Friday, July 10, 2009
A Blog for People Resisting the SEZ planned for Polepally, Andhra Pradesh
The case of the SEZ planned for Polepally in Andhra Pradesh is the subject of a blog, which includes (irregular) postings on recent events, reports from visiting civil society commissions, photos and videos about people's resistance. It is an interesting experiment to try to create a space where a local movement can keep supporters and the wider world informed and (potentially) engaged. It would be interesting to know if other SEZ resistance movements have similar blogs.
Reviving Two Lapsed Bills: Will the Left's Reduced Influence Affect the Quality of Land Acquisition and Resettlement & Rehabilitation Bills?
Priya Parker and Sarita Vanka, of the PRS Legislative Research initiative, produced a very good brief on the Land Acquisition Act Amendment Bill 2007. The article goes into issues such as the setting up of a disputes authority, the recommendations of the Parliamentary Committee established to examine the question of SEZs and Land, and contains a matrix showing how 'public purpose' (with respect to eminent domain/forced acquisition) has been defined in other countries.
This Bill lapsed with the dissolving of the last (2004-09) Lok Sabha, but is to be pursued by the current government. The Left parties that supported the 2004-09 UPA government claimed to have influenced this Bill for the better, stating that Congress and other centrist parties working on their own would not have created any nearly as progressive (not that the Bill itself is a model piece of legislation in any case). It will therefore be interesting to see whether the current (non-Left-reliant) UPA government, post May 2009, will promote an improved, or possibly inferior, Bill.
Either way, the Bill will need to be seen in the context of whatever legislation is introduced to substitute for the similarly stalled/lapsed Resettlement and Rehabilitation Bill which was also the the subject of analysis. The Left parties (the CPI-M in particular) also claimed to have had a positive influence on successive drafts of that legislation -- just as it claimed also to have played a major role in getting the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act 200 passed (an inflated claim, at best). Again, time will tell whether the new dispensation, in which the UPA government is no longer reliant on Left party support for its parliamentary majoriy, leads to better or worse (or just the same) legislation.
Indeed, lapsed legislation that is subsequently revived provides a potentially revealing window on the effect of party/parliamentary reconfiguration on the substance of policy change.
This Bill lapsed with the dissolving of the last (2004-09) Lok Sabha, but is to be pursued by the current government. The Left parties that supported the 2004-09 UPA government claimed to have influenced this Bill for the better, stating that Congress and other centrist parties working on their own would not have created any nearly as progressive (not that the Bill itself is a model piece of legislation in any case). It will therefore be interesting to see whether the current (non-Left-reliant) UPA government, post May 2009, will promote an improved, or possibly inferior, Bill.
Either way, the Bill will need to be seen in the context of whatever legislation is introduced to substitute for the similarly stalled/lapsed Resettlement and Rehabilitation Bill which was also the the subject of analysis. The Left parties (the CPI-M in particular) also claimed to have had a positive influence on successive drafts of that legislation -- just as it claimed also to have played a major role in getting the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act 200 passed (an inflated claim, at best). Again, time will tell whether the new dispensation, in which the UPA government is no longer reliant on Left party support for its parliamentary majoriy, leads to better or worse (or just the same) legislation.
Indeed, lapsed legislation that is subsequently revived provides a potentially revealing window on the effect of party/parliamentary reconfiguration on the substance of policy change.
India's SEZ a Focus of International Campaign Against Forced Displacement
A special meeting of the International League of Peoples' Struggle (ILPS) was held in Hong Kong in June 2008 to launch the International Campaign against Forced Displacement and Special Economic Zones. While allegedly 'international,', India-based events and organizations -- mainly related to SEZs -- seem to be the primary (if not exclusive) focus of this campaign. The campaign's website outlines the purposes and structure of this initiative. The overall purpose of ILPS support is 'to build up organised resistance to imperialism and reaction on an international scale.' Fact-finding reports and background papers from Visthpan Virodhi Jan Vikas Andolan can be found on the India section of the site. Reports cover Nandigram, Jharkhand, and the POSCO project in Orissa, among others.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Election highlights economic zone anger
| By Prachi Pinglay BBC News, Raigad, Maharashtra |
 |   We are not starving, there is no need for us to sell our land at such throwaway prices  Shivaji Patil  |
Shivaji Patil, 69, is firmly against a proposed Special Economic Zone (SEZ) in his village about 90km (56 miles) from the Indian city of Mumbai (Bombay).
