Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Lok Sabha Debates

Regarding The Coastal Aquaculture Authority Bill, 2005. €“ Bill Passed. on 5 May, 2005

Title: Regarding the Coastal Aquaculture Authority Bill, 2005. – Bill passed.

14.24 hrs. COASTAL ACQUACULTURE AUTHORITY BILL, 2005 MR. CHAIRMAN: Now, we will take up Item No. 12, Coastal Aquaculture Authority Bill.

कृषि मंत्रालय में राज्य मंत्री तथा उपभोक्ता मामले, खाद्य एवं सार्वजनिक वितरण मंत्रालय में राज्य मंत्री (श्री कांतिलाल भूरिया) : सभापति महोदय, मैं प्रस्ताव करता हूं …( व्यवधान)

श्री रामजीलाल सुमन (फ़िरोज़ाबाद) : सभापति महोदय, आज प्रात: ही ली ड्र्स मीटिंग में माननीय अध्यक्ष महोदय ने यह निश्चित किया था कि श्री देवेन्द्र प्रसाद यादव जी द्वारा सदन में प्रस्तुत चुनाव सुधारों वाले जिस विषय पर बहस चल रही है, पहले उस पर चर्चा की जाएगी और उस पर चर्चा पूरी होने के बाद तटीय जलकृषि प्राधिकरण विधेयक, २००५ को लिया जाएगा। …( व्यवधान)

सभापति महोदय : नियम ३७७ के तुरन्त बाद, सबसे पहले लैजिस्लेटिव बिजनैस लिया जाना जरूरी होता है। वह विषय भी लिस्टेड है। इसके बाद उसे ही लिया जाएगा। कृपया प्रस्ताव प्रस्तुत होने दीजिए। आप अपना स्थान ग्रहण कीजिए।

श्री कांतिलाल भूरिया : सभापति महोदय, मैं प्रस्ताव करता हूं -

"कि तटीय क्षेत्रों में तटीय जलकृषि से संबंधित क्रियाकलापों का वनियमन करने के लिए तटीय जलकृषि प्राधिकरण की स्थापना और उससे संबंधित या उसके आनुषंगिक विषयों का उपबंध करने वाले विधेयक, राज्य सभा द्वारा यथापारित, पर विचार किया जाए।"

माननीय सभापति महोदय, जैसाकि माननीय सदस्य जानते हैं कि मात्स्ियकी क्षेत्र एक ऐसा क्षेत्र है, जो अधिक उत्पादन द्वारा पर्याप्त विकास हासिल करने में सक्षम है। इससे हमें रोजगार बढ़ाने, किसानों को अतरिक्त आय उपलब्ध कराने, लोगों के पोषणिक स्तर को सुधारने और अपने निर्यात को बढ़ाने में मदद मिलेगी। इसके लिए विशाल क्षमता वाला, जो एक महत्वपूर्ण क्षेत्र है, वह है तटवर्ती जलकृषि, जिसमें मुख्यत: झींगा उत्पादन किया जाता है। खारा जल जलकृषि के लिए उपयुक्त माना जाता है। इसका लगभग १२ लाख हैक्टेयर क्षेत्र में से अभी तक केवल लगभग १४ प्रतिशत भूमि का ही उपयोग किया जा सका है। इसके बावजूद इनमें जो झींगा उत्पादन किया जाता है, वह लगभग ६००० करोड़ रुपए के हमारे वार्षिक निर्यात में प्रमुख योगदान देता है। इसलिए यदि हम तटवर्ती जलकृषि के तहत आने वाली भूमि को उचित रूप से बढ़ा सकें तो हम यह कल्पना कर सकते हैं कि इसके परिणामस्वरूप निर्यात में महत्वपूर्ण वृद्धि होगी तथा हमें अन्य लाभ भी मिलेंगे। यहां इस बात पर गौर करना महत्वपूर्ण होगा कि यदि इस भूमि का जलकृषि के लिए प्रयोग नहीं किया जाता है तो यह बेकार पड़ी रहेगी, क्योंकि यह भूमि खेती अथवा किसी अन्य आर्थिक गतवधियों के लिए उपयुक्त नहीं है।

सभापति महोदय, वर्तमान में हम सिर्फ १४ प्रतिशत के ऊपर ही अभी जलकृषि कर रहे हैं, अगर उसे ३० या ४० प्रतिशत कर दें तो हमारी आमदनी काफी बढ़ जाती है। लेकिन हमें यह देखना होगा कि इससे पर्यावरण को कोई नुकसान नहीं पहुंचे और पारम्परिक मछुआरों, कृषविदों आदि जैसे तटवर्ती क्षेत्रों में रहने वाले लोगों पर इसका प्रतिकूल प्रभाव न पड़े। इसी संदर्भ में मौजूदा विधेयक प्रस्तुत किया जा रहा है।

महोदय, मैं यह विधेयक सम्मानीय सदन के समक्ष लाने की पृष्ठभूमि को संक्षेप में स्पष्ट करना चाहूंगा। तटवर्ती क्षेत्रों में, विशेषकर पूर्वी तट पर झींगा उत्पादन के लिए बड़ी संख्या में जलकृषि फार्म स्थापित किए गए थे। उच्चतम न्यायालय में १९९४ में दायर एक रिट याचिका में इन फार्मों पर इस आधार पर प्रतिबंध लगाने की मांग की गई थी कि ये पर्यावरण को नुकसान पहुंचा रहे हैं। उच्चतम न्यायालय ने दिसम्बर, १९९६ को दिए अपने निर्णय में कहा था कि जलकृषि एक उद्योग है और इसलिए इस पर पर्यावरण संरक्षण अधनियम के तहत फरवरी, १९९१ में जारी सीआरजेड अधिसूचना के तहत उद्योगों पर लागू प्रतिबंध लागू होगा। उच्चतम न्यायालय ने यह भी निर्देश दिया कि तटवर्ती क्षेत्रों में झींगा फार्मों को वनियमित करने के लिए एक प्राधिकरण स्थापित किया जाना चाहिए। न्यायालय ने निर्देश दिया था कि तटवर्ती क्षेत्रों में उस समय मौजूद झींगा फार्मों को हटा दिया जाए। यद्यपि, कृषि मंत्रालय तथा अन्य द्वारा दायर समीक्षा याचिकाओं के आधार पर झींगा फार्मों को हटाने के विरूद्ध स्थगन प्रदान किया गया था, किन्तु समीक्षा याचिकाओं पर अंतिम निर्णय की अभी भी प्रतीक्षा है। उच्चतम न्यायालय के निर्देशों के अनुसार उच्च न्यायालय के एक सेवानिवृत्त न्यायाधीश के तहत जलकृषि प्राधिकरण स्थापित कर दिया गया है, जिसका मुख्यालय चेन्नई में है।

महोदय, इस मामले में सरकार का यह मत रहा है कि पर्यावरण की सुरक्षा के लिए तटवर्ती क्षेत्रों में जलकृषि को वनियमित करने की आवश्यकता है, किन्तु इसे एक उद्योग नहीं माना जाना चाहिए और इसलिए सीआरजेड अधिसूचना के तहत यह एक प्रतिबंधित गतवधि नहीं होनी चाहिए।

सरकार चाहती थी कि जलकृषि प्राधिकरण तटवर्ती जलकृषि को विनयमित करता रहे। वास्तव में, राज्य सभा ने इसी तर्ज पर जलकृषि प्राधिकरण विधेयक, १९९७ पारित किया था। लेकिन लोक सभा के विघटन से पहले इसे लोक सभा में पारित नहीं किया जा सका था। यहां यह उल्लेख करना महत्वपूर्ण है कि वभिन्न राजनीतिक दलों का प्रतनधित्व करने वाले १३ संसद सदस्यों के एक दल ने जून-जुलाई, १९९७ में आठ तटवर्ती राज्यों का दौरा किया था। अधिकारियों, मछुआरा संगठनों और स्थानीय लोगों से विचार-विमर्श करने के बाद इस दल ने वास्तविक स्थिति का जायजा लिया था। यह दल इस पक्ष में था कि झींगा पालन को जारी रखा जाए और कानून द्वारा इसको वनियमित किया जाए। तदनुसार, जलकृषि प्राधिकरण विधेयक को फरवरी, २००० में राज्य सभा में पुन: प्रस्तुत किया गया था। इसे कृषि सम्बन्धी स्थायी समति को भेजा गया था, ताकि वह इसकी जांच कर सके और इस पर अपनी रिपोर्ट दे सके। स्थायी समति ने विधेयक में संशोधन करने के लिए कई महत्वपूर्ण सुझावों के साथ दिसम्बर, २००० में अपनी रिपोर्ट प्रस्तुत की। इस बीच विधेयक के कुछ प्रावधानों के सम्बन्ध में वभिन्न मछुआरा संगठनों तथा अलग-अलग झींगा किसानों से अभ्यावेदन प्राप्त हुए थे। संसदीय स्थायी समति के सुझावों औंर इस सम्बन्ध में प्राप्त अन्य अभ्यावेदनों के कारण बहुत सारे संशोधन करने पड़ते। इसलिए यह निर्णय लिया गया था कि एक नया तटीय जलकृषि प्राधिकरण विधेयक प्रस्तुत किया जाए। तदनुसार, जलकृषि प्राधिकरण विधेयक, २००० को वापस ले लिया गया है और यह नया तटीय जलकृषि प्राधिकरण विधेयक प्रस्तुत किया गया है।

इस विधेयक में केन्द्र सरकार द्वारा निर्धारित किए जाने वाले दिशा-निर्देशों की व्यवस्था की गई है ताकि इस बात को सुनिश्चित किया जा सके कि तटवर्ती जलकृषि से पर्यावरण को कोई नुकसान न पहुंचे और इसे इस तरह चलाया जाए, जिससे इन क्षेत्रों में रहने वाले वभिन्न वर्ग के लोगों की जीविका को संरक्षित किया जा सके। इस प्रकार हम यह सुनिश्चित करेंगे कि तटवर्ती जलकृषि पर्यावरण के लिए प्रतिकूल न हो, जैसा कि उच्चतम न्यायालय ने टिप्पणी की है। साथ ही, हम यह स्पष्ट करना चाहेंगे कि जलकृषि को एक उद्योग नहीं माना जा सकता और इसलिए इसे सीआरजेड अधिसूचना के तहत एक प्रतिबंधित गतवधि नहीं समझा जाना चाहिए। इसलिए विधेयक में यह स्पष्ट किया गया है कि जलकृषि सीआरजेड अधिसूचना के अर्थ के भीतर कभी भी प्रतिबंधित गतवधि नहीं थी। उच्चतम न्यायालय के निर्देशों के तहत गठित जलकृषि प्राधिकरण इस बात को बराबर सुनिश्चित करता रहेगा कि जलकृषि गतवधियां अधनियम के प्रावधानों और अधनियम के तहत जारी किए जाने वाले दिशा-निर्देशों के अनुसार ही चलाई जायें ताकि इससे पर्यावरण को कोई नुकसान न पहुंचे। वास्तव में, इस कानून से जलकृषि प्राधिकरण को एक स्वायत्त आधार मिलेगा और इसलिए वह अपने कार्यों को और अधिक प्रभावी तरीके से कर सकेगा। पर्यावरण के संरक्षण का सुनिश्चय करने की हमारी इच्छा के अनुरूप विधेयक में हाई टाइड लाइन के २०० मीटर के भीतर तटवर्ती जलकृषि गतवधि को प्रतिबंधित किया गया है, तद्यपि मौजूदा फार्मों को संरक्षित किया जाएगा।

तटवर्ती जलकृषि फार्मों का वनियमन जलकृषि प्राधिकरण के पास इन फार्मों के रजिस्ट्रेशन के माध्मय से करने का प्रस्ताव है। जलकृषि में कार्यरत अधिकांश लोग छोटे-छोटे किसान हैं, इस बात को ध्यान में रखते हुए दो हैक्टेयर अथवा उससे कम क्षेत्र वाले फार्मों के रजिस्ट्रेशन की प्रक्रिया को काफी सरल बना दिया गया है।

अन्त में, मैं यह बताना चाहूंगा कि इस कानून के बनने से, जिसे राज्य सभा द्वारा पहले ही पारित कर दिया गया है, इस क्षेत्र में आठ वर्ष से भी अधिक समय से चली आ रही अनिश्चितता दूर होगी और इससे तटवर्ती जलकृषि को व्यवस्थिते ढंग से बढ़ावा देने तथा पर्यावरण को संरक्षित करने के दोनों उद्देश्य हासिल हो सकेंगे।

MR. CHAIRMAN : Motion moved:

"That the Bill to provide for the establishment of a Coastal Aquaculture Authority for regulating the activities connected with coastal aquaculture in the coastal areas and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto, as passed by Rajya Sabha, be taken into consideration. "  

SHRI K.S. RAO (ELURU): Sir, I congratulate the hon. Minister of Agriculture, Shri Sharad Pawar, for having brought this Bill to Parliament though after ten years.

