Lok Sabha Debates
Discussion On Points Arising Out Of Answer Given By The Minister Of Water ... on 11 August, 2000
Title: Discussion on points arising out of answer given by the Minister of Water Resources on 02.08.2000 to Starred Question No. 143 regarding Ongoing Irrigation Projects.
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Now, we will take up the half-an-hour discussion. Shri Naresh Pugulia to speak.
श्री नरेश पुगलिया (चन्द्रपुर) : माननीय उपाध्यक्ष महोदय, दो अगस्त को एक महत्वपूर्ण प्रश्न १४३ आया था। जिसमें कहा गया कि पूरे देश में हमारे जो ऑन-गोइंग प्रोजेक्ट्स हैं, जो छठे, सातवें और आठवें प्लॉन में थे वे इनकम्प्लीट रहे। उस प्रश्न पर बहुत सारे सदस्य मंत्री महोदय से प्रश्न पूछना चाहते थे, अपने विचार रखना चाहते थे। इस पर माननीय अध्यक्ष जी ने इसके ऊपर आधे घंटे की चर्चा का ऐलान किया। इस पर आज आपने मुझे बोलने का जो मौका दिया है, इसके लिए मैं आपको धन्यवाद देता हूं।
उपाध्यक्ष महोदय, मैं महाराष्ट्र से आता हूं और महाराष्ट्र देश का एक विकसित राज्य है जिसने कृषि, शिक्षा, उद्योग और हर प्रकार के क्षेत्र में काफी प्रगति की है। लेकिन जिस प्रकार से मंत्री जी ने दो अगस्त को अपने उत्तर में कहा था कि बड़े और मध्यम दर्जे के सिंचाई प्रोजेक्ट्स जो देश के २२ राज्यों में अधूरे हैं या ऑन-गोइंग प्रोजेक्ट्स हैं। उन १६२ बड़े सिंचाई प्रोजेक्ट्स में ३६ महाराष्ट्र में हैं। देश में जो २४० मीडियम सिंचाई प्रोजेक्ट्स हैं जो ऑन गोइंग हैं या इनकम्प्लीट हैं या जिनका काम चालू नहीं हुआ है उनमें से महाराष्ट्र के अंदर ६६ प्रोजेक्ट्स हैं। इस तरह से अगर अन्याय होता है तो महाराष्ट्र के साथ ही होता है। महाराष्ट्र के बारे में, सिंचाई के संबंध में हमारी जो पॉलिसी है उसके बारे में हमारा यह कहना है कि देश की ७० प्रतिशत जनसंख्या ग्रामीण क्षेत्रों में रहती है और खेती ही उसका आधार है और खेती ही किसान का साथ देती है। पश्चिमी महाराष्ट्र में ७०-८० प्रतिशत इर्रिगेशन है, वहां शुगरकेन, अंगूर, अनार, होर्टिकल्चर, फ्लोरिकल्चर, और एग्रीकल्चर होता है। लेकिन उसी राज्य में दूसरी तरफ मराठवाड़ा, कोंकण और विदर्भ है, जहां बड़ी मात्रा में फॉरेस्ट और मिनरल्स हैं लेकिन वहां सिंचाई का प्रतिशत केवल ११ है। एक ही राज्य में एक रीज़न में सिंचाई का प्रतिशत १०-११ है और दूसरे रीज़न में सिंचाई का प्रतिशत ६०-७० है। देश में कई राज्यों में ऐसे क्षेत्र हैं जहां पर बलशाली नेता अपने क्षेत्र में बड़ी मात्रा में धन लाए, प्रोजेक्ट्स लाए। अभी हमारे एक माननीय साथी मोहिते जी विदर्भ विकास के मामले में एक बिल लाए थे। चाहे तेलंगाना रहा, विदर्भ रहा या बोडो लैंड रहा, जो भी पिछड़ा रहा, वहां बंदूक उठाने पर लोग मजबूर हो रहे हैं। लोकतंत्र के अंदर जब लोगों की बात मानी नहीं जाती है तो बंदूक उठाने वाले पैदा हो जाते हैं। हम लोग तो लोकतंत्र को मानते हैं।