He stands to lose about seven acres of farmland if the scheme goes ahead.
In this election, the issue of land acquisition for SEZs is a priority for the voters of the Raigad and Maval constituencies, where several are planned. However, most political parties have not made it a part of their manifesto and as a result the election atmosphere is low key.
About 22 villages in Raigad stand to lose 5,700 acres of land for an SEZ proposed by Reliance industries.
The villages are part of the MahaMumbai SEZ (Great Mumbai SEZ), which is planned to spread over 45 villages in total and more than 20,000 acres of land.
Increasingly impatient
In a rare public opinion exercise in September 2008, more than 80% of farmers voted against the proposed SEZ.
 The SEZ idea has generated much controversy |
Farmers are increasingly impatient with what they see as the non-committal stand by political parties over the issue.
They almost unanimously oppose the Congress-led government's refusal to accept the public opinion exercise.
But they do not agree on what they want for their land in future.
Mr Patil, who worked as a primary schoolteacher for 40 years while simultaneously running his farm, has opposed the SEZ for more than two years.
"We are not starving, there is no need for us to sell our land at such throwaway prices to the private companies," he says.
However, he does attach an important proviso.
If he gets a "good price", (nearly 10 times what is proposed) and is assured of not being displaced, he is willing to give up his land.
Shunned
Most farmers oppose the SEZs because they say they will lose crops at a time when a soon-to-be-completed dam will ensure high quality irrigation and more produce.
|  If public opinion does not matter, why go through the consultation exercise at all? Farmer Ashirwad Mokal |
They allege that the government is now postponing the irrigation scheme and delaying the supply of water to this land in a bid to hasten their departure.
While political parties have not actively been talking about SEZs, there are signs that could be about to change.
A recent - and somewhat unlikely - tie-up between the right wing Shiv Sena party and the Peasants and Workers Party (PWP) is significant, because both say they strongly oppose the zones.
This could spell trouble for the Congress party candidate in Raigad district, AR Antulay, who now faces the prospect of being shunned by the electorate even though he personally has kept quiet over the issue.
Alternative jobs
Janardan Mhatre, 75, who owns about four acres of land, has been active in the anti-SEZ movement.
Not making the result of the opinion poll public is his main complaint against the government.
"The result has not been accepted by the government publicly. If they had, they would have scrapped compulsory land acquisition and instead concentrated on the irrigation project which was promised back in the 80s," he says.
|  It is important to have someone taking a clear stand against them (SEZs) Forum Against Globalisation spokeswoman Ulka Mahajan |
Ashirwad Mokal, owner of about 11 acres of rice-growing land, is also displeased.
"If public opinion does not matter, why go through the consultation exercise at all?" he asks.
"Industrialisation is possible without displacing farmers. I don't think you need over 30,000 acres to make a profitable industry. We would like to speak to the private companies who are proposing the SEZ. Instead the government is doing land acquisition on their behalf."
Dr Mokal also points out that farmers - who in general are not well educated - are not likely to find good alternative jobs.
"Recently when a factory was set up, locals could not get any other jobs except loaders."
Ulka Mahajan, from the Forum Against Globalisation, says that the economic downturn has only temporarily slowed the process of land acquisition for the SEZs.
"Once the corporate groups recover they will want to go ahead with the zones. To keep the movement [against them] going we are fielding our own candidate in the adjoining constituency where more land will be taken up by SEZs.
"It is important to have someone taking a clear stand against them."
In the meantime farmers are at a crossroads.
They face a difficult choice: either accept the zones and give up their ancestral property or carry on farming in the hope their land will not be compulsorily purchased and they will benefit from the new irrigation system.