Unfortunately, in the year 1996, when the issue was represented to the Supreme Court by some vested interests, the Supreme Court gave a judgement on December 11, 1996 that all the aquaculture industry including shrimp culture, pond culture, etc. operating or set up in the Coastal Regulation Zone as defined under the CRZ Notification shall be demolished and removed from the said area before March 31.

This coastal area is an area which is not touched by anybody. As the hon. Minister has said, 12 lakh hectares of coastal area which is saline, which has not been put to use for generations earlier, where there is not even a tree or human beings also except fishermen who are just staying in the coastal area was put to use. When this land was put to use by both the local fishermen and also by some farming community there, suddenly some people had come in the name of environment and ecology. They made a big presentation in the Supreme Court which led to this judgement. It is a very surprising thing. I wish that every friend of mine sitting here must hear this. Birds of the same feather flock together.

The hon. Minister has said just now that a lot of fishermen’s associations had made representations to me that their livelihood has gone and that this Bill has to be brought immediately to save their lives and also to improve their living standards. In this connection, the NDA Government had said that a lot of fishermen’s associations had come and made representation to them that the entire ecology and environment of that area is getting spoiled. So, this Bill should not be introduced. The then hon. Prime Minister went to the extent of assuring them that it was to undo the Supreme Court Judgement that the United Front Government attempted to pass the Acuaculture Authority Bill in the Rajya Sabha on March 20, 1979. At that time, eminent Gandhian, Mr. Jagannathan, who was planning to sit on a fast against the Bill, met Shri Vajpayee and the then Leader of the Opposition along with Shri Sunderlal. Shri Vajpayee requested Shri Jagannathan not to sit on fast and had given him an assurance that the BJP will strongly oppose the Bill. To this end, Mr. George Fernandes and Shri Murli Manohar Joshi had also given similar assurances to the coastal community who are in Delhi. Unfortunately, the poor fishermen who are living in the coastal areas do not have the capacity even to travel up to Delhi. I have seen this with my own eyes as I have represented Machilipatnam Parliamentary Constituency thrice which has the coast line only. The poor fishermen never used to have an opportunity even to have clothes on their body.

I wish to bring to your kind notice one incident. In 1990 when this culture was brought in Machilipatnam, one day a fisherman was travelling in a bus. He was without a shirt. When he asked for a ticket in the city bus, he gave a note of Rs.100 denomination. Immediately, the bus conductor asked him where did he get Rs.100. He replied that it is his own money. The bus conductor did not believe his words because he knew that a fisherman cannot have a note of Rs.100 denomination. Therefore, he made a police complaint that this man had either cheated somebody or had pickpocketed somewhere. Those were the days when the aquaculture was growing very fast and the poor fisherman could had the opportunity to make some money.

People who had never seen a note of ten-rupee denomination had, in fact, notes of hundred-rupee denominations with them. When that was the ground reality, people living in Delhi who are habituated to seeing only rich people and had never visited a coastal area and even did not have the least knowledge about the environment and ecological conditions prevalent in a coastal area and did not know whether it was going to affect any habitation adversely or not, made speeches and addressed Press Conferences on this issue. But only those people who understand the ground reality would know how much damage really that   judgement of the Supreme Court and the inaction of the Government caused in the last ten years. Some of the over-zealous officers in the area had gone to the extent of even filling up the ponds. They used bulldozers to fill up the tanks where the shrimp was grown. In those days the value of the shrimp was 20 dollars per kg. But the affected people there had no opportunity to represent. There was an uproar and a reign of terror prevailed in that area. The affected people did not know what to do, whom to represent and who could help them and protect them in their distress. They did not do anything against the law. They by themselves did not raise those ponds. The Government had promoted them, the society encouraged them to use the land, that was not put to use all these years, to make their livelihood. They took loan from the banks. They invested a lot of money to raise the shrimps. At that stage, simply because of a judgement from the Supreme Court to this effect, without having gone into the details – whether this judgement would damage the cause of the farmers or would do good for them – some over-zealous officers acted on it blindly and ordered them to close the tanks and threatened them of closing the tanks. Heavy machinery was used to fill up the tanks. Nobody at that stage responded to the problems of these poor farmers. When that was the situation, great leaders here gave assurances in those days that they would see to it that this Bill was not passed.

Sir, I am happy that the hon. Minister, having understood the problems of the fishing community, has brought this Bill to the House. The hon. Minister has mentioned that earning from coastal aquaculture has been to the tune of Rs. 6,800 by utilisation of only 14 per cent of the land that could be put to use. If the entire 100 per cent of land could be used for this purpose, then how much foreign exchange could we have earned? What amount of increase could have been there in the GDP? The hon. Finance Minister has to put in a Herculean effort to bring about an increase of 0.1 per cent in the GDP. But by simply encouraging coastal aquaculture half a per cent to one per cent increase in the GDP could easily have been there without affecting anybody adversely.

Sir, a professor can give a wonderful lecture on environment and ecology. I could have understood the merit of it if such an activity would have had adverse effects. The people who are living there are not doing anything wrong. But without having gone into the details of the case, just based on a judgement of the Supreme Court on this issue, some over-zealous officers acted on it; and some politicians being carried away by it gave assurances based on what they heard in the lecture.

Sir, in this context I would wish to bring some points to the notice of the hon. Minister. I am happy that the Government is not considering to prohibit the activity of aquaculture but only wish to regulate it. We are in support of regulating this activity of coastal aquaculture. It has to be regulated. There are very progressive farmers in those areas, I would say, that in some cases they are better than even scientists. But the unfortunate thing is that there is not proper infrastructure in those areas.

MR. CHAIRMAN : Shri Rao, I would like you to please formulate your points briefly. The points you have to make, you may please formulate them briefly.

SHRI K.S. RAO : Sir, how much time have I got?

MR. CHAIRMAN: You have already taken ten minutes. You have five more minutes.

SHRI K.S. RAO : Sir, problems the farmers face in that area are of bad seeds and bad feed.

So, Government has to bring some regulation in controlling the quality of the seeds and the feed.. Actually, the virus that has come could not be prevented and it has caused extensive damage there. This has happened because extensive propaganda has not been done, wide publicity is not being given and enough research was not done in this line to protect the farming community from the virus. So, I request the hon. Minister to go into the details of bringing   infrastructure into the area like providing drainage facilities and sending the already used water or polluted water into the sea so that nobody is affected by it.

Similarly, there should be training centres for farmers for some farming techniques to avoid all these problems. I wish examples of those countries which have done very well earlier, like Vietnam, Hawaii, Thailand and Taiwan should be followed. They have actually got much more yield as they have done extensive campaign. But this campaign has to be done by the Government and cannot be expected by the poor farmers. So, I wish that the Government takes this initiative and goes in for extensive publicity.

There are a lot of fluctuations in the market price. Countries like America speak about globalisation but when they found that their national interest was being affected, they coined a term called anti-dumping duty. When our people are exporting shrimps to America, they impose anti-dumping duty at 14.1 per cent thereby once again our industry is put to trouble and inconvenience. Then, when prices come down, once again the farmers are put to trouble. Today, even that 14 per cent is not under cultivation because of this problem.

Sir, while telling you about these things, I want to mention some of the provisions that are made in the Bill. You have said that registration is a must. We agree that registration is a must. We do not deny that. But you said that when the farmer applies for registration, it is for the authority to approve or reject the registration. On what grounds will he decline the registration? Have you given any guidelines saying that he has to follow those guidelines and only then, he can accept or reject the registration? When a farmer, after investing lakhs of rupees in shrimp ponds which are very expensive, suddenly finds that registration is rejected at the whims and fancies of the officer, what will happen to his life? He will also start committing suicide then. So, you please see that guidelines are provided and after giving registration, for some reason, a farmer does not do farming for one year. It may be because prices are not encouraging. He may think that this year, he will not be able to go in for farming because prices are unremunerative or that sufficient sweet water of the river is not coming to mix it with salt water. In that case, he may not do farming. He may say that after a gap of one year of non-farming, the registration will be cancelled. In that case, what happens to the farmers?

Similarly, you said that without registration, if some farmer were to do cultivation, then penalty will be Rs. 1 lakh or three years imprisonment. Sir, this imprisonment is for whom? A farmer! For doing what? Farming! All right, registration is required. But is it for a farmer owning half an acre or two acres or 2000 acres? A corporate which owns a thousand acres does not mind paying Rs. 1 lakh or Rs. 2 lakh as penalty or sending any of their men to be imprisoned and then go on with their activities. So, please specify whether penalty is for the corporate sector or small farmers. You must exempt small farmers from this area. You cannot put small farmers in prison and make them suffer. They have not committed any crime.

You have also said that no court shall take cognizance of this crime unless the authority represents the court. That means you are still making the authority to misuse his power because there is no appellate authority. You please have some appellate authority. If some officer acts either due to his self-interest or corrupt practices, or as per his likes or dislikes, whims or fancies, then there must be an appellate authority so that justice will be done.

I do not say that you must do it right now because I do not want any further delay in passing of this Bill. But please bring forward these amendments at the earliest so that no farmer is punished.

My humble request in this regard is, please distribute these 12 lakh hectares of land which are lying idle, which were not used all these years, to the local people, be it fishermen, Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes or small farmers who are landless. They will get encouragement and they will work hard. You need not give them any subsidy later. You only motivate them to work and leave them on their own. We are bringing in so many proposals and schemes, like free food, jobs, etc. Instead of all these things, you can encourage people who are prepared to work through their sweat and raise crops worth millions of dollars and crores of rupees. It is our duty to encourage these people.

So, I sincerely, honestly and whole-heartedly congratulate the hon. Minister of Agriculture for bringing forward this Bill to Parliament, and for getting it passed in the Rajya Sabha. I am sure, this House will also pass this Bill. This will provide a big relief and this will infuse confidence in the poor fishermen who are living in the coastal areas. This will encourage the small farmers to go in a big way and take advantage of it. This will be done as per your guidelines and not against your guidelines. This can be done within the framework. Ten or twenty times of foreign exchange can be earned and Rs. 7,000 crore can become Rs.1,00,000 crore one day with your support. Do not be carried away by the feelings expressed by the earlier Governments or the Opposition or by the big speeches given by the environmentalists and economists.

