-AndrewYule.jpg "Andrew Yule")
After NBA, Modi also opposes panel on Sardar Sarovar
Demands that MoEF’s advisory committee to ascertain compliance with environmental standards be scrapped
GN Bureau | New Delhi | May 04 2010
After Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) cried foul over ministry of environment and forests’ new advisory panel on Sardar Sarovar Project, Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi has also opposed the formation of the committee, albeit for different reasons.
In a letter handed over to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on Monday, Modi demanded that the MoEF’s order for formation of the committee, which is tasked with examining the adequacy of the plans and schedule for implementation to ensure ‘pari-passu’ compliance with environmental safeguard measures, be revoked.
“Decision of the Ministry of Environment and Forest taken on 28th April 2010 is not at all in accordance with the present provisions of Narmada Yojana and with the order of the Supreme Court on 20th Oct 2000,” says the letter.
Modi insisted that forming such a high level committee would be contrary to the numerous decisions taken by other central bodies in the past, and the move would further perplex the situation and “pass the negative impacts”.
“Narmada Control Authority has a complete monitoring set-up and environmental sub-group is capable enough to take any step related to the project; there is no need of any other independent body to take decision in this issue,” the letter said.
Last week, NBA had objected to the new advisory committee, primarily on the grounds that it would bypass Devendra Pandey Committee's interim report that showed that Sardar Sarovar project did not have sufficient plans for compliance with environmental safeguards.
“The ministry has full powers…to straight away issue stop work notices. Instead, it is forming one committee after the other,” NBA leader Medha Patkar was quoted as saying in a news-report.
NBA also objected to the membership of the committee, which includes Yoginder K. Alagh, one of the planners of the project and a known supporter of the dam.
“He was a party to the same plans which are being analyzed. We cannot expect objective analysis from someone who has had an interest in the project from the beginning,” Patkar was quoted as saying.
Post new comment