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Can the Empowered Group of Ministers Demand RBI Changes
The press trust of India is reporting that the Government of India's Empowered Group of Ministers (EGoM) has asked the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to classifies SEZs as infrastructure projects rather than as speculative real estate projects. This matters because of the interest-rate implications of being an infrastructure project (the rate is lower), and because of tax benefits that could accrue to infrastructure-based projects. This is particularly true of manufacturing-based SEZs, where there are various tax- and duty-deferring or other such credit schemes in operation, including many for exporters.
The EGoM and the supporters of this proposal justify the move as necessary given the global economic slowdown. This has manifested itself in the form of drastically reduced credit availability, but also in the form of declining Indian exports, which were down 12% in October on a year-to-year basis -- the first decline of any kind in more than five years.
Apart from the long-term policy issues involved, the immediate questions that arise are whether the EGoM is indeed empowered to take this decision -- or, if merely advisory, what status it has as an input to future cabinet decision-making -- and whether such authority, if it existed, would be a good thing. Looking forward, we can anticipate further controversy surrounding the mechanisms through which such a decision should, could, or would be repealed. There is also the reasonably robust politicial-economy rule of thumb that says that it is harder to take away an existing benefit than it is to deny the granting of such a benefit in the first place. So, regardless of which agency is authorized to reverse such a decision, were it to be effected (and thus far the RBI has not taken specific action), it will face great pressure, once the economic climate improves, to leave in place a tax benefit put in place to cope with stormier times.
The EGoM and the supporters of this proposal justify the move as necessary given the global economic slowdown. This has manifested itself in the form of drastically reduced credit availability, but also in the form of declining Indian exports, which were down 12% in October on a year-to-year basis -- the first decline of any kind in more than five years.
Apart from the long-term policy issues involved, the immediate questions that arise are whether the EGoM is indeed empowered to take this decision -- or, if merely advisory, what status it has as an input to future cabinet decision-making -- and whether such authority, if it existed, would be a good thing. Looking forward, we can anticipate further controversy surrounding the mechanisms through which such a decision should, could, or would be repealed. There is also the reasonably robust politicial-economy rule of thumb that says that it is harder to take away an existing benefit than it is to deny the granting of such a benefit in the first place. So, regardless of which agency is authorized to reverse such a decision, were it to be effected (and thus far the RBI has not taken specific action), it will face great pressure, once the economic climate improves, to leave in place a tax benefit put in place to cope with stormier times.
Friday, December 5, 2008
Through What Channels Does Industry-Wide SEZ Lobbying Take Place?
| This piece is an indication of the kind of lobbying undertaken by the SEZ-promoter industry as a whole. But it also raises the question quoted in the title to this post: through what channels does this lobbying take place? And, furthermore: can such lobbying only work on issues of common concern to more or less all SEZ promoters (in this case, who does NOT want a more comprehensive form of tax relief)? Are there conflicts of interest within the SEZ business lobby that cause friction in determining which agenda items get priority, assuming a finite amount of political capital? And, with reference to the earlier Posts of 4 Dec and earlier, what impact does the financial crisis (as a narrative-framing device, more than as an actual economic force) have in affecting the chances for successful lobbying on something like this? That is, will the government decide that SEZs are in danger, and that tax relief will save them from being a costly failure? Or is a pending government-revenue crisis more powerful a motivation -- leading officials to prioritize resource mobilization over business promotion/rescue? | ||||
| ||||
Thursday, December 4, 2008
State withdraws SEZs from Real Estate Category and puts them in Purview of Infrastructure
| SEZs and IPs get major relief | |||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Announcing this at a function here today, a senior government official said the government has issued a directive to Reserve Bank to withdraw its SEZs and IPs categorisation under real estate category and put it in purview of infrastructure to spur up exports which are badly hit due to global slowdown in the developed markets the United States and European Union nations.
The announcement made by Director General, Export Promotion Council for EOUs and SEZs, L B Singhal has come as a big relief to exporters who have been demanding a special package to check the slide in export growth.