 

श्री शैलेन्द्र कुमार (चायल) : माननीय सभापति महोदय, आपने मुझे तटीय जल-कृषि बिल पर बोलने का मौका दिया, मैं इसके लिए आभारी हूँ। मैं इस बिल का समर्थन करते हुए कहना चाहता हूँ और जैसा अभी राव साहब ने तमाम तर्क-वितर्क सहित स्पष्टीकरण के साथ कहा है, जल सीमा में मछली पकड़ने हेतु एक व्यापक राष्ट्रीय नीति बनाने की आवश्कयता है। तभी हमारे मछुआरों की भलाई हो सकती है। वर्ष २००४ में हमने ६५०० करोड़ रूपए की मछली का निर्यात किया है। समुद्री सीमा के अलावा अन्य स्थानों पर भी मछली पालन का बहुत अच्छा स्कोप है। मैं माननीय मंत्री जी से मांग करूंगा कि इस ओर विशेष ध्यान दिया जाए ताकि इससे हमें कई रुाोतों से निर्यात करने में सुविधा होगी और विदेशी मुद्रा का भी लाभ मिलेगा। महोदय, पर्यावरणविद् मछली पकड़ने के तरीकों से बहुत चिन्तित हैं, क्योंकि मछली पकडने के साथ ही लगभग २ करोड़ टन अन्य जीव-जन्तुओं को भी पकड़ा जाता है जिससे समुद्र में पर्यावरण का संतुलन बिगड़ जाने का खतरा भी है। इस ओर भी हमें ध्यान देना चाहिए।

14.54 hrs. (Shri Varkala Radhikrishnan in the Chair) महोदय, अन्तर्राष्ट्रीय नियमों के अनुसार हमारे मछुआरे समुद्री तटस्थल से लेकर ५० किलोमीटर दूरी तक ही मछली पकड़ सकते हैं। उससे बाहर जाने पर उन्हें अन्य देशों से खतरा बराबर बना रहता है। जहाँ तक मछली उत्पादन की बात है, विश्व में हमारा स्थान आठवां है। मछली उत्पादन में चीन, पेरू, जापान, चिली, इण्डोनेशिया, रूसी संघ के राज्यों आदि देशों के अलावा भारत का आठवां स्थान है। यह आपने आपमें एक कीर्तिमान है। पर्यावरण से जिस प्रकार से हमारे मछुआरे भाइयों को खतरा है, उससे गरीब मछुआरों की दुनिया भी बेदखल हुई है। आज उनकी तरफ भी हमें सोचना होगा। जहाँ तक भारत के जम्बूद्वीप के वनों की रक्षा, पर्यावरण और पर्यटन को देखते हुए करीबी २० हजार मछुआरों को विस्थापित किया गया है।

आज उनके सामने रोजी-रोटी का सवाल है। इस ओर भी मंत्री जी को विशेष ध्यान देना होगा कि जम्बू द्वीप से जो २०,००० मछुआरे विस्थापित किए गए हैं, उन्हें भी कम से कम रोजी-रोटी से जोड़ा जाए। समुद्रीय सुरक्षा के नाम पर श्रीलंका हो, बांग्लादेश हो या पाकिस्तान हो, वहां हमारे कई मछुआरों को जेलों में रखा गया है। श्रीलंका में १२० भारतीय मछुआरे जेलों में बंद थे। जिन्हें तमिलनाडू की मुख्य मंत्री जयललिता जी ने पूर्व प्रधान मंत्री अटल बिहारी वाजपेयी जी से हस्तक्षेप कराकर छुड़ाने का काम किया था।

इसी तरह से कच्छ द्वीप है, जो मूल रूप से भारत का ही हिस्सा है। लेकिन समझौते के अंतर्गत वह हमारे क्षेत्र में नहीं आता है। वहां झींगा मछली का बड़ा स्कोप है। मैं चाहूंगा मंत्री जी इस पर भी ध्यान दें, ताकि झींगा मछली का हम निर्यात कर सकें, क्योंकि उसकी विदेशों में भी बहुत मांग है।

जहां तक समुद्र तटीय क्षेत्र में मछली पकड़ने की बात है, यह काम कम होता जा रहा है। वहां पर मछलियों के जीवन को खतरा पैदा हो गया है। ३५,००० बड़े औद्योगिक और जहरीले कारखानों का कचरा वहां आता है। खासकर समुद्री मार्ग से तेल लेकर जो बड़े-बड़े जहाज आते हैं, उनमें जब रिसाव होता है, तो उससे पर्यावरण को बड़ा खतरा पैदा होता है। इस कारण तमाम मछलियां भी उससे मर रही हैं। इस पर भी मंत्री जी को विशेष ध्यान देना होगा। कोई ऐसी टेक्नोलॉजी विकसित करनी पड़ेगी, जिससे बड़े-बड़े पोत जो इधर-उधर आते-जाते हैं, उनसे मछलियों का जीवन हम बचा सकें।

मेरा संसदीय क्षेत्र १२० किलोमीटर लम्बा है, चूंकि वह तटवर्ती समुद्री जल कृषि से अलग है, लेकिन मैं बताना चाहता हूं कि वहां गंगा-यमुना में भी मछली पकड़ने का काफी बड़ा स्कोप है। इस पर भी आपको ध्यान देना चाहिए। मेरे क्षेत्र में पांच हजार एकड़ की झील है। वहां वर्षा का पानी इतना इकट्ठा हो जाता है कि यदि उसे सही तरीके से विकसित किया जाए तो हमें काफी मछलियां मिल सकती हैं और वहां के बेरोजगार युवकों को भी काम मिल सकता है।

मैं मंत्री जी का ध्यान इस ओर दिलाना चाहूंगा कि उत्तर प्रदेश सरकार ने कई योजनाएं आपके सम्मुख भेजी हैं। वे योजनाएं केन्द्र सरकार के पास लम्बित हैं। मैं चाहूंगा उनमें शीघ्र ही धन आबंटित किया जाए, तो लाभ होगा। जैसे मत्स्य पालक विकास अभिकरण है। उसमें ३८४.२८१ लाख रुपए प्राप्त होने थे, लेकिन अभी तक केवल २०० लाख रुपए ही केंद्रांश के रुप में अवमुक्त हुए हैं। शेष १८४.२८१ लाख रुपए बकाया हैं। मत्स्य प्रशिक्षण एवम् प्रसार योजना में भी आठ लाख रुपए प्राप्त होने हैं, लेकिन वे अभी तक नहीं दिए गए हैं। इसी तरह से मछुआ आवास योजना में ४४६.०० लाख रुपए का प्रावधान है, लेकिन ४३८.८० लाख रुपए का अनुमोदन करते हुए केन्द्रांश के रूप में २१९.४० लाख रुपए की प्रथम किस्त प्राप्त हुई है। अभी १०० लाख रुपए अवमुक्त होने हैं, इसलिए तुरंत इसे देने का काम करें तो हमारे यहां मछुआरों की आवासीय समस्या हल हो सकती है।

डाटा बेस इंफार्मेशन एवम् नेटवर्किंग के सुद्ृढ़ीकरण की योजना है। इस चालू वित्त वर्ष में ३५.८२ लाख रुपए के अंश की आवश्यकता थी, जिसमें से आपने २५ लाख रूपए केंद्रांश के रूप में अवमुक्त किए हैं और ३.३१ लाख रुपए की धनराशि भारत सरकार के पास विचाराधीन है। मैं चाहूंगा कि जल्दी से जल्दी ७.०१ लाख रुपए की केन्द्रीय सहायता भारत सरकार राज्य सरकार को दे दे, तो इस पर भी अच्छी सफलता प्राप्त कर सकते हैं।

आपने मुझे बोलने का मौका दिया, उसके लिए मैं आपको धन्यवाद देता हूं और इस बिल का समर्थन करते हुए अपनी बात समाप्त करता हूं।

     

DR. SEBASTIAN PAUL (ERNAKULAM): Sir, I am supporting the Coastal Aquaculture Authority Bill. The importance of the Bill is to be analysed in the context of the situation in the country. India being the second largest producer of inland fish, the importance of aquaculture cannot be belittled. With an area of about 30,000 square kilometres under aquaculture, the industry is providing employment to three lakh workers.

15.00 hrs. As such, steps should be taken to augment the yield up to the sustainable level in a responsible manner. It is the fundamental duty of every citizen to protect and improve the natural environment. Agenda 21 - a global action plan outlining priority issues for the 21st century - was adopted at the Rio de Janeiro Conference in 1992. It identified integrated management and sustainable development of the ocean and coastal zone as one of the essential components of the global life-supporting system. The ocean and the coastal zone together represent an interface between the land and the sea. It was in this context that the Supreme Court in 1996 ordered the removal of all aquaculture units and shrimp culture ponds operating in the coastal regulation zone. The only activity permitted by the Court was traditional and improved traditional aquaculture.

The Coastal Aquaculture Authority Bill, as presented before this House, is not intended to negate the mandate of the apex court. The Bill presented after prolonged deliberation with the intent of saving employment and investment will ensure sustainable development of coastal aquaculture. The apprehension of traditional fishing community, NGOs and coastal agriculturists has been allayed to a reasonable extent. The boom in aquaculture has been spectacular in the developing countries, including India. Today aquaculture accounts for over 30 per cent of total world fish production.

 

However, the mushrooming of shrimp aquaculture farms in the vicinity of the coasts is causing so much sea and groundwater pollution, necessitating the intervention of the Supreme Court for the removal of all aquaculture farms within 500 metres of the high tide line. However, in the proposed legislation the prohibited limit is reduced to 200 metres from the high tide line and existing farms have been totally exempted from the distance stipulation. Such exemption and relaxation are totally unwarranted. If the exclusion is necessitated by circumstances, strict guidelines shall be issued for the enforcement of the spirit of the legislation. Drawal of groundwater in the 200-500 metre zone for drinking, horticulture, agriculture and fisheries purposes can be permitted only when done manually through ordinary wells. As part of the measures to control marine pollution from land based activities, steps should be taken to prevent aquaculture waste reaching the sea. India harbours some of the best mangroves in the world and these occur all along the coastline. They stabilise the shoreline and act as a bulwark against encroachment by the sea. Coastal aquaculture activities shall not end in the destruction of precious mangroves. The proposed aquaculture authority has power to regulate the construction and operation of aquaculture farms within the coastal areas; to ascertain their environmental impact; and to order removal or demolition if they cause pollution. It is good to that extent. Let us hope that teeth given to the authority are sharp enough to bite. With this hope, Sir, I support this Bill.