कुछ लोग लोकतंत्र को नहीं मानते और मजबूरी में हाथ में बंदूक उठाकर सरकार से न्याय मांगने की कोशिश करते हैं। क्या आप देश में इस प्रकार की प्रणाली विकसित करना चाहते हैं? क्या आप लोगों को बंदूक उठाने के लिये मजबूर करना चाहते हैं? आज महाराष्ट्र में ३६ मेजर प्रोजैक्ट्स अपूर्ण हैं। श्री मुत्तेमवार जी यहां बैठे हुये हैं। वे पहले चिमूर से सांसद थे। इन्होंने १९८६ में एक बहुत बड़ा प्रोजैक्ट गोसीखुड में मंजूर करवाया था। उस समय इस प्रोजैक्ट की कीमत ४५० करोड़ रुपये थी। उस प्रोजैक्ट का काम बड़ी तेजी से चल रहा है और उम्मीद है कि आने वाले एक दो सालों में वह डैम पूरा होने वाला है। उसका एक चैनल मेरे जिले चन्द्रपुर में आता है। इस चैनल से मेरे जिले की एक लाख ५० हजार हैक्टेयर जमीन को पानी मिलने वाला है और ८ ताल्लुकों को लाभ मिलेगा। लेकिन मुझे दुख के साथ कहना पड़ता है कि जिन लोगो ने जंगलात को बचाया, उन्हें इनाम देने के बजाय फारेस्ट कंजर्वेशन एक्ट के तहत सजा दी जा रही है। चन्द्रपुर में ४० प्रतिशत से ऊपर जंगलात हैं और साथ लगे जिले गढ़चिरौली में ७७ प्रतिशत से ऊपर जंगलात हैं। इस प्रकार नागपुर डिवीजन में २० लाख हेक्टेयर जमीन में जंगलात हैं। आज नागपुर डिवीजन में १०६ मेजर और मडिल प्रोजैक्ट फारेस्ट क्लीयरेंस के कारण रुके हुये हैं। आप चर्चा के माध्यम से इरीगेशन के प्रोजैक्ट की बात तो करते हैं लेकिन फारेस्ट कंजर्वेशन एक्ट के तहत कई प्रोजैक्ट रुके हैं।
उपाध्यक्ष महोदय, आज देश के पांच राज्यों - आन्ध्रा प्रदेश, मध्य प्रदेश, बिहार, उड़ीसा और महाराष्ट्र में नक्सलवादी गतवधियां बड़े जोरों पर चल रही हैं। इसके पीछे फारेस्ट डिपार्टमेंट की जिम्मेदारी है। जहां ३३ प्रतिशत से ज्यादा जमीन पर जंगलात हैं, वहां आपमें और फारेस्ट डिपार्टमेंट में कोई को-आर्डिनेशन नहीं है। यहां ठाकुर साहब बैठे हुये हैं जिनके पास पहले इरीगेशन विभाग था। मैं जानना चाहता हूं कि केवल आदिवासी इलाकों में नक्सलवादी गतवधियां क्यों चल रही हैं? इसका कारण यह है कि यह अनडेवलप्ड ऐरिया है। यदि आप चन्द्रपुर और गढ़चिरौली जिलों के गांवों में जाकर देखेंगे तो पायेंगे कि लोगों के पास एक-दो किलो चावल, थोड़ा नमक और एक किरोसिन आयल से जलने वाले दीया होगा। इसके अलावा उन लोगों के पास कुछ नहीं। ऐसी हालत में यदि वे बंदूक उठाते हैं तो इसके लिये कौन दोषी है? हम और आप सब लोग दोषी हैं या उस राज्य या केन्द्र की सरकार है, वह दोषी है। इसलिये मेरा आपसे निवेदन है कि फारेस्ट कंजर्वेशन एक्ट में जो नक्सलवाद प्रभावित क्षेत्र हैं और जहां आपके प्रोजैक्ट्स रुके हुये हैं, आप डिपार्टमेंट से बात करिये। यह देखा गया है कि जिन जिलों में ३३ प्रतिशत से ऊपर जंगलात हैं, वहां १८-१८ साल से प्रोजैक्ट्स रुके पड़े हैं। वहां एक डैम का फाउंडेशन स्व. राजीव गांधी ने रखा था और वह डैम पूरा होने वाला है। लेकिन वह रोक दिया गया। हम लोग मजबूरी में उसे स्टैंडिंग कमेटी आन फारेस्ट एंड एनवायरमेंट के अंदर ले गये। उसके बाद कमेटी ने स्पाट डिसीजन लिया और इस प्रोजैक्ट को क्लीयर करवाया। मेरा आपसे अनुरोध है कि इस प्रोजैक्ट को पूरा करावें।
उपाध्यक्ष महोदय, स्टेट में प्रोजैक्ट का ३० प्रतिशत हिस्सा सैंटर से मिलता है लेकिन नवीं प्लान में यह घटकर १४.५ प्रतिशत मिल रहा है। ग्रामीण जनसंख्या ७० प्रतिशत है जो कृषि पर निर्भर करती है लेकिन बजट कम दिया जा रहा है। इस कारण ग्रामीण क्षेत्रों की जनता शहरों की ओर भाग रही है और शहरों में कोई होटल में नौकरी कर रहा है, कोई दुकान के अंदर काम कर रहा है, कोई पान ठेला लगा रहा है और वे यह धंधा करना पसंद करते हैं। गांवों में कोई काम नहीं है। वे लोग बैकवर्ड ऐरिया से आते हैं। मंत्री जी भी बैकवर्ड ऐरिया से आते हैं और वे जानते हैं कि उड़ीसा में नक्सलवादी गतवधियों की समस्या है। इसी तरह वहां पर सिंचाई की भी प्राब्लम है। मेरी मंत्री जी से अपील है कि इन सभी चीजों को देखते हुये जिस प्रकार आपने प्राइवेटाइजेशन में