Full Transcript
Hon’ble Deputy Speaker Sir,
I rise to oppose the Right to Fair Compensation & Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation & Resettlement (Amendment) Bill, 2015. Sir, a land bill was brought by UPA Government in 2013. It was debated on the August 28, 2013 and both Congress and BJP supported the Bill. There was voting. The voting result was: 268 Ayes & 19 Noes. The 19 noes were from Trinamool Congress only; this voting was on my amendment and the motion was lost.
Who was the main Speaker in Lok Sabha on behalf of BJP? Rajnath Sigh ji was the main speaker who spoke on behalf of the Bill. Who was the main Speaker in Rajya Sabha on behalf of BJP? Mr Katiyar was the main speaker on behalf of BJP in Rajya Sabha. What is the necessity of introduction of another Bill when one Bill is already passed on the floor of the House with division of votes? Everybody has now come to know that what is the role of which party.
Trinamool Congress is of the opinion that farmers are to be given more free hand so far the Land Acquisition is concerned. We are totally against at the forceful occupancy of the land. I believe that every one of us should protest the forceful occupancy of the land on the farmers. We had our own fight in our State under the leadership of Mamata Banerjee when Singur land was occupied by a very big corporate house. We have seen the struggle of hungry farmers, how they maintain their livelihood.
Sir, land is not elastic that if you stretch it, it will increase. Land is the same but the population is increasing. If the land is grabbed forcefully and all the decisions are taken in favour of the captains of industries or by the corporate houses, then gradually size of the land will be decrease and very soon there will be food scarcity in the country.
The Standing Committee made 13 recommendations when UPA brought a land bill. UPA Government accepted 11 recommendations but did not accept 2 recommendations. Trinamool Congress is in favour of all 13 recommendations made by the Standing Committee.
What were the two recommendations discarded by the then Rural Development Minister Hon’ble Jayram Ramesh Ji? Mainly it was that the private investor is expected to buy at least 80 per cent of the required land directly from the people. The government can acquire the remaining 20 per cent, according the draft. In case of social sectors it would be up to 70 percent other is to be acquired by the Government in whatever manner they deem fit.
What we raised objection at that time? That investor and the farmer should discuss among themselves and settle the price. It is totally to be left on the discretion of the farmers that whether he is interested or keen to sale his land or not. The government should not play the role of the mediator. It is not the duty and responsibility of the government to play a role of a mediator. Normally a farmer feels in such negotiations the attitude of the government is automatically favourable towards corporate houses.
We are against forceful acquisition of land. We believe 100% acquisition must be done by those who want to set up industry.
We also believe that only two types of land can be acquired -barren land and mono-crop land. We are against acquisition of multi-crop land.
Sir, Trinamool Congress has been at the forefront of land movement from the very beginning; we opposed the land bill even at the time of UPA Government. We still stick to our stand.
We believe this Bill will not serve the interest of common farmers. It will be certainly projected as anti-farmer and Trinamool Congress thoroughly opposes the Bill.
Thank you, Sir.