   

श्री राम कृपाल यादव (पटना) : सभापति महोदय, मैं माननीय मंत्री जी के प्रति आभार व्यक्त करता हूं जिन्होंने तटीय जलकृषि प्राधिकरण विधेयक, २००५, जो लंबित पड़ा हुआ था, उसे लेकर आपने बड़ा उपकार किया है । खास तौर से जो मछली पालन करने वाले लोग हैं, जो समुद्र के किनार बड़े पैमाने पर बसी हुई आबादी है, उनके रोजगार के लिए, उनकी उन्नति के लिए और देश की आर्थिक मजबूती के लिए बहुत महत्वपूर्ण कार्य किया है। इसके लिए मैं उनका आभार व्यक्त करता हूं ।

महोदय, यह बिल बहुत छोटा है लेकिन बहुत महत्वपूर्ण है। इसके माध्यम से, जो बाधा उत्पन्न हुई थी और जो गाइडलाइन सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने दी थी, उस गाईडलाईन को पूरा करने के लिए बिल लाने की आवश्यकता पड़ी है । इस बिल से देश का, समाज का बहुत बड़ा वर्ग जो बेरोजगार है और गरीबी की हालत में है, उसे मदद मिल पाएगी। खास तौर से देश के समुद्री इलाके में जो बसा हुआ भू-भाग, जो आंध्रा प्रदेश, केरल और तमिलनाडु में पड़ता है, लगभग १२ लाख हेक्टेयर का कोस्टल इलाका है । इसके माध्यम से वे मछली पालन करके अपनी जीविका का उपार्जन कर रहे हैं। पिछले वित्तीय वर्ष में जो आकलन किया गया है, उसके अनुसार ६,००० करोड़ रुपए का एक्सपोर्ट किया गया है। यही चिंता का विषय है कि हमारे देश में उत्पादन हो रहा है लेकिन वियतनाम जैसा छोटा-सा देश भी हमारे कम्पीटिशन में आ रहा है। चीन भी इसी काम में लगा हुआ है। मैं समझता हूं कि इस संबंध में और कार्यक्षमता बढ़ाने की आवश्यकता है और उन लोगों की मदद करने की जरूरत है, इसके बगैर हम कम्पीट नहीं कर पाएंगे।

महोदय, हमारे देश को किसानों का देश कहा जाता है, ऐसे इलाकों में, जहां हम एकमात्र फसल का उत्पादन कर पाते हैं, हमारे पास कोई व्यवस्था नहीं है कि हम दूसरी फसल का उत्पादन कर सकें । इस संबध में जरूरत इस बात की है कि जो बहुत बड़ा सागर का भू-भाग है, इसकी चर्चा भी की गई है कि यह १२ लाख हेक्टेयर का इलाका है, इससे जुड़े हुए जो लोग हैं, वे बहुत गरीब तबके के हैं । उन्हें प्रोत्साहित करने के लिए, उनकी बेरोजगारी और गरीबी दूर करने के लिए आवश्यक है कि हम उनकी अधिक से अधिक मदद करें, उनके उत्पादन को बढ़ाएं, उनको प्रोत्साहित करें ताकि हमारे देश की अर्थव्यवस्था, जो किसानों पर निर्भर करती है, उसमें मजबूती आ सके।

पिछले दिनों भी चर्चा हुई थी कि हमारी एग्रीकल्चर प्रोडक्शन बहुत हो रही है । यह हमारे देश के लिए शुभ संकेत नहीं है। अगर खेत-खलिहानों और किसानों की तरफ ध्यान देने का काम नहीं होगा तो आने वाले दिनों में हमें और भी संकट का सामना करना पड़ेगा । मैं समझता हूं कि एक मात्र उपाय यही है और यदि हमें देश की अर्थव्यवस्था मजबूत करनी है तो किसानों की तरफ देखना होगा, चाहे वह किसान खेत के माध्यम से उत्पादन कर रहा है या जल के माध्यम से उत्पादन कर रहा है। हम ऐसे किसानों की मदद करने का काम नहीं करेंगे तो निश्चित तौर पर, जिस तरह से हमारी बेरोजगारी और आबादी दिनों-दिन बढ़ती जा रही है और रोजगार के अवसर घट रहे हैं, इसके लिए हम लोगों को नए तरीके अपनाने पड़ेंगे। हम बेरोजगारों को रोज़गार दे सकें, अपनी अर्थ-व्यवस्था निश्चित तौर पर मजबूत कर सकें, इसके लिये हमें ऐसे उपाय करने चाहिये। माननीय मंत्री जी हमें इस बिल के माध्यम से एन्श्योर करने जा रहे हैं कि इससे पौल्यूशन दूर करेंगे। लेकिन इस गांरटी को पूरा करने के लिये सरकार को उपाय करने होंगे। कोस्टल ऐरिया में रहने वाले जो लोग हैं, उनके उत्थान के लिये, उसे विकसित करने के लिये, उन लोगों को लाभ पहुचाने के लिये और किसानो को उपाय सुझाने का काम करेंगे।…( व्यवधान)

MR. CHAIRMAN : Please conclude. Your State is not a coastal State.

श्री राम कृपाल यादव : सभापति जी, मैं बिहार से आता हूं वहां नदियों बहती हैं। हर साल…( व्यवधान)

MR. CHAIRMAN: You mean to say that riverside also is a coastal area.

श्री राम कृपाल यादव : वहां भी झींगा मच्छली का पालन किया जाता है। आधे से ज्यादा बिहार में पानी ही पानी रहता है। इसलिये मछली पालन का बहुत बड़ा स्कोप है। गंगा तो हम लोगों से दूर जा रही है लेकिन कोसी, कमला बालान और बागमती नदियों का पानी हम लोगों पर कुप्रभाव डालता है। माननीय कृषि मंत्री जी किसानों के दर्द को समझते हैं। मेरा निवेदन है कि केवल सागरीय इलाकों की तरफ ही ध्यान न देकर हमारे क्षेत्र की तरफ भी किसानों के हितों के लिये कार्य. किया जाये। इससे हमारे देश की अर्थ-व्यवस्था को मज़बूती प्रदान होगी।

सभापति महोदय, हमारी यू.पी.ए. सरकार इस बिल के माध्यम से संकल्प लाई है जो पिछली सरकार नहीं ला सकी थी। वह खेत-खलिहानों की बात नहीं करती थी। उसे इस बिल से कोई मतलब नहीं था। अगर उनकी सकारात्मक भूमिका होती तो इस तरह विरोधी दल सदन का बहिष्कार नहीं करते। वे बहस में भाग लेकर सरकार के इरादों को मजबूती प्रदान करते। सुप्रीम कोर्ट की गाइडलाइन्स के अनुसार यह सरकार बिल लाई है। इस बिल के माध्यम से सागरीय इलाके में रहने वाले बरोज़गार नौजवानों के लिये सरकार ने रोजगार का स्कोप बढ़ाने का काम किया है। अंतरराष्ट्रीय स्तर पर ग्लोबलाइजेशन का समय आ गया है और विदेशी लोग हमारे कम्पीटीशन में आ गये हैं, इसलिये सरकार को उनका मुकाबला करने के लिये ठोस उपाय निकालने होंगे। जैसा मैंने पहले कहा कि हम ६००० करोड़ रुपये की विदेशी मुद्रा कमा रहे हैं, उसे और बढ़ाना होगा। इससे किसानों का उत्साहवर्द्धन होगा।

सभापति जी, मैं इस बिल का समर्थन करते हुये माननीय मंत्री जी का धन्यवाद अदा करता हूं कि बेरोजगार नौजवानों को रोजगार देने के लिये वह यह बिल सदन में लाये हैं।

श्री इलियास आज़मी (शाहाबाद) : सभापति महोदय, यह बात सही है कि मेरा चुनाव क्षेत्र कोस्टल एरिया से बहुत ज्यादा दूर है लेकिन मछली से भी पर्यावरण पर बुरा असर पड़ता है, यह मैं ज़िन्दगी में पहली बार सुन रहा हूं और वह भी सुप्रीम कोर्ट के माध्यम से सुन रहा हूँ। मैं शरद पवार जी को मुबारकबाद देता हूं कि इस ज़माने में जब कुछ हमारी गलतियों से और ब्यूरोक्रेसी की बहुत ज्यादा गलतियों से ज्यूडीशियरी हर उस मामले में दखल दे रही है जिसमें अभी दस-बीस साल पहले सोचा भी नहीं जा सकता था कि ज्यूडीशियरी इसमें भी दखल दे सकती है। उन्होंने इस ज़माने में हिम्मत की कि एक ऐसा कानून लाए जिससे जो बेजा मुदाखलत हो रही है, जो तरक्की के रास्ते में बाधा बन रही है, उसको दूर किया जा सके।

पूरी दुनिया में गेहूं के बाद इंसान की खुराक में मछली का नंबर आता है। इसलिए ज्यादा से ज्यादा मछली की पैदावार हमारी राष्ट्रीय ज़रूरत है। मछली कोस्टल एरिया में बहुत बड़े पैमाने पर हो सकती है, लेकिन जैसे मेरा क्षेत्र कोस्ट से बहुत दूर है, अगर वहां भी भारत सरकार और कृषि मंत्री जी तवज्जह दें तो वहां भी बड़ी-बड़ी झीलें हैं जिन पर कुछ पैसा खर्च करके बड़े पैमाने पर समुद्री मछली से ज्यादा अच्छी मछली पैदा की जा सकती है। अब कल कोई कह दे कि गेहूं की खेती से भी पर्यावरण पर बुरा असर पड़ता है तो क्या हमारी सुप्रीम कोर्ट गेहूं की खेती को भी इंडस्ट्री करार देगी? यह एक सोचने का विषय है, इस पर मुझे कोई लंबी-चौड़ी तकरीर नहीं करनी है। मैं कृषि मंत्री जी से सिर्फ इतना कहूंगा कि आप थोड़ा उन इलाकों पर भी तवज्जह दें जो समुद्र से दूर हैं, लेकिन जहां बहुत अच्छी किस्म की मछलियां बड़ी तादाद में पैदा हो सकती हैं। आज भी उत्तर प्रदेश में अच्छी किस्म की मछली बड़ी तादाद में खुद-ब-खुद पैदा होती है और अगर हम कोशिश करें तो उसकी क्वालिटी और क्वांटिटी को हम बढ़ा सकते हैं।

ज्यादा न कहकर मैं शरद पवार जी को एक बार फिर मुबारकबाद देता हूं कि वे यह बिल लाए। मैं चाहूंगा कि ऐसे हर फैसले को जो देश की तरक्की और देश के उत्पादन में बाधा बन रहे हों, उन सारे मामलों में कानूनसाज़ी करके बेजा गलत हस्तक्षेप को आगे भी रोकने का प्रयास यह सरकार करेगी। इन्हीं शब्दों के साथ मैं अपनी बात समाप्त करता हूँ।

 

MR. CHAIRMAN : Now, there is a provision in the Bill that representation is given to coastal States only by rotation. In the Coastal Aquaculture Authority which is to be formed, as per the provisions of this Bill, only coastal States are representatives to the Authority by rotation. Now, interior States are not given representation because they do not come within the purview of this Bill. Am I correct?

THE MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE AND MINISTER OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION (SHRI SHARAD PAWAR): Yes, Sir. The Bill is restricted to coastal area.

 

SHRI C.K. CHANDRAPPAN (TRICHUR): Mr. Chairman, Sir, I rise to support this Bill, and I congratulate the UPA Government and more specially the hon. Minister, Shri Sharad Pawar for bringing forward this Bill because it has been lying in hibernation for the last eight years.

It is something like Ahalya Moksha as described in our Puranas. Yes, the reasons are obvious. So, I congratulate you because you have now brought this Bill which will create conditions for our pisciculture to develop faster. Though our export earning from fishery comes to more than Rs.6,000 crore, I may say, we are still at an infant state as an industry, as a farming area to develop. It is because in the coastal area, according to the statistics and many people have said also that 12-14 lakh hectares of land could be developed. We have developed roughly 14 per cent of that. So, with this, if we can provide employment to nearly four lakh people and earn an income of more than Rs.6,000 crore, once this Bill is made as an Act, it will give an impetus for further development, more employment and more wealth in the country. So, that is the reason that we support it.

Also, one should know that basically this is a small farmers’ business because 91 per cent of the farmers engaged in this aquaculture have only less than two hectares of land and only six per cent of the farmers are middle-class with a land holding between two and five hectares. The big sharks are only three per cent. So, it is basically a small man’s occupation. It provides employment; it generates wealth; and it should create conditions so that our environment in the coastal area also is protected.

So, while supporting this, I must say that there are two aspects which should have been included in the Bill. If you could bring amendment later, it would be all right. Clause 11 deals with the duties of the Coastal Aquaculture Authority. The Authority may make any inspection, survey, etc. I would like to add to it, research and development on sustainable basis and environment friendly   aquaculture. Only then, probably we can see that this becomes a sustainable occupation which will be environment friendly. For that, this new Authority should be entrusted with the task of taking up research and development and training.

There is one more aspect that I would like to add there, that is, to ensure supply of quality seeds and quality feeds which are very important. According to the statistics, it is said that at present more than 50 per cent of the seeds available for the cultivation shrimps is substandard. Similarly, the feeds available are also substandard and toxic. So, if this Authority is entrusted with these two jobs, then probably you are asking this Authority to do a complete job. It will not only do inspection, give certificates and all that but also ensure that the industry is sustained.