इरीगेशन डिपार्टमेंट को मंजूरी दी है, महाराष्ट्र में भी दो बड़े प्रोजेक्ट्स में कृष्णा वैली प्रोजेक्ट कई लाख हैक्टेअर जमीन को पानी देने वाली प्रोजेक्ट है। यह आपकी कारपोरेशन में चल रहा है। दूसरी सरदार सरोवर गुजरात की प्रोजेक्ट है, नर्मदा निगम बनाकर जिसका काम चल रहा है। तीसरी कर्नाटक की प्रोजेक्ट है, जय भाग्य निगम बनाकर उसका काम चल रहा है और अभी विदर्भ डेवलपमैंट इरीगेशन कारपोरेशन बनाकर विदर्भ में भी बड़े प्रोजेक्ट्स लेने की मुहिम शुरू हुई है।
उपाध्यक्ष महोदय, मैं आपके माध्यम से मंत्री जी कहना चाहता हूं कि इस प्रकार के इरीगेशन सैक्टर का जो महत्व कम हो चुका है, जब तक आप उसे दोबारा इस्टाब्लिश नहीं करेंगे, ग्रामीण जनता और खासकर किसानों को न्याय नहीं देंगे, तब तक आप भले ही रूलिंग पार्टी में रहे और हम अपोजीशन में रहे, आप उस बैंच पर बैठे या यहां बैठे, कुछ नहीं होने वाला है। इस संसद में हमारे ७० प्रतिशत प्रतनधि चुनकर आते हैं, उनका रूरल बेस होता है, वे किसान हैं। मैं खुद भी एक किसान हूं। लेकिन बड़े दुख के साथ कहना पड़ता है कि जब हम कांस्टीटुएंसी में रहते हैं तो एक बात कहते हैं। लेकिन पार्लियामैंट में आकर दूसरी बात करते हैं और मनिस्ट्री में जाने के बाद सब भूल जाते हैं।
उपाध्यक्ष महोदय : आप एक सवाल पूछिये। आपने इतना सब कुछ कह दिया है, अब आप सवाल पूछ सकते हैं।
श्री नरेश पुगलिया : सवाल पूछने से पहले मंत्री महोदय को पूरी भूमिका समझाना जरूरी था।
उपाध्यक्ष महोदय : आपने पूरे ११ मिनट समझाया है।
श्री नरेश पुगलिया (चन्द्रपुर) : उपाध्यक्ष महोदय, मैं दो मिनट में अपनी बात समाप्त करूंगा। मैं मंत्री महोदय से जानना चाहता हूं कि हम डेवलपमैंट की बात करते हैं, हमारी जो अगली प्लानिंग होगी, उसके लिए प्लानिंग कमीशन से बात करनी चाहिए। देखा गया है कि जिन जिलों में पचास परसेन्ट के ऊपर इरीगेशन हो चुकी है, उन्हीं को आप फंड देते हो। जिन जिलों में पांच-दस परसेन्ट भी इरीगेशन नहीं हैं, जहां इरीगेशन का परसेन्टेज कम है, उन्हें ज्यादा धन देने के लिए आपका विभाग क्या कोशिश कर रहा है। फॉरेस्ट कन्जर्वेशन एक्ट में जितने हमारे नेक्सेलाइट अफेक्टिड एरियाज हैं, वहां हमारी प्रोजेक्ट्स रूकी हुई हैं, विदर्भ में २०१ प्रोजेक्ट्स हैं, अमरावती डिवीजन में ९६ और नागपुर में १०६ प्रोजेक्ट्स हैं। फॉरेस्ट कन्जर्वेशन एक्ट में जो इरीगेशन के प्रोजेक्ट्स रुके हुए हैं, उन्हें क्लियर करने के लिए फॉरेस्ट एंड एनवॉयरनमैंट मनिस्ट्री और आपका इरीगेशन विभाग दोनों की ज्वाइंट मुहिम चलाकर इनके लिए क्या कोई रास्ता निकालने की कोशिश करेंगे।
उपाध्यक्ष महोदय, आपने मुझे बोलने की इजाजत दी, इसके लिए मैं आपको धन्यवाद देता हूं। धन्यवाद।
प्रो.रासा सिंह रावत (अजमेर) : माननीय उपाध्यक्ष महोदय, जैसा कि अभी बताया गया कि भारत एक कृषि प्रधान देश है और यहां कृषि के लिए सिंचाई की परियोजनाओं का अत्यधिक महत्व है। क्योंकि हिंदुस्तान के बजट के बारे में कहा जाता है कि भारतीय बजट मानसून का जुआ है और मानसून में कभी अतिवृष्टि, कभी अनावृष्टि, कभी सूखा एवं बाढ़ इन सब कारणों से अगर वह सारा पानी व्यर्थ में बहकर चला जाए, चाहे जब भी वर्षा हो, जितनी भी वर्षा हो, उसे बांधों के माध्यम से रोककर सिंचाई परियोजनाओं का निर्माण करना कृषि की द्ृष्टि से बहुत आवश्यक है और आजादी के बाद से हमारे देश के कर्णधारों का इस ओर ध्यान भी गया है और सिंचाई योजनाओं का निर्माण भी हुआ है। लेकिन यह अत्यन्त खेद का