguese Communist leader Jeronimo de Sousa said his country has become a “protectorate of Brussels”. Portuguese Communists are not the only ones who are complaining. Italy’s Rifondazione Comunista, France’s Parti Anti-capitaliste and Germany’s Die Linke are all capitalising on the crisis of capitalism. If Germany and other stronger economies don’t succeed in accelerating growth, many would begin to lose confidence in Europe. The continuing crisis has revived the clichés about the north-south and east-west divide. There is a perception, maybe a distorted one, that people in north and west are thrifty, honest and hard-working, whereas those living in south and east are spendthrift, more fun-loving, lazier and even more flexible in their morality. Many have begun to question the wisdom of welcoming too many “Club Med” countries into the eurozone. Some even talk of splitting the currency into “neuros” and “souros”. That may or may not happen, but Europe will find its capacity to exercise power abroad greatly constrained by the lack of political and economic integration at home. Europe’s leverage will become more constrained. Gideon Rachman of Financial Times says that Europe is facing a “midlife crisis.” The modern European Union “has its origin in the Treaty of Rome of 1957. That means that the Union is now 53 years old — a classic age for a midlife crisis. And sure enough, the EU betrays every sign of a debilitating loss of a sense of purpose.” What should Europe aim at — peace, prosperity, power projection, spread of democracy or simply practical benefits to its citizens like passport-free travels, cheaper phone calls etc? All these goals have become controversial and with rapid expansion even controversial. Much of Europe’s idealistic goals have begun to flounder in the wake of the economic crisis. If liberalisation has become a dirty word for some, immigration is unacceptable to others. As Rachman puts it, “The Union is like a middle-aged man whose inconclusive reveries about the meaning of life have been interrupted by the unpleasant realisation that he has not saved enough for his retirement — and may have to start eating cat food on a more regular basis.” There are many who argue that what Europe is facing is a long-term economic decline. In analysing the current economic crisis in Europe, both similarities and contrasts in Asia come to mind. Let us see Japan, for instance. With a public debt to GDP ratio of about 200 per cent, Japan is the most indebted industrial economy in the world. It has racked up debt totaling $9.4 trillion, while its GDP is only $5 trillion, close to twice the country’s GDP. Public debt as a percentage of GDP in Europe too will soar even in Europe’s anchor economies. Dan Steinbock of Stanford University says that in the absence of gradual adjustments, “it will climb to almost 200 per cent in UK and France — and to some 150 per cent in Germany and Italy by the year 2020. Historical experience indicates that as the debt ratio exceeds 90 per cent, it will tax economic growth.” In any case, the budget deficit as a share of GDP even in Germany is equivalent to some of not so well performing economies of Asia like Thailand and Philippines. Like Japan, Europe too is wrestling with ageing population and low fertility problems. It will only worsen in future. By 2050, the UN projects, the working age population in Europe will decrease by over 110 million people. Already more people now die in Europe than are born. The total fertility rate is 1.47 children born per female. Fertility rates above 2 per female are required to maintain the current population. A century ago Europe was home to 25 per cent of the world’s population. Now it stands over 10 per cent. Asia, Africa and Latin America will account for practically all population growth over the next 20 years; less than 3 per cent of the growth will occur in the West. One need not be overly pessimistic about Europe and the European project. After all, no region has achieved what Europe has — Schengen, euro and above all, peace and democratic consolidation. Europe will come out of its midlife crisis. Sometimes, problems themselves become part of the solution. Europe will, of course, have to reconcile with a four speed world, rather than a two speed world. To end, both the present and future world powers would do well to remember the words of Jean Monnet, regarded as the chief architect of European unity, “nothing is possible without people, nothing is durable without institutions.”