The industry remains environment friendly if good feeds and seeds are provided. So, I would like these two things to be taken into account. Another doubt that I have, which has been also expressed by other speakers, is with regard to clauses 15 and 22, wherein the provisions were: "The court cannot intervene with the decisions taken by the Authority". I can understand that. But how is it going to affect it when bureaucratic decisions are taken or decisions are taken with vested interest? If it cannot be challenged in a court of law, probably people will be put in a great difficulty.

So, I would request the Minister to look into that matter whether clauses 15 and 22 need some kind of improvement so that we assure a protection to the aggrieved. These are some of the issues I would like to highlight. On the whole, I support this Bill because at the beginning I cited the reasons. I wish that this Bill would be implemented soon.

With these words, I conclude.

   

SHRI M.M. PALLAM RAJU (KAKINADA): Sir, I thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak on the Coastal Aquaculture Authority Bill, 2005. I think that it is a very important Bill. It has wide reaching consequences for the protection of our ecology, for the protection of a large number of small and marginal farmers, for the welfare of a large unorganised workforce that is associated with the industry, and lastly but most important, on the aspect of economic health of the nation through the substantial contribution of our seafood exports.

I come from the coastal constituency of Kakinada where Aquaculture is extensively practised, and from the Godavari district where shrimp farming and pisci-culture have contributed towards the economic transformation of the region. I am happy to contribute my thoughts during the debate on this important Bill. I have been a ringside observer to the growth of the industry, its successes and the trials that this industry has gone through.

Sir, to go into a bit of history, the activity of shrimp farming kicked off in a big way in the early nineties after its commercial farming successes in Thailand, Indonesia and Vietnam. Small farmers with small tracts of agricultural land, which were in close proximity to the sea, got into the activity as it was important for an appropriate mix of fresh water and sea water for the sustenance of the shrimp seed which would grow into shrimp, and which could be exploited commercially. There were great success stories of unimaginable profits and the shrimp farmers saw a lot of quick wealth all across the States that were quick to exploit this new field.

This new wealth generation opportunity encouraged a lot of small farmers to jump into the fray, in the process leading to large areas of good agricultural land being converted into aquaculture ponds, misuse of agricultural infrastructure like letting out this pond drainage into the agricultural drains thereby polluting agricultural drains and other unhealthy practices that had a detrimental effect on the healthy agricultural environment, and the fragile marine ecology of coastal areas across the country. Large companies also jumped into the activity for the reason of profits.

Subsequent to this came the opportunity to set up shrimp hatcheries for producing the shrimp seed. Here again, the large returns prompted a large number of entrepreneurs to enter the field without sensitivity to the coastal or ecological concerns. In spite of the presence of the CRZ regulations, and ecological concerns, the returns of the industry blinded several entrepreneurs to violate CRZ norms, and other norms.

The other opportunity that also came up simultaneously was the feed that was needed for nurturing the shrimp to ensure healthy growth and size which fetched a premium from export markets worldwide, primarily the USA, Japan and Europe. However, all the seasons of the crop did not ensure great yields. There were several failures due to entrepreneurs not following healthy farming practices; and they wanted larger yields through higher stacking of the ponds thereby leading to diseases and pollution of the entire stock. Freezing plants were another opportunity for that the trade threw up for ensuring proper packaging and storing of shrimp for the export markets.

All the above activities led to a lot of direct employment and indirect employment, both in the educated workforce and in the unorganised labour. A lot of fishermen living in proximity to ponds, hatcheries and freezing plants got gainfully employed, leading to alternative means of livelihood other than fishing activity in the sea. However, the industry has had its own share of problems and we saw the Supreme Court order which had a detrimental effect on the growth of the industry. In such cases, we tend to ignore greater polluting industries like the ship-breaking industry, which have far more devastating consequences on the ecology of our coastline. Against this, we should see this trade in proper view and give it its due support.

 

Somewhere down the line, the industry has also suffered, taking a big blow from the decrease in exports mainly because of the reason of farmers, packagers and exporters not taking adequate measures for ensuring international norms and standards for export quality. The current crisis that the industry faces today is the usage of anti-biotics which the US market is resisting. So, it is these things that should also be kept in mind when we try to encourage the industry.

Currently, the average production in India is about 100,000 metric tonnes of shrimp per annum, contributing to about Rs. 3,000-6,000 crore exports annually, the second foreign exchange earner after IT exports. This is where the trade potential and opportunity lies that the nation cannot afford to lose. The huge employment that the industry is generated is another strong justification why this industry should be supported and encouraged.

Currently, there are about 12 lakh to 15 lakh unskilled labourers in this sector, primarily in the rural areas. While we attempt to pass this Bill and implement it, we have to keep in mind that this opportune area needs to be encouraged for the economic benefits that it presents to the nation. Only a fraction of the land available for agriculture is currently being exploited and a lot could be done for increasing the usage of land. Currently, about 150,000 hectares of land is being utilised as against available land of 12 lakh hectares. Again, most of this land is not suitable for other agricultural purposes. So, we are putting land that is not suitable for other purposes to productive utility and this should be encouraged. Against this backdrop, I think, the Bill provides a great opportunity and I would like to offer the following suggestions.

It should be kept in mind that the livelihood of a lot of small and marginal farmers is at stake; that there is a large number of direct employment and indirect employment that the activity has generated; that it is absolutely necessary to protect the fragile marine ecology along the coast, which is so important for the livelihood of the fishing community which lives along the coast of India; that prudent judgement should be made regarding conversion of existing agricultural land for aquaculture; that punishment should be severe for violating ecological and environmental norms; that we should encourage the conditions for strengthening the infrastructure necessary for maintaining an efficient and effective cold chain for maintaining the quality of exports; and that suitable credit should be made available to make this industry grow and sustain in a healthy manner which would lead to its healthy growth.

I feel that credible entrepreneurs from the industry should also be appointed to the Authority to give an empathetic angle to the industry.

Again, we have a good body, called the MPEDA, which should be strengthened for effective and efficient dissemination of advice and information. That will lead to quality of the exports. The effective monitoring of the quality of the seed and the feed by the Authority at the usage level would go a long way in ensuring the quality of the end product. I think, that is very important. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN : Please conclude.

SHRI M.M. PALLAM RAJU : Sir, I am concluding.

The Authority should be an enabler of healthy aquaculture practices for the proper usage of land and towards contributing to the strengthening of the economy. It is important to enable and to regulate this activity in a positive manner and in a constructive manner. So, this Bill is an important first step in this right direction.

So, with these few words, I support this Bill.

 

PROF. M. RAMADASS (PONDICHERRY): Sir, I rise to support this Bill on behalf of our Party, PMK. The objects of this Bill are excellently framed and the provisions contained in this Bill go to help the development of one of the vital sectors of the economy, namely, the fishing sector, which is next only to agriculture in terms of employment, livelihood, exports and a number of other forward and backward linkages. Therefore, this Bill now seeks to provide a protection to this industry by creating a Regulatory Authority.

One of the most important reasons as to why we support this Bill is that the Government has been extremely responsive in accepting the recommendations of the Supreme Court and has brought this Bill in consonance with the judgement of the Supreme Court dated 11th December, 1996. Therefore, we are able to satisfy the considerations of the Supreme Court with regard to environment.

Secondly, this Bill strikes a nice compromise or a balance between economic considerations and ecological considerations. As the House is aware and as the Hon. Chairman is aware, the shrimp industry in India has been making very rapid strides. As other Hon. Members have pointed out, the contributions made by this industry have been immense. But, unfortunately, as in every other sphere of the Indian economy, the development in this country has always had its own disaster. The more you develop the economy either in agriculture or in fisheries or any industry, you get the offshoot of it in terms of environmental hazard and this industry was no exception to this trend. A large number of chemicals, which are used in this industry, have polluted the environment and the environmentalists have taken up this issue to a level beyond proportion. Therefore, the question before the Government was to encourage this activity or to end this activity. Now, both options would have been disastrous. Therefore, the Government took what is called a `gold-mean’ approach that we are not ending this, but we are mending this profession. So, this Bill tries to provide a balanced economic development, as portrayed by the shrimp, aquaculture development and also the environmental consideration and that is the greatest utility of this Bill.

The third important feature of this Bill is that it provides autonomous power, autonomous character to the Regulatory Authority, which implies that no government, no environmental organisation or no other group can intervene in the activities of this Authority. The composition of Authority is such that it includes all the experts who are concerned in the development of the shrimp culture. Therefore, we can get the best advice and try to promote this industry from a sustainable point of view, from the point of view of the long-run ecological and economic development.

So, the autonomous character of this Bill is so fascinating that it has to be approved. Now, there are many more merits of this Bill which I do not want to elaborate, but at the same time, I would like to put forth some of the views which can be considered by the hon. Minister of Agriculture, who has been kind enough to bring this Bill and to give focus to it.

Now, I come to one of the important issues with regard to composition of the authority. It is true that all the concerned people are there, but two groups, which have a say in this matter, in the matter of development of shrimp culture as far as the coastal areas are concerned, have been left out of the authority. For example, a large number of small farmers are involved in this profession and a large number of fishermen, who are living in the coastal areas, are going to be affected by this development. Who is represented in this authority? You have got experts. You have got representatives of the States and Union Territories. You have got people from the Ministry of Agriculture and the Ministry of Environment. You have got everybody, but who will be able to place before the Committee the problems faced by the small and marginal farmers in the aquaculture industry and who will represent the views of the fishermen? Therefore, I would urge upon the Government to provide some representation to the farmers in aquaculture as well as somebody from the fishing industry.

 

The second important thing is that the thousand-metre regulation, condition has to be looked in or has to be re-visited after the tsunami which has brought devastating effect on the soil conditions in the coastal areas. Sir, you know that the Union Territory of Pondicherry, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Andaman & Nicobar Islands and Andhra Pradesh are coastal in character and have got a lot of shrimp activities, aquacultural activities. Those activities have been affected by the tsunami waves. Consequently, the salinity, the soil fertility in these areas has been affected. So, it has to be looked into by the Government whether this thousand-metre regulation would still be relevant and valid.

The third important thing is that there is an omnibus provision in the Bill which says that no suit, prosecution or other legal proceedings shall lie against the Central Government or the authority or the Chairperson and other members of the authority and so on and so forth. Given the past experiences, I am afraid that this provision would give unwieldy powers to this authority to act according to its own whims and fancies. We do not have dearth of examples in this country where Commissions and Committees have acted in contravention of public interest. I would only feel that some kind of an amendment should be brought to this clause and we should not vest with the authority enormous powers. This is my suggestion.

Since 90 per cent of the farmers are small and marginal farmers here, why do you not think of forming co-operatives for them? Just as we have farmers" service co-operatives, why are small co-operative groups could not be formed so that you can provide all assistance in cash and kind through these co-operatives and relieve the farmers from the financial distress or financial burden which they may have? Once you remove this, they would be able to contribute a greater deal.

 

Then, there is the question of management of aquaculture. It requires specialised skills, it requires acumen on the part of the people so that the environmental hazards do not occur. The use of chemicals and the application of various other devices may create or may require specific talents and specific management techniques. The Fisheries Departments of the Union Territory and of States today are not capable of providing this support to the farmers. Even the NGOs are not so much specialised in this area to provide this input to the farmers. If this safeguard is not provided, perhaps the aquaculture industry will face a long-term problem. That is why, I would feel that the Central Government, through the State Government, should help or encourage formation of self-help groups among the small farmers.

In Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu, the Government is encouraging the formation of aqua clubs which are catching the attention of the people as it renders a lot of assistance to the people. Why do we not have this as a universal phenomenon and the Government comes forward with the scheme of providing aqua clubs to the people?