विषय है कि जैसा मंत्री जी ने स्वयं अपने उत्तर में बताया था कि देश के २२ राज्यों में लगभग १६२ बड़ी सिंचाई परियोजनाएं हैं और २४० के लगभग लघु सिंचाई परियोजनाएं अभी भी निर्माणाधीन हैं। आप जानते हैं कि अगर उसमें थोड़ा सा भी विलम्ब हो जाता है तो लागत मूल्य बढ़ जाता है, मजदूरी के रेट बढ़ जाते हैं और अन्य कई बाधाएं खड़ी हो जाती हैं। भारत जैसे कृषि प्रधान देश के लिए सिंचाई परियोजनाओं को इतना उपेक्षित करना कहां तक युक्तिसंगत कहा जा सकता है। मैं समझता हूं कि यह सरकार के लिए भी विचारणीय है।
उपाध्यक्ष महोदय, मैं इस संबंध में सरकार से प्रश्न पूछना चाहूंगा कि अभी यहां चर्चा हुई कि जल राष्ट्रीय सम्पत्ति है और जब जब राष्ट्रीय सम्पत्ति है तो राष्ट्रीय जल नीति बननी चाहिए और राष्ट्रीय जल आयोग भी होना चाहिए। मैं जानना चाहूंगा कि सरकार जल नीति का निर्धारण करते हुए राष्ट्रीय जल आयोग कब तक गठित करेगी। ताकि एक राज्य से दूसरे राज्य में बहकर जाने वाले नदियों के पानी का सिंचाई के लिए उपयोग किया जा सके। इसी सें संबंधित एक सवाल यह है कि राजस्थान में मरूगंगा इंदिरा गांधी कैनाल जिसे पहले राजस्थान नहर से नाम से जाना जाता था।
जिस नहर पर करोड़ों अरबों रुपये खर्च होने के बाद राजस्थान के उत्तरी और पश्चिमी रेगिस्तानी प्रदेश में पाकिस्तान की सीमा के साथ साथ सारे रेतीले प्रदेश में हरित क्रांति आ गई है, लेकिन अफसोस यह है कि धनाभाव के कारण, वित्तीय संकट के कारण अभी तक वह पूर्णता को प्राप्त नहीं हो पाई है। मैं मंत्री जी से जानना चाहूंगा कि राजस्थान सरकार ने इस इंदिरा गांधी नहर को पूरा करने के लिए आपके पास जो प्रस्ताव भेजे हैं धन का और अधिक आबंटन करने के लिए, उसको इस वर्ष तो बिल्कुल ही काट दिया गया और पिछले वर्षों में भी बहुत विलंब से दिया गया। इसके क्या कारण रहे हैं और क्या केन्द्रीय सरकार इंदिरा गांधी नहर योजना को राष्ट्रीय सिंचाई परियोजना मानकर उसके अनुरूप महत्व प्रदान करते हुए पूर्ण सहायता प्रदान करेगी या नहीं? इसी प्रकार से राजस्थान के बाड़मेर और जालौर इलाके में सूखा पड़ा है और पशुधन भी खत्म हो गया। नर्मदा सागर और सरदार सरोवर परियोजना भी गुजरात में पूरा नहीं हुआ, हाइट को लेकर विवाद हो रहा है। अगर वह पूरा हो जाए तो उससे जहां गुजरात और मध्य प्रदेश की आवश्यकताएं पूरी होंगी वहां उसकी योजना है कि राजस्थान के जालौर और बाड़मेर आदि इलाकों में पेयजल के साथ साथ सिंचाई की सुविधा भी उपलब्ध कराई जाएगी। इसके बारे में माईसागर राजस्थान का जो प्रोजेक्ट है, उसके बारे में और मध्य प्रदेश में जो बाणसागर और राजघाट परियोजनाएं अधूरी पड़ी हैं, ये अधूरी क्यों हैं? मैं यह जानना चाहूंगा कि राजस्थान की जो छोटी और बड़ी सिंचाई परियोजनाएं लंबित पड़ी हैं, उनको पूरा करने के लिए सरकार क्या प्रयास कर रही है और इस इंदिरा गांधी कैनाल को राष्ट्रीय नहर परियोजना मानकर इसके लिए अनुदान क्यों रोक दिया गया और उसको कब रिलीज़ करने जा रही है?
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Now, the hon. Minister.
SHRI PRAVIN RASHTRAPAL (PATAN): Sir, I had also given a notice to speak because the issue of Narmada Dam is very serious.
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Shri Pravin Rashtrapal, according to the rules, for speaking in the half an hour discussion, one has to give notice.
SHRI PRAVIN RASHTRAPAL : I had given the notice.