The writer is Associate Director,
|
Regulating the media
A
judge cannot sit in his own judgment” thus goes the argument preferred by the Union Information and Broadcasting Ministry officials who have prepared a draft proposal for setting up a broadcasting authority for regulating the media under soothing phrases like “co-regulation”, “independent body” and Broadcast Authority (they have now replaced the obtrusive phrase, Regulatory Authority). Predatory creatures have a bizarre skill to move slow and without any noise during the final leap on the prey. The state appears in its predatory best. It has provided in the draft certain clauses that prima facie give an impression as if it is the sole custodian of the public interest and is also at the same time a protector of media autonomy — a sine qua non for a functional democracy. However, it has by design tried to retain the final arbiter’s role. Its NBAI will have all the necessary ingredients of the state — funding, appointment and legislation but it has sought to do it in a circuitry manner so that its intentions remain concealed. In the days to come, it will become another allurement for “looking forward” judges and bureaucrats — a cozy slot for which most of the top people in statecraft become servile a few years before retirement to appease the government. True, no body can or should sit in his own judgment. But contrast the government’s assertion with another latest situation. In June 2010, the Union Law Minister had said the government proposed to bring in a legislation to once again take into its hands the appointment of judges. For the past 17 years, this job has remained in the hands of a collegium of the Supreme Court judges following a decision in the S.P. Gupta case. The Minister feels that the collegium has not served the purpose well. It is common knowledge that the Indian state is the biggest litigant in the country. By selecting judges, will it not chose its own judges? Can this not amount to “the litigant appointing his judge”? Moreover, when a judge does not sit in his own judgment, this job of adjudication against him is not given to any extra-judicial body. Here the government intends to ask its cabal selected by it — albeit by proxy — to control the media and still claim that it would be an independent body. The CBI is used to shackle the political adversaries into submission. Everybody knows how top bureaucrats, judges are accommodated in cosy slots after retirement. Prasar Bharti was brought into existence claiming that it would remain completely autonomous. Today everyone knows how Doordarshan functions. Para 11 of the draft talks about co-regulation but while creating regulatory structure it has resorted three-tier vertical hierarchy. Ironically, at the lowest rung the individual media organisation has been asked to create a complaint redress mechanism. At middle tier it envisages a body by the industry which will look into complaints and will be empowered by law to take punitive action against erring channels. But both these tiers will be under the direct control of the apex tier, i.e. the NBAI. The catch lies in how the NBAI will be structured, funded and empowered. It is at this level that the media will have no say in any manner except that it can nominate one person in the proposed seven-member authority. The appointment of the NBAI chairman and members is proposed to be made by a committee comprising the presiding officers of the Rajya Sabha and the Lok Sabha and a Supreme Court Judge who can be nominated by the Chief Justice of India. Alternatively, the committee can also comprise the Chairperson of the Rajya Sabha, a Supreme Court Judge and a nominee of the President of India or the Chairman of the Press Council of India. Besides, the proposal also envisages two other steps — the funding of the NBAI by the state directly and its existence through a parliamentary legislation. Now while the Ministry officials do talk about co-regulation, there is hardly any say of the so-called “independent” media in all three functions — appointment, funding and legislation so far as the apex tier is concerned. It is pertinent to note that the Supreme Court, while interpreting Article 12 of the Indian Constitution, had in over a dozen judgments, including the Mohini Jain case, clearly laid out criteria for what constitutes the state. “If a body is brought into existence by way of a legislation, it is funded by the state and is appointed by the state it will be termed as part of the state”, it ruled. The NBAI fulfils all the three criteria. Are we, after over 60 years of democratic practices, being controlled by the state? Often, the Information and Broadcasting Ministry officials cite the example of the media regulators in the US, the UK and Australia. However, in those countries, the mighty state and its representatives cannot dare put pressure on the “independent institutions”. In 1913, an Australian judge could not take oath because a newspaper brought out the fact that the Attorney-General had sought the judge’s view on certain issues in which the government was involved before he was elevated to the High Court. The judge could not dare take oath after this expose. Recently, a British minister had to resign because his personal staff had taken an out-of-turn air ticket in a particular flight. A better option could have been empowering the industry’s body and watch it work for three years. If it fails, the civil society and not the state should start developing a body. But this may not suit the predatory
state.
The writer is General Secretary, Broadcast Editors’ Association (BEA), New Delhi
|
|
On Record His fight against the timber mafia has certainly come at a cost as Chipko volunteers have faced murderous attacks. He, too, has received threats. Dabral was conferred the Ashoka Fellowship in 2004 by Ashoka Foundation, Washington DC and the Real Heroes Award in 2008 by CNN-IBN news channel. He speaks to The Tribune in Dehradun. Excerpts: Q: How did you get to the depth of this mammoth wood scandal? A: There is a big forest scam involving lakhs of trees in Uttarakhand. The timber mafia has cut thousands of trees in connivance with the State Forest Department officials in the name of Hak hakook (people’s traditional right to use wood for their consumption). The wood smugglers cut many more trees than the sanctioned number. They cut the wood in marketable sizes and sell it in black market. Q: What about villagers’ response to the timber mafia? A: The beneficiaries have no clue of the official sanction for cutting trees. Village Pradhans apply on their behalf to the Forest officials. The latter get paid a paltry sum for the applications. After clearance, the applications are given to the timber mafia who cut the trees and sell the wood in the market. Q: Is Hak Hakook proving counter-productive for forest conservation? A: While it is an essential part of livelihood in the hills, its misuse must be checked. The people in the hills should not be deprived of these age-old rights. At the same time, we won’t allow the timber mafia to destroy the Uttarakhand forests in the garb of these rights. There should be a mechanism to check cheating of the local villagers. Q: Did your public interest litigations in the Supreme Court further your case of forest conservation? A: Certainly. Acting on my PIL, the Supreme Court ordered the state government and the Ministry of Environment & Forests to enquire into the complaints. Initially, the state government officials denied any illegal cutting of trees. But the Ministry of Environment and Forest report corroborated all the facts of the petition. It mentioned the forest officials’ cover-up operations after the PIL in the Supreme Court. Then, the state Forest Department, in an affidavit, admitted the misuse. Q: Do you fear the timber mafia? A: Not at all. Fighting the timber mafia is not so easy. It does involve high risk. One of my men and his family members faced almost certain death at the hands of timber mafia recently. Shiv Prasad and his wife Kavita were mercilessly beaten by the timber mafia in Pauri Garhwal district. It was only after my intervention that some medical relief came for the couple and the report could finally be lodged. I have also received threats earlier. But such cowardly act would not desist me from taking on the strong land
mafia.
