Water ‘vision’ for villages

DEEPANKAR GANGULY
Calcutta, June 26: The Mamata Banerjee government has taken up a scheme to supply 70 litres of safe drinking water daily to each household in rural areas by 2020.

The chief minister has asked public health engineering (PHE) minister Subrata Mukherjee to draw up a detailed report on the project — named Vision 2020 — and submit it to her by the end of this month.

Mukherjee said the programme planned to supply safe drinking water to every village from a source not more than 50 metres from a household. “If we can achieve our target by 2020, it will also help improve the general health of villagers, many of whom suffer from water-borne diseases and the effects of arsenic contamination. The estimated cost of the project is Rs 1,095 crore,” the PHE minister said.

According to the draft Vision 2020 document, the government will try to bring about 55 per cent of the rural households under the scheme by 2015. Kiosks will be set up in every village where water will be stored after purification from treatment plants. Villagers will be able to collect water from the kiosks, Mukherjee said.

“We will also try to supply piped water directly to 33 per cent of these 55 per cent households by 2015,” the minister said. “All schools will have access to adequate drinking water. Panchayats and self-help groups will be tasked with maintaining the water-supply network.”

“It is a shame that in many villages, the residents still have to collect drinking water from ponds,” Mukherjee said.

PHE officials said several small water-treatment plants would be set up. Water from various sources such as rivers, canals and ponds will be brought through pipes to the treatment plants. After purification, the water will be piped to the kiosks. The officials said rainwater harvesting was also being considered.

“We want to avoid the use of underground water as much as possible, particularly in Bankura, Purulia, West Midnapore, Birbhum and Burdwan. In these districts, the arsenic level in groundwater is high. There are problems of fluoride contamination too,” a PHE official said.

PHE sources said a separate scheme was being considered for the Sunderbans, but they did not mention the specifics. For the Darjeeling hills, the Terai and arid regions, water will be carried to and from the treatment plants through large pipes as local water sources are insufficient in these regions.

Mamata will approach the Centre for funds once the Vision 2020 document is ready, the sources said. The PHE department is “giving final touches to the document”, they added.

PHE minister Mukherjee has formed a 12-member expert committee to prepare the document.

Source: http://www.telegraphindia.com/1110627/jsp/bengal/story_14164309.jsp

Cola Bill by R. Krishnakumar

THE road ahead seems to be a difficult one for the Bill passed recently by the Kerala Assembly for the establishment of a special tribunal to “make the polluter pay” and recover compensation for the people affected by the activities of Coca-Cola's controversial bottling unit at Plachimada in Palakkad district. “The Plachimada Coca-Cola Victims Relief and Compensation Claims Special Tribunal Bill, 2011”, proposed by the Left Democratic Front government at the fag end of its term, was passed without discussion on February 24, the last day of the last session of the 12th Assembly, while members of the LDF and the opposition United Democratic Front (UDF) were busy trading corruption allegations.

Amidst criticism that a Bill on an issue that falls under the residuary powers of legislation of Parliament (Article 248) may not be within the constitutionally mandated jurisdiction of a State Assembly, the Kerala government has decided to send the Bill for the President of India's assent, before it can become law and rules can be framed on its basis.

Under the proposed law, the tribunal is sought to be established “for the adjudication of disputes and recovery of compensation for the damages caused” by the company “by entertaining original applications” (from the affected people) and “by transferring cases pending before the various courts and other authorities to the tribunal”. The tribunal can also entertain grievances regarding violation of laws relating to the environment and air and water pollution or the implementation of such laws.

The three-member tribunal is to have all the powers and authority of a civil court and is to decide its award by applying the “principles of sustainable development, precautionary principle and the polluter pays principle”. All cases involving local residents arising out of violations of laws relating to the environment and air and water, in which the company is a party, and are pending before any court, except the High Court or the Supreme Court, have to be transferred to the tribunal as and when it is established by a government notification. The High Court can also refer “any matter pending before it relating to the company” on which the tribunal is empowered to adjudicate.

Some organisations that had participated in the agitation against the Coca-Cola unit described the Bill as “a historic victory for the people of Plachimada”. Others, including former Law Minister K.M. Mani (a prominent leader of the UDF), described it as “an election gimmick” and said the Assembly had passed a Bill on an issue over which it did not have jurisdiction. The Coca-Cola company said it was “disappointed in the Plachimada Tribunal Bill and the flawed process on which it is based”.

The company claimed in a press statement that none of the scientific studies conducted by various government bodies had found its operations responsible for any of the instances of damage alleged in the Bill. It said the Bill “is devoid of facts, scientific data or any input from HCCB” (Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages) and that “at no time was HCCB offered an opportunity to present facts, engage in dialogue around this issue or share independent data before the Bill was tabled or approved”.

The company also argued that “any government committee or panel reviewing claims should have first determined, through scientific study and established process of law, whether any damage was caused to the local residents. And, second, if such damage was caused, who or what was responsible” (for it). Currently, HCCB is reviewing all available options, but remains willing to engage with all stakeholders on the issue. It is likely that the people of Kerala may soon realise that any action against the soft-drink giant is easier said than done.

Source: http://www.frontlineonnet.com/fl2806/stories/20110325280611600.htm

June 10 is groundwater day.