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: We have not received that.
SHRI PRAVIN RASHTRAPAL : But Sir, I had given the notice on the same day.
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Though we have not received it, I am giving you a chance, as a special case to seek clarification from the hon. Minister. But it cannot be made as a precedent.
SHRI PRAVIN RASHTRAPAL: Thank you very much. Sir, I am very happy that along with the concerned hon. Minister, Dr. C.P. Thakur is also present here. Here, I would like to draw the attention of the hon. Minister Shri Arun Jaitley also because he is not representing a particular constituency but he is representing the entire Gujarat.… (Interruptions)… Shri Jaitley, please. I want your help because you are also elected from Gujarat.
According to the details given by the hon. Minister, the figure of the spill over cost in the Ninth Plan was Rs. 64,183 crore. As far as Gujarat is concerned, the figure is the highest. It is Rs. 16,779 crore.
Sir, everybody in the country knows about the seriousness of Narmada Dam. Every day, the State is losing Rs. 8 crore even if there is construction or no construction. Hon. Dr. C.P. Thakur also came to my constituency about two-three months back for inauguration of Narmada canal. Everything is ready in Gujarat.
Sir, in one of the written answers, it was stated by the hon. Minister that there is a dispute about the height of the dam. Sir, according to my information, the Supreme Court has gone on record that ‘they are not going to listen to any argument as far as the height is concerned because the matter is settled by the Narmada River Dispute Tribunal.’ The dispute is about the rehabilitation of the displaced persons from Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra, that is, the project-affected people. I am also concerned about that. But as far as the height is concerned, there is no dispute.
I would like to quote the hon. Prime Minister who intervened in one of the debates held on 15th December. There, he said:
" अध्यक्ष महोदय, देश के कई भागों में जैसे राजस्थान, गुजरात, आंध्रा प्रदेश में सूखे के कारण गंभीर परिस्थिति पैदा हो गई है। फसल का क्या होगा यह भविष्य बताएगा। वर्षा होने की कोई संभावना दिखाई नहीं देती। पेयजल की कमी एक बड़ा संकट बनकर हमारे सामने आया है। इस बारे में प्रदेश सरकारें कदम उठा रही हैं। सरकार चाहती है कि सदन इस पर चर्चा करे, अगर कहीं कमियां हैं तो हम आपस में चर्चा करके तय करें। यह प्रदेश का मामला नहीं है, यह राजनीति का सवाल नहीं है। हमें इस राष्ट्रीय संकट का सामना करना पड़ेगा। इसलिए उपाध्यक्ष महोदय, आप सब नेताओं से विचार-विमर्श करके कोई तथि निश्चित कर दें। "… इस पर एक पृथक चर्चा होनी चाहिए। सरकार भी तैयार होकर आएगी। सारे तथ्य सामने रखेगी और आपके सुझावों का स्वागत करेगी।"
This is what the hon. Prime Minister spoke on the 15th December. There was an assurance by the hon. Prime Minister during his speech in Ahmedabad that when they come to power, within fifteen days the River Narmada dispute would be solved. As the Government has called the meeting of the Cauvery dispute States twice during the last one year, I want to know from the hon. Minister when the Government would call a meeting of the Chief Ministers of Gujarat, Maharashtra, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh to settle the dispute. … (Interruptions)
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Only one question is allowed.
SHRI PRAVIN RASHTRAPAL : Sir, I want to know when the meeting would be called and when the issue would be settled.
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: That is considered to be one question.
THE MINISTER OF WATER RESOURCES (SHRI ARJUN SETHI): Mr. Deputy-Speaker, Sir, I am thankful to the hon. Members who have raised this Half-an-hour Discussion. Through this discussion, they have sought to know the position of the on-going projects.
All of us know that irrigation being a State subject, the irrigation projects are planned, investigated, formulated, executed and funded by the State Governments themselves out of their resources as per their own priorities. So, the projects, which have been spilled over since the planning process began in the country, have been planned, investigated, formulated and also funded by the States. They are being executed as per their own priorities. The Central Government or the Ministry of Water Resources only provides them assistance under different scheme when they require or ask for funds for the completion of these projects.
As my hon. here stated, since 1951-52 till the end of the Eighth Plan, 288 major and 938 medium projects were taken up for construction by various State Governments. As they have also stated here, out of these projects, 162 major and 240 medium projects have spilled over into the Ninth Plan as on-going projects. The spill over cost of these on-going projects into the Ninth Plan complition is of the order of Rs.68,044 crore, which is the outlay under the Ninth Plan. … (Interruptions)
SHRI NARESH PUGLIA (CHANDRAPUR): You are repeating the same things. You have already said that. … (Interruptions)
SHRI ARJUN SETHI: The outlay for the Ninth Plan for major and medium projects is Rs.42,644 crore. From this also we can see that there would be a deficit of funds in respect of the projects that have spilled over to the Ninth Plan period.