|
|
Profile NOTED Konkani litterateur, Ravindra Kelekar, decorated with the prestigious Jnanpith Award, is 85 and has been ailing. He was brought in an ambulance to receive the Award presented by Lok Sabha Speaker Meira Kumar. A Gandhian activist, freedom fighter and a pioneer in modern Konkani movement, Kelekar is a well known scholar, linguist and creative thinker. He actively participated in India’s freedom movement, Goa’s liberation movement and later led the anti-merger campaign with Maharashtra. He spearheaded the literary campaign for recognition of Konkani as a full-fledged language and its recognition as the state language of Goa. Kelekar was born in Cuncolim, South Goa. His father, Dr Rajaram Kelekar, was a reputed physician who took keen interest in literary activities. He had the distinction of translating Bhagwad Gita in Portuguese. While still a high school student, Ravindra joined the Goa liberation movement, bringing him close to several national leaders including Dr Ram Manohar Lohia. Under Lohia’s influence, he was able to recognise the power of language to mobilise the people. Later, he saw the potential in his native Konkani language which became his life-long work. Deeply influenced by Gandhian philosophy, he left his native Goa in 1949 for Wardha to be with the noted Gandhian and writer, Kakasaheb Kalelkar, and stayed under his tutelage until 1955, when he was appointed librarian of Gandhi Memorial Museum, New Delhi. This stay, however, turned out to be short-lived as only a year later, he plunged back into the Goa freedom movement. With a mission to reconnect the Goa diaspora all over the world, he started the weekly, Gomant Bharti (1956-60), published in Roman script. Soon after his active participation in the freedom struggle, he was imprisoned by Portuguese rulers, but was released as the Indian Army liberated Goa from the Portuguese in 1961. However, Kelekar’s political activism was far from over. He joined the successful socio-political campaign against the merger of Goa into neighbouring Maharashtra. The campaign ended after the plebiscite of 1967 with Goa retaining its separate identity albeit as a Union Territory, until 1987 when it was declared a separate state. After Goa achieved statehood, Kelekar took to literary activism with the objective of getting Konkani independent status and not just as a dialect of Marathi. This was a long drawn struggle. During this period, he penned some of his most important works, promoting Konkani language including Aamchi Bhas Konkanich, a dialogue revealing the importance of Konkani to the common man. The struggle finally ended in 1992 when Konkani was included in the Eighth Schedule of the Constitution as an official language of Goa. With his life’s mission having been completed, Kelekar retired from public life and has been writing. The pinnacle of his career came with the Sahitya Akademi Fellowship and Jnanpith Award which was for the first time given to a Konkani language writer. Among his books, Himalayant (In the Himayalas), a travelogue in Konkani, won him the Sahitya Akademi Award. A number of his books have been translated into Hindi and other North Indian languages and are used in university education. Kelekar has penned nearly 100 books in Konkani and also edited Jaag (awakening) magazine for more than two decades. Kelekar translated the epic Mahabharat in Konkani, running into two volumes. In his version of the Mahabharat, he has successfully tried to rationalise the mythological characters and events. His interpretation and style of writing are so interesting that one gets a feeling of reading the epic afresh. Kelekar married Godubai Sardesai in 1949 and they have a son, Guirish. He presently stays in his ancestral home ‘Kelekar House’ in Priol, Central Goa, built by his father in
1937. |
|
|
|
| HOME PAGE | |
Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir |
Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs |
Nation | Opinions | | Business | Sports | World | Letters | Chandigarh | Ludhiana | Delhi | | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
Nuclear power remains a government monopoly at a level of 4.5 GW, in the hands of the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL), while the need to strengthen regulatory systems remains unaddressed.
Today, when the world teeters on the brink of the new age of rage and Europe faces a tinderbox moment, new fault lines are visible between Germanic northern Europe and southern Latin Europe, on the one hand, and between the western and eastern Europe on the other. Rising economic crisis including the volatility of euro is leading to a social fury in both southern and eastern Europe. Luckily, there is no Fascist threat this time.
“As a judge cannot sit in his own judgment, the electronic media, too, cannot be left to judge itself”, they argue equating the media with banking, telecom, insurance or other similar industries. And, therefore, in para 13 of the draft, they have proposed to set up a National Broadcast Authority of India (NBAI).
IT is a one-man army standing against the mighty Uttarakhand Forest Department. Very few know of Jayprakash Dabral, founder President, Himalayan Chipko Foundation. An MBA from Faculty of Management Studies, Delhi, he shot into limelight over the Tehri Dam transmission line issue, where he saved 85 per cent of the 90,000 trees. After he approached the Supreme Court, its Central Empowered Committee restricted the felling.
Besides Konkani, he has widely written in Hindi and Marathi. His acceptance speech was read out at the Award function by noted Hindi critic Namwar Singh. Kelekar expressed concern over excessive obsession among the people over English language in virtually every sphere of life. Stating that this was weaning away people from regional languages, he remarked that this mindset was instrumental in producing “Bonsai intellectuals, Bonsai writers and Bonsai readers”.