Lastly, the Government, at any rate, should be very careful to see that the multinationals do not enter in any form or guise, either in terms of technical support or in terms of financial guidance, into Indian coastal areas and exploit the marine products or wealth of this country.

Let us not experiment with the British method of exploiting India as it would result in resource drain from this country in the years to come. Therefore, the Government should take all these factors into account to provide a sustainable basis for the development of aquaculture in this country. Therefore, I wholeheartedly support this Bill.

 

DR. BABU RAO MEDIYAM (BHADRACHALAM): Sir, thank you very much. I rise to support the Coastal Aquaculture Authority Bill 2005.

As we all know, the aquaculture industry is growing, and it is providing employment not only to the farmers, but also to the local fishermen, scientists, biochemists, etc. In our State, Andhra Pradesh, it has spread over seven districts. The aquaculture farming gives us a lot of foreign exchange. But as there was no such Act, the aquaculture farmers were incurring losses. They were also getting cheated by a lot of moneylenders.

I want to cite an example. In July last, about 30 aquaculture farmers came from Nellore District -- where the aquaculture farming is abundant -- to Delhi. They came to Delhi to meet the hon. Minister of Commerce because a virus infection, in the year 2002, had caused huge loss to the farmers. The Marine Products Export Development Authority (MPEDA), which is located in Kerala, had sanctioned them some beneficiary amount. Almost all the DDs and cheques were prepared, but the previous Government stopped it on the plea that the elections were going to take place. Even 10 months’ after the election, the cheques are not issued to the farmers. They came to meet the hon. Minister of Commerce, and gave him a representation on this issue. They also gave representations, through me and other hon. Members from Andhra Pradesh, to the Ministry of Commerce, but still they did not get it. Therefore, these events would not occur with the enactment of such a Bill by us.

Aquaculture farming also results in ecological imbalances. The most prominent hazards are salinity of ground water, barrenness of the land, scarcity of drinking water in the areas where it is being done, etc. Therefore, I demand a provision to be included in the Bill to protect the ecology from these hazards.

On the other hand, some provisions should be made in the Bill to provide support to the aquaculture farmers, who are facing a lot of trouble. The support must be in the following areas. Firstly, we must provide them with some bank credit because they are small and marginal farmers. They must be provided with bank credit to purchase land, pesticides, feed, antibiotics, etc. Secondly, they must be covered under some insurance scheme like LIC, etc. Otherwise, the farmers are at a loss if there is a virus attack or some such thing. Therefore, some provision must be made to cover the aquaculture farmers under some sort of an insurance scheme. Thirdly, technical support should be provided to them from the scientific angle. Fourthly, they must be provided with a good amount of feed, pesticides and antibiotics at cheaper rates.

They must be provided with cold storage facilities to preserve their produce because they are producing very high quality of prawns. Each prawn almost weighs about a kilogram. They are producing such good quality prawns, and they must be provided with some facilities to preserve their produce and also help them by providing better marketing facilities. Since 90 per cent of the produce is exported or marketed outside, they must be provided with good marketing facilities.

SHRI J.M. AARON RASHID (PERIYAKULAM): I rise to support this Bill. Our UPA Chairperson and our Leader, Madam Sonia Gandhi, visited all the coastal areas affected by Tsunami. I am thankful to the Chairperson, the Government, and our hon. Prime Minister who has given more than Rs. 5,000 crore as compensation to the affected fishermen.

MR. CHAIRMAN : Are you not speaking in Tamil? You have given notice to speak in Tamil. No doubt, you can speak in English.

SHRI J.M. AARON RASHID : I will speak in Tamil.

MR. CHAIRMAN: You can continue your speech in English. It was written here that you will be speaking in Tamil. You can continue your speech in English. There is no harm in it.

SHRI J.M. AARON RASHID : The wastelands which are 500 metres away from the seaside should be given to fishermen families who are below the poverty line. The wasteland should also be given to the self-help groups, local societies, and to those who are living in that area for more than two decades so that the unemployment problem in the coastal areas will be solved, and it will also fetch good foreign exchange revenue. Secondly, bank loans should be given to fishermen in the coastal areas on easy installment basis. Thirdly, environmental impact study should be conducted. Research and periodic inspection of the coastal areas should also be conducted.

The farmers who are cultivating shrimps are using improved technology for increased production, but they should not use 20 banned antibiotics, as directed by the hon. Supreme Court. To monitor this, the State and Central Governments should set up a monitoring committee in the coastal areas where aquaculture farms are located. The Government wastelands, like salt-pans, mangroves, forest lands earmarked by the Government for the villagers’ common use, should be given to the fishermen families, who are below the poverty line, to do aquaculture. In this way, the problem of unemployment and poverty could be solved to some extent.

Big business houses are occupying the lands of the poor fishermen by giving small loans and advances to them. They are taking away their lands and constructing big ponds, each occupying 2.5 acres, which is causing problems to the local people. These ponds are located just 50 metres away from the source of their livelihood and their houses. Moreover, the water in the 15’ x 20’ well, that was dug up to draw water for their daily use, has become polluted. Therefore, the CRZ notification that prescribes the minimum limit of 1,000 metres should not only be implemented but should also be monitored. The ponds should not come up near the highways or housing areas because the chemicals used in these ponds produce bad smell. The Government has to ensure that groundwater is not polluted in the villages where these fishermen live, otherwise it may cause problems from the point of their livelihood and also the availability of drinking water to them.

The Government should identify prospective lands for the farmers for prawn and aquaculture, and hatcheries. Small fishermen catch fish in Pullicat and Buckingham lakes. The Government should see that wastewater from the ponds is not let out just like that. Wastewater from the farm lands goes via these bunds into the sea. Because of this, trees in those areas become dry. In those areas, coconut trees, palm trees, mango trees are dying due to excess of water logging. People who have lost their land and trees should be given compensation by the Government. Used water should be treated properly and sent back to the sea through pipelines.

 

Garbage generated by the hatcheries is highly hazardous and that should also be properly disposed of. I would, once again, request the Government to look into all the pros and cons of this issue. This sector earns a lot of foreign exchange for the Government. Currently it is earning about Rs.7,000 crore, and it may reach up to Rs.1 lakh crore. So, the Government should lay more emphasis on this industry. The Government should give importance to the small farmers and below the poverty line families living on the coastline of this country.

DR. SUJAN CHAKRABORTY (JADAVPUR): Sir, this is a very important discussion. Though we have had to wait for a long time for so many years, a discussion at the introduction stage of the Bill is quite due. While I generally support the Bill, there are some specific issues which should be looked into very categorically.

The Coastal Aquaculture Authority Bill obviously will interfere in the entire coastal management processes and procedures that we are having. Aquaculture is definitely an agri-industry in the country, the potential of which is enormous. There is no doubt about it. That is more particularly so in our country because we are having a very huge coastline and vast coastal areas. Bio-diversity in the coastal areas is also huge. So, the issue of specific documentation of flora and fauna and how those can be sustained along side should be properly planned. Hence, the Authority must take a holistic, comprehensive view of the entire issue.

There is no doubt that basically it will help in developing effectively in the field of economy. Simultaneously, the question of maintenance of environment is a very serious issue and a serious concern. All of us know that marine biology these days is a very specific and specialised subject. Many countries in the world are now concentrating on research and development in marine biology. Therefore, I propose that in the entire approach, functioning and everything of Aquaculture Authority, the question of scientific research and development is a continuous process and it should be maintained side by side.

Since this is a very lucrative industry, exports are very important. Some of my friends were referring to MPEDA. I believe MPEDA should also be augmented in proper fashion.

16.00 hrs. Since it is a lucrative industrial business, from that sense, the question of aggression from MNCs may come. We should see as to how to checkmate that aggression. This is obviously very important. For over-profiting, what happens is that most of the times, other areas and normal land also get engulfed by these big companies. Hence, the question of salinity and desalination will be a very serious concern and the same should definitely be looked into specifically.

From the viewpoint of over-exploitation of the marine products, I would like to categorically say that chemical degradation is a continuous phenomena, on which we should keep an eye from the very beginning.

Multinationals generally use big trawlers. We should properly regulate them in a coordinated manner. As they see aquaculture from the angle of profit, even the fish seedlings are getting destroyed. As a result, our country may lose tremendously in future. Hence, I would suggest some three or four points.

The question of involving farmers along the coastline is to be seen or looked into in a priority manner. In this area, we have to arrange cooperatives of fishermen and self-help groups, provide them bank credit and get them remunerative prices. By this way, an important content of our unemployment problem can be tackled if we undertake it in a categorical and planned manner.

Providing complete communication in the coastal and remote areas would help them scientifically at the time of disasters. Now a days, we are talking of effective disaster management and the same should be provided.

My specific suggestion is in regard to the question of seed and feed. I would like to know as to how to arrange and manage seed and feed gainfully. This aspect should be looked into categorically.

In the Bill, representation of the farmers is not there. Representation of the farmers is a must. Otherwise, their interests cannot be safeguarded. Like the importance of research and development, scientific management and environmental maintenance, similarly, involvement of fishermen is important. Fishermen should also be involved in the Central policy-making.

I do not see any reason as to why a retired High Court Judge is a must for the Chairmanship. Why is it so? A person with a scientific bent of mind or an all-knowing person probably can take up the task, regulate and look into aquaculture from a scientific point of view and from the views of coastal aquaculture, science and environment. Taking the above into consideration, the Authority should be composed. With these words, I thank you, Sir, and conclude my speech.

     

SHRIMATI D. PURANDESWARI (BAPATLA): Sir, I rise to participate in the discussion on the Coastal Aquaculture Authority Bill, 2005. The Supreme Court in its judgement in the year 1996 had identified and recognised aquaculture to be an industry and directed that no aquaculture activity should be grounded in the coastal area. The Court further directed that an Aquaculture Authority needs to be established through a proper legislative intervention which would look into the regularisation of the setting up of aquaculture in the coastal area. The Supreme Court, just by the stroke of a pen, as it were, had decided to ban all aquaculture farms, whether intensive, semi-intensive, extensive or semi-extensive, in the coastal regulatory zone. It permitted the traditional and the improved traditional aquaculture. Because of this judgement by the Supreme Court, a lot of people were thrown out of employment, almost around three lakh people were to be thrown out of employment who were totally and solely dependent on the aquaculture activity. The land use for these aquaculture activities was the saline coastal belt which could not be utilized for any other activity. In order to safeguard the interests of these workers and to promote the growth of the aquaculture industry, it was very important that this aquaculture industry should be protected in consistence with the safeguarding of the environment.

Indian marine product sector has been assured a place of pride in the global economy and the country has now become the second largest fish producer in the world. The fishing resource in India is indeed a very high bonanza for setting up a giant aqua industry in our country. By virtue of its strategic location in the Indian Ocean, our country comes under the influence of two monsoons which bring in sufficient water to replenish brackish and salt water bodies which are used for aqua farming. Also, we have a lot of coastal marshy areas, coastal lagoons, and shallow inland water which can be used for the aqua farming also. If the Government takes appropriate steps to augment the aquaculture, this can earn a very high foreign exchange. This can also create a lot of employment for lots of people living in the coastal belt. Therefore, I would welcome this Bill. However, according to me, there are certain grey areas which I would like the Government to give a little thought to.

Under clause 4, the proposed Bill provides for the composition of a Coastal Aqua Authority and the appointment of a Chairperson and the members. Here, there has been no representation from the fishing community at all to safeguard their interest. A majority of them are small farmers. Their interest needs to be safeguarded. Therefore, there should be necessarily a representative from the fishing community, just as my colleague Prof. Ramadass had pointed out.

Secondly, the Chairperson of the proposed Authority is either to be a sitting or a serving Judge. Basically, the rationale behind this is not very clear. However, since problems of aquaculture are of national importance and they have international ramifications, the Chairperson of the Authority should either be a retired or serving Judge of either the High court or the Supreme Court and preferably the Supreme Court.