The main constraint, as I have pointed out here, in the completion of the projects is the paucity of funds with the State Governments. The other important contributing factors for delay in the completion of the projects are land acquisition problems, resettlement problems, rehabilitation problems and the problems related to acquisition of forest land. There is also the tendency of the State Governments to take up too many projects resulting in thin spread of scarce resources. These are the causes. These projects have been taken up by the State Governments themselves.
Whenever they come to us for funds or for any other assistance to complete the ongoing projects, the Government of India provides them funds under different schemes. The schemes are Accelerated Irrigation Benefits Programme (AIBP), Rural Infrastructure Development Fund (RIDF) which is being funded through NABARD, and under the Water Resources Consolidation Project (WRCP). We provide funds through these schemes for the completion of ongoing projects. My hon. friends will agree with me on this point. They will be interested to know the quantum of funds that has been provided under different schemes. Under AIBP scheme, which was started during the year 1996-97. Since inception in 1996-97, till 1999-2000, we have provided to 22 States for 112 projects, an amount of Rs. 4032 crore. The Budget provision under AIBP for the current year is Rs. 1712 crore. You can well imagine and appreciate that whenever the State Governments sought the assistance of the Central Government, the Central Government from time to time, have been providing assistance for early completion of the spill over irrigation projects.
Similarly, under RIDF, the Government is providing loans through NABARD. As I have said earlier, this scheme was launched in 1995-96. An amount of Rs. 3080 crore has been released through NABARD for irrigation projects during the last five years, that is, from 1995-96 to 1999-2000.
These funds are provided mainly for early completion of the ongoing projects only. My hon. friends will appreciate that whenever the State Governments approach the Central Government for funds, the Central Government or the Ministry of Water Resources have been providing funds under different schemes. But the states are to fulfil formalities to get these assistance on their part.
Hon. Member, Shri Naresh Puglia from Maharashtra said that there has been unequal distribution of funds or whatever irrigation potential that has been created, it is unequal, in different parts of the State of Maharashtra. As I said earlier, these irrigation projects have been planned, investigated, funded and executed by the State Government, fixing their own priorities. The Central Government has nothing to do with them and it cannot interfere in those matters. Whenever any project comes to the TAC of the Water Resources Ministry, we examine it; we only advise on technical points; entire funding and its execution remain with the State Government concerned. There is no scope for the Central Government to come in and execute on its own.
So, I will request my friend Shri Naresh Puglia to try to convince his own State Government so that they can execute and complete the projects. … (Interruptions) Let me conclude and then you can seek clarifications.
So far as Vidarbha region, etc. are concerned – about which he mentioned – I would repeat what I said earlier. The whole process of irrigation project being planned, being investigated, etc., is with the State Government. So, the State Government should look into the difficulties and the thin spread of the irrigation schemes all over the State.
1800 hrs. So far as the Forest Conservation Act is concerned, the Members know that it does not come under my Ministry. There is a separate Ministry for that. The State Government can approach the Ministry of Environment and Forests and it can do the needful. Prof. Rasa Singh Rawat said that there is no National Water Policy. In fact it is there since 1987 and it has been working. Recently we tried to amend it as per the priority set by the hon. Prime Minister. We are also trying to have a new policy so that whatever deficiency is there in the old policy can be made good of in the new policy. For the Indira Canal from 1996-97 to 1999-2000 Rs. 160 crore have been provided. … (Interruptions) I have no information for this year. But I can supply the information to the hon. Member.
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: You can collect the information and send it to the hon. Member.
… (Interruptions)
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Hon. Members, this is not the Question Hour.
… (Interruptions)
SHRI ARJUN SETHI: As far as Narmada is concerned, hon. Member, Shri Pravin Rashtrapal, knows that it is pending in the Supreme Court. He is a very learned Member. … (Interruptions) There is a stay. … (Interruptions)
SHRI PRAVIN RASHTRAPAL : There cannot be a stay on holding the meeting. … (Interruptions)
SHRI ARJUN SETHI: Holding of meeting is different. It is about the raising the height of the dam. … (Interruptions)
SHRI PRAVIN RASHTRAPAL : Neither there is a ban nor is there a stay. There is no question of height. It is only a question of rehabilitation. … (Interruptions)
SHRI ARJUN SETHI: Sir, I will supply the information to the hon. Member.… (Interruptions)
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Now, the House will take up Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2000.
1832 Hours *m07 THE MINISTER OF STATE OF THE MINISTRY OF INFORMATION AND BROADCASTING AND MINISTER OF STATE OF THE MINISTRY OF LAW, JUSTICE AND COMPANY AFFAIRS (SHRI ARUN JAITLEY): Sir, I am extremely grateful to the hon. Members, each one of whom has supported this amendment Bill and have also made some very constructive suggestions. There was an observation made that this Bill is perhaps dealing with the area of cable, a piecemeal legislation. Shri Rupchand Pal, said it. There was yet another observation which said that we would also have to contemplate, within the system of cable laws, a system to check piracy. A query was also raised as to what is the plight of the Broadcast Bill which had earlier been introduced in this House, and had been referred to a Select Committee in 1997. There have been several suggestions made with regard to the impossibility of this law, as also improvement in the quality of television programming in this country. May I respond to the larger question which had been raised? It is perhaps correct that this is a legislation which is operating in a limited field today.