Industry chambers, Ficci and Assocham- only yesterday had reiterated their demand for the relief package, saying if not given immediately it would lead to huge loss of jobs, particularly in labour-intensive sectors like textiles, leather, handicrafts and gems and jewellary- all hard hit by drop in exports.
Commerce Secretary Gopal Pillai, too, had recently warned of five lakh job loss in textile sector alone by March next on account of worldwide slowdown.
The Commerce Ministry, which overseas the SEZ policy, has been demanding for quite some time that Reserve Bank allow SEZ units in the infrastructure sub-group to raise loans at lower core sector interest rates.
Core sector interest rates are almost two percentage points lower than the rates applicable to real estate project. This categorisation, the Ministry contended, would complement its recent efforts to support private investment in infrastructure finance.
Source: http://www.uniindia.com/unilive%5Cunisite.nsf/All/EB73F06CB9C13C30652575130049086A
RBI To Categorise SEZs, IPs Under Infrastructure Head To Spur Up Exports : D.G., EPC, EoUs & SEZs
Tuesday, December 02, 2008
The government has issued a directive to Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to withdraw its SEZs and Industrial Park (IP) categorization under Real Estate category and put it in purview of infrastructure to spur up exports which are badly hit due to global meltdown. Announcing this at ASSOCHAM organized National Summit on Special `Economic Zones : Resolving Policy and Tax Issues’, Director General, Export Promotion Council for EOUs and SEZs, Mr. L B Singhal said that the decision of RBI to categorise SEZs and IPs under purview of real estate dampened growth of SEZs and IPs due to which exports have suffered severely. Mr. Singhal, therefore, suggested that the RBI should immediately implement decision of Group of Ministers (GoM) to bring SEZs and IPs under purview of infrastructure, especially when centre has already issued a directive to RBI. The Director General, Export Promotion Council for EOUs and SEZs during Interactive Session with ASSOCHAM members here today pointed out that in the last 35 years, Rs.8000 crores of exports were effected through various SEZs. However, after the SEZ Act of 2005, exports activities through number of SEZs and IPs were held to an extent of Rs.66,000 crore and their exports by end of current fiscal would reach over Rs.1 lakh crore. The SEZs and IPs that are currently operational have a total investment amounting Rs.94,000 crore and providing 3.62,000 direct employment to various people and therefore, their categorization under infrastructure head is the right call given by the central government to premier apex bank – the RBI as it is this institution which is empowered to categorise SEZs and IPs under purview of infrastructure, said Mr. Singhal. In a bid to spur up exports through SEZs and IPs, the SEZ and IPs would be exempted from the service tax and a notification to this effect would shortly be issued, said Mr. Singhal, clarifying that the central government has already decided to provide service tax exemptions to SEZs for services they are providing outside the SEZs. Mr. Singhal also said that the Department of Commerce and Industry is also finalizing a notification in consultation with the Ministry of Finance to provide Duty Entitlement Passbook Scheme (DEPB) as well as Duty Drawback benefits to SEZs and IPs. In addition, the Ministry of Finance is also coming out with directives to provide CENVAT credit benefits for manufacturing of various articles within SEZs, he added. According to him, India would extend these benefits to its SEZs and IPs as their are total 138 countries that have such facilities for their SEZs and IPs which have created direct employment for 68 million people with investments of US$ 1600 billion and export worth of US$ 750 billion. Mr. D S Rawat, ASSOCHAM Secretary General complimented Mr. Singhal for disclosing the government decision for directing RBI to bring in SEZs and IPs under purview of infrastructure as it has become necessary to push up exports at times when these are sinking. Among others who attended the conference included Mr. B Vijayan, Development Commissioner, MEPZ, Special Economic Zone, Chennai, Mr. S Ramasundaram, CMD, Tamil Nadu Industrial Development Corpn., Mr. R Sannareddy, Chairman, Sri City Pvt. Ltd., Mr. Srinivasan K Swamy, President, Madras Chamber of Commerce & Industry and Mr. Murali Venkatraman, Chairman, ASSOCHAM Southern Region Development Council.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)