In clause 11, sub-clause 2, when the Authority orders for the removal or demolition of an aquaculture farm, compensation has to be paid and it has to be decided by a person to be appointed by the Authority who is endowed with the power of a District Magistrate. Instead of getting somebody from outside into the Authority and then endowing him with magisterial power, it would be more apt if the District Magistrate of that area or any other District Magistrate himself is bestowed with these powers so that this would ensure credibility to the arbitrator also.

Next point is about authorisation under clause 12. It talks about authorising any person to inspect any coastal aquaculture land, pond, pen or enclosure. But care should be taken so that this provision does not ensure ushering in of the Inspector raj again because this will give rise to a lot of corruption and bribery. This will act as an impediment to the growth of aquaculture.

 

Now, clause 13 sub-clause 8(a) says that no coastal aquaculture shall be carried on within two hundred metres from High Tide Lines. Sir, according to Coastal Regulation Zone, no activity should take place within the 500-metre band along the coastal area. So, this needs to be looked into. I think it is very essential that we should again look into this 200 metre norm, especially that we were hit by the Tsunami on 26th December, 2004, and consider the 500-metre norm. I think that it is very essential.

The Supreme Court Judgment dated 11-12-1996 directed that no shrimpculture or shrimp-farm should be constructed at a distance of about 1000 metres of Chilika or Pulicat lake to safeguard the environment. For this, I find no mention in the Bill at all. So, I think that basically all the aqua-farms should be located at a distance from all such sanctuaries to protect them.

There have also been attempts to close down the research organisations spread all over the coastal areas so as to bring them under one body. I think that it is very essential to retain them as and where they are. It is because they would be then easily accessible to the people living along the coastal areas, especially taking into consideration the requirements like good feed, good seed and all these things.

Both promotional and regularity activities have been entrusted to the Coastal Aquaculture Authority. These two activities need totally different mindsets. When you look at promotional activity, you need to have a positive outlook. Whereas in case of regulatory activities, there is more of a negative outlook. So, it is very essential that both these activities are under different bodies. I should be very ideal if the regulatory activities continue under the present authority and have a promotional authority to look into promotional activities. This should be very ideal. This would definitely facilitate the growth of our aquaculture.

With these few words, I support the Bill introduced today.

     

SHRI S.K. KHARVENTHAN (PALANI): Sir, I rise to support this Bill.

Sir, with respect to aquaculture and sericulture, the hon. Supreme Court has given clear directions as to what steps are to be taken to safeguard the interests of the public, how public demands have to be formed and aquaculture to be developed.

Actually, Sir, in Tamil Nadu, from Madras to Cape Comerin nearing to 500 kms. of coastal area, Nagapattinam, Karaikal, Thanangambady, Poraiyar, Thanjavur, Pudukottai, Tuticorin, Kanya Kumari, Kancheepuram and Pazhaverkadu – the people were obstructed in so many places for the reason the wastes are coming from these kinds of industries affecting the drinking water, particularly borewell due to chemicals. A number of chemicals were identified by the hon. Supreme Court. It also banned nearly 20 chemicals. Another important thing is that the farmers are afraid of this development of aquaculture and sericulture. In this area, the coconut, banana and all plants are affected. Moreover, they were purchasing the agricultural lands at lesser prices and using them for this purpose. They are afraid that their houses and lands would be affected. There are so many Government lands that can be used for this purpose. Between Nagapattinam and Kancheepuram in Tamil Nadu, so many agitations were there, people were arrested and cases were also filed against them for opposing this thing.

Aquaculture and shrimpculture are other industries that are giving more money to the Government. One such variety is available in Rameshwaram. "It is TIGER PRAWN." They are exporting very large number of varieties throughout the world. It would give a very good income. This Bill will go in solving all such problems as per hon. Supreme Court directions. Hence, I welcome this Bill.

   

SHRI KINJARAPU YERRANNAIDU (SRIKAKULAM): Mr. Speaker, Sir, I rise to support this Bill wholeheartedly on behalf of the Telugu Desam Party.

In our country, we have a long coastline. In Andhra Pradesh also, we have more than 1,000 kms. of long coastline.

This Bill was introduced in the Rajya Sabha seven years ago. It had lapsed. Again a new Bill was introduced. When the UF Government was in power, Shri Chaturanan Misra was the Agriculture Minister. He introduced this Bill. When NDA was in power, Shri Ajit Singh was the Agriculture Minister. He tried to introduce this Bill. Anyway, the present Government has brought forward this Bill. This will safeguard the interests of lakhs of small and marginal fishermen families and also the industry.

According to me, we have to protect the coastal environment, the livelihood of lakhs of people who are living in the coastal area.

16.16 hrs. (Shri Devendra Prasad Yadav in the Chair ) After the Supreme Court judgement, the whole industry has collapsed. Since 1996, the industry and the small and marginal farmers, as also the fishermen had requested the Government of India to constitute an Authority, namely, Coastal Regulatory Authority, as per the direction of the Supreme Court. This Authority will safeguard the industry and the fishermen community in our country.

With this industry, we will get three lakh direct employment; with the ancillary units, we can get employment for about seven lakh people in our country. Every year, we are earning, Rs.6,000 crore as foreign exchange through this industry. If we safeguard this industry, employment potential will also increase. We have to protect the livelihood of the fishermen community, particularly when there is the problem of salinity of water. Even now, fishermen are not getting safe drinking water in the coastal areas. With this industry, now there is a fear among the fishermen community that the ground water quality will further deteriorate and the salinity of water would increase, and then, the fishermen would suffer a lot in the coming days. So, that caution should be taken by this Ministry.

We will be creating this Authority with a sitting Judge or a former Judge. But according to me, the Chairman should be a technocrat. Normally, from the judiciary, they may not have enough knowledge about aquaculture; so, if there is a technocrat as the Chairman, he could take care of this industry, the environmental aspects and the problems faced by the fishermen.

Moreover, in this Bill, there is no provision to have a representative from the fishermen community. There is a provision for experts, for environmental people, and for others. But there is no provision for representing lakhs of fishermen. So, we have to provide for one such person; we have to take one person from the fishermen community, to safeguard their interests.

This Bill is a good Bill. Since the past eight years, we have been discussing about this; finally, the present Agriculture Minister, Shri Sharad Pawar has brought forward this Bill. I am appreciating him on behalf of my Party. He is giving a lot of boost to this industry. I am also appreciating him on behalf of the fishermen community and also on behalf of this industry. Thank you.

… (Interruptions)

SHRIMATI TEJASWINI SEERAMESH (KANAKAPURA): Sir, I want to tell one thing. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN : No. There is no need for that. Shri Vikrambhai Madam.

 

*m16 श्री विक्रमभाई अर्जनभाई माडम (जामनगर) : सभापति महोदय, माननीय कृषि मंत्री जो तटीय जलकृषि प्राधिकरण विधेयक, २००५ लेकर आये हैं, मैं उसका समर्थन करने के लिये खड़ा हुआ हूं।

सभापति महोदय, मैं गुजरात के जामनगर निर्वाचन क्षेत्र से आता हूं जो देश का सब से बड़ा कोस्टल एरिया है। पूरे सौराष्ट्र क्षेत्र में लोगों को कोई सुविधा नहीं है। वहां के मछुआरे बहुत दुखी हैं क्योंकि उन्हें कोई सुविधा नहीं है। मेरा सुझाव है कि उन्हें रहने के लिये जगह मिले और कम ब्याज पर ऋण मिले।

इससे किसान अपने पैरों पर खड़े हो सकते हैं, उन्हें रोज़गार मिलेगा और उन लोगों को अपना जीवन-यापन करने के लिए बड़ी सुविधाएं मिलेंगी। मैं मंत्री जी से गुज़ारिश करूंगा कि उन्हें ज्यादा से ज्यादा सुविधाएं मुहैया कराएं और जैसे मेरे पूर्ववक्ताओं ने बताया कि ऐसे प्रावधान उसमें रखें जिनसे उन्हें ज्यादा से ज्यादा सुविधाएं मिलें।

*m17 कृषि मंत्री तथा उपभोक्ता मामले, खाद्य एवं सार्वजनिक वितरण मंत्री (श्री शरद पवार) : सभापति जी, मुझे खुशी है कि दिखने में छोटे मगर बड़े महत्वपूर्ण बिल पर कई माननीय सदस्यों ने अच्छे सुझाव रखे। In fact, I need not explain the entire background of this Bill because my colleague, the Minister of State has already given the details. It is true, as Shri K.S. Rao has described, the issue was pending for the last eight to ten years. I recollect when the Supreme Court took a decision, some of the authorities, especially in the State of Andhra Pradesh, took immediate action. I was in the Opposition at that time and I recollect there were many delegations from coastal areas, essentially, from Andhra Pradesh. A lot of youngsters had taken huge loans from the banks. They had decided to pursue their career in this particular area. But just because of one particular decision they had practically lost everything.

In those days, most of our colleagues from Andhra Pradesh, irrespective of the political party they belonged to, came together. They tried to convince the Government that some corrective action was needed. In that way, it was not very simple. Media, on the one hand, was taking a different approach. It was supporting the environmentalists. The judgement was also totally in favour of the environmentalists. On the other hand, thousands and thousands of youngsters, who had taken tremendous burden on their heads and had entered into this line as a profession, to develop their own career, practically lost everything. But the process to take corrective action had started.

A Bill was introduced in Rajya Sabha. Unfortunately, the Parliament was dissolved and as a result, it was not possible to take corrective action. Next year, again the Bill was introduced and was referred to the Standing Committee. The Standing Committee had given a number of suggestions. My predecessor, Shri Ajit Singh, gave opportunity to practically every interested person. As a result of this, the Government had got a number of suggestions and it was not possible for the Government to bring an amendment Bill. Ultimately, a decision was taken to introduce a fresh Bill. Though practically we have lost 10 years, I am happy that after wide consultation and discussion with all concerned, State representatives, fishermen and farming community, we could bring this Bill.

The Rajya Sabha has cleared it and today I am happy that we are discussing this Bill for the last few hours. This is one of the areas where there is a tremendous potential for a country like India. As my colleague, the Minister of State, has described, our last year’s export was something Rs.6000 crore. I am observing that in the last three years, Vietnam has improved its exports substantially. It has touched practically Rs.10,000 crore for such a small country. Thailand’s export is somewhere near Rs.20000 crore. We are utilising hardly 14 per cent of land which is not at all useful for any other purpose but we can use that land for this particular profession. After passing this Bill, and if the respective State Governments are ready to give tremendous facilities and encouragement to those youngsters who would like to enter in this line, I am sure, they -- along with our friends from coastal areas – would try to create a situation where whatever India has lost in the last few years would be made up.

A number of points were raised by many hon. Members. Firstly, there was anxiety about how exactly we are going to protect the environment. In fact, this issue was raised by certain section to protect the environment and the judgement was also supporting this idea. In this regard, we have decided to follow the total Supreme Court guidelines. The Supreme Court has said that it is the responsibility of the State to protect environment. In clause 11(1) there is a provision which says if anything happens which would ultimately affect the environment, the Authority has got the right to take corrective action. For example, if any firm is causing damage, it is just possible even to close that particular firm which is affecting environment.

 

A point was raised here regarding clauses 15 and 22 and it was said that they would practically stop people going to any court. But that is not fully correct. Firstly, if you carefully study clauses 15 and 22, you will find that the Authority will definitely give a hearing before taking any decision. There is an opportunity for a person to plead his case before the Authority. To be frank, as per our Constitution, the writ jurisdiction of the High Court and the Supreme Court is always there.

One of the hon. Members had raised the issue as to why opportunity should be given only to the judges to become the Chairman of this Authority. In fact, this is a quasi-judicial Authority and giving opportunity to a judge, who is not interested in taking sides, will definitely help in dispensing justice evenly from all angles.