SHRI PAWAN KUMAR BANSAL (CHANDIGARH): That is what is meant by `piecemeal’.
SHRI ARUN JAITLEY: I quite concede to that. We are operating in an area where technology has been moving at a very fast pace. Actually, Shri Rupchand Pal himself suggested that. We were initially contemplating a Broadcast Bill and he himself suggested that now is the era of the convergence law.
Therefore, we have entered the era of the evolution which takes place in the fields of broadcasting, telecommunications and information technology, converging them into a common technology, making them easier to the people and making even communications cheaper to the people. As I indicated in my opening remarks, certainly the Government is fully seized of this matter. There is a Group headed by the hon. Finance Minister which is working on that legislation and a lot of what we are doing today, in the normal course, would also get incorporated into that proposed scheme of legislation with, of course, a much larger scope. But, in the meanwhile, what is really to be done?
We have worked the Cable Law for about the last five to six years and we have seen some obvious shortcomings in the Cable Law. For instance, one of the shortcomings that we saw was that the foreign satellite channels which do not use a decoder and which are not encrypted channels are almost outside the Programme and Advertisement Codes. It was a lacuna in the law. We have attempted to cure that lacuna. The second suggestion, which has been made – Shri Thawar Chand Gehlot and Shri Rupchand Pal made it – was that, what is really happening to the enforceability of even the existing provisions in the 1995 legislation. I must concede that in the absence of authorised officers appointed in every district and sub-division of this country, the enforceability of those provisions was very weak. For instance, if somebody relays a programme or an advertisement, which is contrary to the Code, there was, almost, no machinery to check it, since it was being done locally, because in a large number of places, even at the decentralised level, officers had not been appointed.
Therefore, now, by virtue of the amendment to the Act itself, we have, in the Act itself, designated the authorities. A suggestion was made that we have made the District Magistrate, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and also the Commissioner of Police as the Designated Officers and there are several places where there is no Commissioner of Police. So, the Act itself says that where the Commissioner of Police is operating as a Director-General or with any other nomenclature, in addition to these three officers, we can include any other officer notified in the Official Gazette of the Central Government or the State Government. So, where there is an officer with any other nomenclature, we only require a subordinate legislation, a notification, in order to make sure that it can be notified and such an officer would, obviously, be in place.
Sir, two very important questions have been raised though they are, at the moment, outside the purview of this Bill. A large number of Members have expressed serious concern with regard to the fact that in the matter of communication of cable television, effectively in each locality and area, a monopoly of one operator is created. It is, certainly, a matter of concern. There are several other issues which relate to this monopoly with which we are, certainly, concerned and we will take them into consideration when we consider a more comprehensive legislation in the field of convergence. Under the present law, there is only a provision for registration. So, whoever can register with the Post Office in an area is entitled to operate a cable service in that particular area. There are several areas where there is more than one cable operator, but there are a number of areas where there is only one cable operator. So, in the absence of competition, the quality of service or the number of channels shown starts suffering. Competition, in fact, becomes the greatest protector of the viewers’ and the consumers’ interests.
Similarly, many suggestions about piracy have been made by many hon. Members. This is not a law which deals with piracy. As I said, piracy is dealt with by the Copyright Act, but since the enforcement of the Copyright Act is only through law courts, could it be considered when we conceive this larger legislation? As I indicated this morning also while answering a question, this is, certainly, one of the factors which is present in our minds and when we work on a larger scheme we have to consider whether we can try and see that the tariff system itself acts as a certain constraint that copyright violations, in terms of piracy, do not take place.
Sir, there are several other suggestions which have been made with regard to the quality of programming and a constant review of the Advertisement and the Broadcasting Code so that we meet the changing challenges of the society itself. I take these suggestions in the right spirit. Certainly, this is one area where we are going to work on it.
You raised the question as to how one would define obscenity because it can mean differently to different people. I must mention that in this Act, the phrase which we have used is ‘morality and decency’. ‘Morality and decency’ is the phrase which we have picked up from article 19(2) of the Constitution. But obscenity is a phrase which is used in the penal provisions of our penal laws. It provides for trial and punishment. If there is something which is obscene, the test is that you can be tried and prosecuted if something is obscene. But when you frame laws relating to exercise of freedom of expression and you put restraints in those laws, the Constitution itself does not use the word ‘obscene’, but it uses the word ‘decency’. Therefore, we have consciously used the phrase ‘decency’ which part, as you have submitted, really comes within the parameters of the phrase which we have used that the quality of programming must be such which does not offend morality and decency. There are other phrases which we have picked up from article 19(2). Therefore, the restraints which we have put in this section are only those restrictions which are constitutionally permissible and which have stood the test of time from 1950 onwards.
You are right when you say that it is the quality and the credibility of the programming that really will eventually determine the viewership of the public broadcaster or Doordarshan itself. I must say that even contrary to an impression which is normally created, the mandate of both All India Radio and Doordarshan is not commercial in character. Their mandate is not merely to compete with the private channels. You are right when you said that it is education, information and entertainment. The recent figures have indicated that on the National Channel that the content of the information, news and the educational programmes is almost 58 per cent. The entertainment programmes are about 42 per cent of the National Channel. DD-II is essentially an entertainment channel. That content is much larger on the entertainment channel itself. Therefore, these organisations have been trying to discharge - in a small way - their own mandate.
The All India Radio, for instance, in so many different languages has 192 Production Centres in this country where it is relaying programmes. May I just correct the impression when you said that there is a small area in this country which is covered by Doordarshan? Today, there are 21 channels which they are running all over the country. Therefore, it is the extent of viewership in terms of population of the terrestrial channel which is DD National. It already covers 89 per cent of India’s population. Therefore, even in certain areas where it is commercially not viable but it is in the national interest to reach out to those areas, they have been trying to reach out in terms of several areas where private sector has not ventured to come in because it may not be commercially possible. In order to discharge this mandate, they have been trying to enter into those areas, for example, in the remotest areas in the hilly areas, in the North-East, in Kashmir. You said that PTV is very popular in Kashmir today both in terms of the national channel, the Metro Channel and also the Kashmir local channel which has already been given terrestrial support. In addition to being a satellite channel, they have tried to enter those areas. Of course, they cannot enter every area to compete with the private channels because private channels essentially concentrate in a big way only on entertainment. Here you have also to keep programmes for various sections of the society. You have to keep programmes relating to women, tribals and farmers. The programmes of all kinds have to be telecast for various sections of the population. That is why we consider it necessary that a clause - we must restrict - must be present for essentially two terrestrial channels, that is DD-I and DD Metro. Metro is essentially a satellite channel but is now terrestrially supported in very large number of places in the country. In addition to that, one regional channel must also be on the cable operation. These would be the ones which would be notified from different regions of this country. Therefore, the object of this amendment really is to enforce and implement a broadcasting discipline on the cable operators so that the kind and quality of programmes which reach the human mind, which reach the mind of our children, do not offend ethics, do not offend morality, do not offend decency.
I am extremely grateful to almost all the speakers for having supported these amendments. Certainly, this is the process which is an evolving process.
SHRI G.M. BANATWALLA (PONNANI): Why did you use the word ‘decency’ and not a common word like ‘obscenity’?
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: He has explained this.
SHRI G.M. BANATWALLA : In the Act itself! MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Shri Banatwala, before your arrival, he explained both the words.
SHRI G.M. BANATWALLA : I must make my presence felt, I have just entered, Sir. I lost my chance of speaking. Thank you Sir.
SHRI ARUN JAITLEY: Sir, this question has been raised by Shri Rupchand Pal. I had, at length, explained to him. I shall also explain to him, maybe outside the House. I explained the rationale for using this word ""decency"" and not ""obscenity"" in the Act.
I am extremely grateful to all the Members who have supported this Bill and I commend to this hon. House that the Bill be approved and passed.
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: I shall now put the amendment moved by Shri Varkala Radhakrishnan to vote.
The amendment was put and negatived.
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: The question is:
"That the Bill further to amend the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1955, be taken into consideration."
The motion was adopted.
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: The House will now take up clause by clause consideration of the Bill.
"That clauses 2 to 4 stand part of the Bill."
The motion was adopted.
Clauses 2 to 4 were added to the Bill.
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Amendment Nos. 3 and 4. Shri Vilas Muttemwar - not present.
"That clause 5 stand part of the Bill."
The motion was adopted.
Clause 5 was added to the Bill.
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Amendment No.5. Shri Vilas Muttemwar - not present.
"That clause 6 stand part of the Bill."
The motion was adopted.
Clause 6 was added to the Bill.
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Amendment No.6. Shri Vilas Muttemwar - not present.
"That clause 7 stand part of the Bill."
The motion was adopted.
Clause 7 was added to the Bill.
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Amendment No.7. Shri Vilas Muttemwar - not present.
"That clause 8 stand part of the Bill."
The motion was adopted.
Clause 8 was added to the Bill.
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Amendment No.8. Shri Vilas Muttemwar - not present.
"That clause 9 stand part of the Bill."
The motion was adopted.
Clause 9 was added to the Bill.
Clause 1, the Enacting Formula and theLong Title were added to the Bill.
-------
SHRI ARUN JAITLEY: Sir, I beg to move:
"That the Bill be passed."
श्री जी.एम. बनातवाला (पोन्नानी) : सर, यह तो फायनल रीडिंग है। मुझे एक क्लाज पर बोलने की इजाजत दी जाए। I want to speak for one hour.
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: You have to give notice for that. You are frightening me, Shri Banatwala.
"That the Bill be passed."
The motion was adopted.
----------
1832 hours