An issue was raised about providing compensation. A mention of providing compensation has been made in clause 11(2) of the Bill. We would definitely think about a simple and effective system of appointing a person who can decide about compensation. But such a provision of providing for compensation is very much there in the Bill.

A point was made as to what would happen in the event of the Authority deciding on rejection of a registration. Clause 13(2) in the Bill deals with this particular subject. Refusal of registration can be done only after giving the party in question an opportunity of hearing.

Hon. Member Shri K.S.Rao suggested that substantial land is available for use in this type of business and that such a land should be given on lease to the poor people for coastal aquaculture. I think such a thing is possible through guidelines. We could definitely take care of this aspect when we issue the guidelines. We will accept this suggestion and try to implement it.

 

An issue was raised by many hon. Members here about the poor quality of seed and feed. In fact, we will ensure in the guidelines that the seeds will be provided by hatcheries only and that these hatcheries will provide disease-free seeds. An inspection machinery would also be put in place to keep an eye on the hatcheries.

I am fully aware of the events that took place in this industry in the last ten years. There are many cases and in some cases the problems had been of a very serious nature. It is not just a loss to the entrepreneur, but if such a message of loss is sent out to the outside world, then it would also affect our market abroad. From that angle we have to be very careful. Effective steps will definitely be taken in this regard.

A point was made that there are a number of cases where moneylenders are exploiting and cheating these entrepreneurs. I think, our total approach will be to give instructions to NABARD. We will also discuss with the Authority, NABARD and RBI and try to send instructions to the banks that they should reserve certain percentage of their resources to support this particular type of industry. I will discuss with NCDC and also try to introduce a scheme where NCDC will also support this type of proposal, whether it is a co-operative proposal or a group proposal or a proposal coming from the self-help groups. I would like to assure the House that money will not be a problem. We would definitely take care to see that sufficient fund is provided.

Many hon. Members here have raised the issue about the composition of the Authority and practically most of the Members have raised the issue about representation from the fisherman and farming community.

In fact, under clause 4 (3)(g), there is a provision that four members of coastal States can be included here. These four members from the coastal States will be essentially from fishermen community or farmers, especially those who are   interested in this particular area and those who try to protect the interests of entrepreneurs.

SHRI KINJARAPU YERRANNAIDU : It is better to incorporate it in the rules that out of the four members, two will be from fishermen community and two from farming community. Nobody will object to it.

SHRI SHARAD PAWAR: I accept this suggestion and we will take care of it at the time of drafting.

Hon. K.S. Rao has raised one important issue. It is true that recently, the American Government has taken a decision about anti-dumping duty. In fact, this particular issue was raised by the Minister for External Affairs who recently visited America, and after discussion with the American authorities on this particular subject, they agreed and gave an assurance to the Minister of State that they are ready to re-examine the entire issue and we are expecting the result of it.

Shri Pallam Raju has made a suggestion that we should try to encourage cold chain and other infrastructure. In fact, MPEDA will take corrective action in this area. In fact, we are not only thinking of it but some decisions are already taken. But it will take some time to come to action. So, there is tremendous potential in our country in areas like acquaculture and fishery sectors. Sizeable poor sections of the society are also associated with this particular profession. A sizeable section of women is also associated in this field. We would like to give more support and encouragement to them. That is why, we had decided to set up an organisation on the pattern of NDDB, the National Dairy Development Board, which is one of the success stories in the country.

Once upon a time, this country was facing shortage of milk. I recall that when Shri Lal Bahadur Shastri was the Prime Minister of the country, with his own idea, he had set up the National Dairy Development Board and substantial money was provided by the Government of India in those days. Dr. Kurien was appointed to look after this organisation. The organisation had introduced Operation Flood Scheme and today, India is the largest milk producer in the world. We are number one in the world and this is a great success story. So, if this is a success story in the field of milk, why not we follow exactly the same pattern for the development of fishery sector also? That is why, we have decided to set up Fishery Development Board and I am happy to say that the Planning Commission has, in principle, accepted our proposal and some limited provision is also suggested. We will be able to take a final decision in course of time. I would like to assure the House that ultimately, we will solve problems like requirement of development of infrastructure and others by this new organisation.

Shrimati Purandeswari has raised a different issue regarding the Chilika Lake which is not mentioned in this Bill. We will take care of it. We will take suitable action which will ultimately cover this particular problem. We will provide suitable action in our guidelines.

Many hon. Members have also suggested that we should give enough attention for research and development in this particular field.

In fact, the Indian Council for Agricultural Research is already working in this area. One or two institutions have been set up and they are doing an excellent job. I myself visited some of these institutions. They have developed new varieties. They are also using transgenic technique. With the help of transgenic technique, they are developing new breeds. I am confident that there will be perfect coordination between research organisations and the entrepreneurs.

SHRI M.M. PALLAM RAJU : Sir, may I intervene at this point?

Research is happening but dissemination of research information is not taking place properly. To add to this problem, what is happening is that they are trying to collate all the research organisations in one or two or three locations. But there is a move to consolidate all these things in one area in the hope of conserving the resources. But now they are spread all over. These organisations exist wherever there is aquaculture and pisciculture. So, I feel they should remain where they are so that effective dissemination takes place. This should be strengthened.

 

SHRI SHARAD PAWAR: I know what exactly you want to say. This particular problem is there. In fact, this particular problem was studied by eminent experts and they came to certain conclusions. That is the reason why certain decisions have been taken. In this particular Bill, there is a proposal that the organisations or institutions which are doing research and are set up within 200 metres will not be disturbed. Along with this, I would like to assure the House that we will definitely take care of research. We will encourage research and we will provide sufficient money for this. Whatever research is done, it should not be restricted to laboratories and it should ultimately go to the field. Our efforts will be towards that end. That kind of precautions will be taken.

कई सदस्यों ने, खास तौर पर हमारे उत्तर प्रदेश और बिहार के सदस्यों ने यहां फ्रैश वाटर एक्वाकल्चर के बारे में कई सुझाव दिये। जैसा रामकृपाल सिंह यादव जी ने कहा, यह बात सच है कि गंगा यमुना के आसपास पानी की कोई कमी नहीं है और इस क्षेत्र में भी यह काम हो सकता है। मैंने कहा है कि हम एन.डी.डी.बी. के पैटर्न पर एक आर्गेनाइजेशन देश में बनाना चाहते हैं। हमारे सामने यह भी एक उद्देश्य है कि जैसे कोस्टल एक्वाकल्चर को मदद करने की बात हमारे सामने है, वैसे ही इस देश में कई तालाब हैं, कई इर्रीगेशन प्रोजैक्ट्स हैं और कई ऐसी जगह हैं, जहां बहुत पानी है। उस क्षेत्र में भी हम इस तरह का काम शुरू कर सकते हैं। उसे मदद करने की आवश्यकता है और उसे मदद करने के लिए कुछ न कुछ इन्तजाम करने की आवश्यकता है। इसलिए कई स्कीम्स आज भी हमारे सामने हैं, जैसे फ्रैश वाटर एक्वाकल्चर की स्कीम है। साथ-साथ इस तरह की स्कीम्स के लिए कुछ मदद कई राज्यों को दी भी गई है। खास तौर पर उत्तर प्रदेश को १० करोड़ रुपये के आसपास पिछले साल इसी काम के लिए मदद की गई।…( व्यवधान) बिहार का आंकड़ा मेरे पास नहीं है, वहां कुछ प्राब्लम हो सकती है। जो कुछ कमियां हैं, उन्हें पूरा करने के लिए हम कोशिश करेंगे और २-३ साल में अगर ध्यान नहीं दिया होगा तो उसे कम्पेंसेट करने के लिए ध्यान देंगे।

सैण्ट्रल स्कीम्स के बारे में कई प्रोवीजंस हैं। सैण्ट्रल स्कीम्स का फायदा खास तौर पर नॉन कोस्टल एरिया के राज्यों में अलग-अलग स्कीम्स पर अमल करके, वहां बढ़ावा देने के लिए ध्यान देना हमारा फर्ज रहेगा। इस पर हम लोग ज्यादा ध्यान देंगे। एक सूचना यहां आई थी, एक प्रपोजल यहां आया था कि यह सब काम करते समय बी.पी.एल. फैमिलीज़ को मदद करने की आवश्यकता है और उन पर ज्यादा ध्यान देने की आवश्यकता है। यह बात सच है कि बहुत बड़े पैमाने पर जो जमीन पड़ी है और जिसका इस्तेमाल हार्डली १४ परसेंट किया गया है, बाकी सभी जमीन का बंटवारा करने का अधिकार स्टेट गवर्नमेंट के पास रहा है। हम स्टेट गवर्नमेंट को लिखेंगे कि इसमें आप प्रायरिटी बिलो पावर्टी लाइन जितने परिवार हैं, उनको दीजिए, बेरोजगार नौजवानों को प्रायरिटी दीजिए, सैल्फ हैल्प ग्रुप को प्रायरिटी दीजिए। एक समस्या यहां खड़ी की गई कि कुछ मल्टीनेशनल्स के इसमें आने की सम्भावना है।

हमारे इस क्षेत्र में ९० प्रतिशत से ज्यादा लोग दो हैक्टेयर से नीचे जमीन वाले हैं और इस क्षेत्र में काम करने के लिए कोई एमएनसी आएंगी, ऐसी परिस्थितियां बिलकुल नहीं हैं। राज्य सरकार को जब हम जमीन का बंटवारा करने के लिए लिखेंगे तब हम इनको सावधान करेंगे कि अब कोई एमएनसी या कोई दूसरी कंपनी यहां नहीं आएगी। यहां का बिजनेस खास तौर से नौजवानों के हाथों में, बेरोजगारों के हाथों में, छोटे किसानों के हाथों में और सैल्फ हैल्प ग्रुप्स के हाथों में रहेगा। इस तरह के कदम राज्य सरकारों को उठाने के लिए कहेंगे। जिस तरह की पाजटिव अप्रोच सदन के सभी माननीय सदस्यों की इस बिल के ऊपर रही है, यह देखने के बाद मुझे विश्वास है कि इस पर पूरा अमल करने के लिए मेरा मंत्रालय ध्यान देगा। इस क्षेत्र में इससे पहले कुछ काम करने की आवश्यकता थी, मगर हम पिछले सालों में किन्हीं कारणों से इस क्षेत्र में पिछड़े हैं, इस कारण से बाकी दुनिया के देश हमसे आगे आ गए और हम पीछे रह गए। यह जो परिस्थिति पैदा हो गई है, इसे दूर करने के लिए हम ज्यादा से ज्यादा ध्यान देंगे। यह सैक्टर देश में अनाज की पैदावार करने के साथ ही साथ देश के लिए निर्यात करने वाला एक बहुत बड़ा सैक्टर बनेगा। यह सैक्टर नौजवानों को रोजगार देने वाला बनेगा और इस तरफ हमारा ध्यान हमेशा रहेगा। मैं इतना ही कहना चाहता हूं।

MR. CHAIRMAN : The question is:

"That the Bill to provide for the establishment of a Coastal Aquaculture Authority for regulating the activities connected with coastal aquaculture in the coastal areas and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto, as passed by Rajya Sabha, be taken into consideration."

The motion was adopted.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The House will now take up clause-by-clause consideration of the Bill.

The question is:

"That clauses 2 to 27 stand part of the Bill."

The motion was adopted.

Clauses 2 to 27 were added to the Bill.

Clause 1, the Enacting Formula and the Long Title were added to the Bill.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister may now move that the Bill be passed.

SHRI SHARAD PAWAR : Sir, I beg to move :

"That the Bill be passed."

MR. CHAIRMAN: The question is :

"That the Bill be passed."

The motion was adopted.