Month: December 2022

Mr. Deputy Chairman, Sir, I thank you very much for giving me this opportunity to speak. Through you, I thank the Minister for being present to listen to our woes. This is a subject that affects all of us, but where the State of West Bengal is concerned, there are many other issues also which we would like to raise; we have been raising them, like the federal structure, North-East including Meghalaya, unemployment, price rise, misuse of the Central agencies and the border issues with China. Since you have given me this chance of speaking on this.The special issue of climate change affects the coastal States of India the most. As you know, the immediate effect is the rise in the sea-level. One of the most immediate effects is the rise in the sea-level that we have been hearing of projections of apocalypse for the last twenty-twenty five years. The way we are proceeding, much of it might come true. We see the effects of it in the Sunderbans. The Sunderban is a very special area which is, apart from being a world environmental site and a world heritage site, it is one of the great examples of how nature controls us. That Sunderban today is gravely threatened by dissipation of the ocean which is again caused by
climate change. At periodic intervals, the Bay of Bengal is subjected to cyclones of a type that only two other zones in the world receive–the Gulf of Mexico and the U.S. Coast, and the Philippines. We are ravaged and, that means, today, Tamil Nadu has been ravaged and tomorrow Andhra Pradesh will be ravaged, Odisha has been ravaged, and the Bay of Bengal–West Bengal and Bangladesh–is ravaged with full cyclones like a magnet. But, nevertheless, what stops the sea from invading West Bengal is the mangrove plantation that we have. On the mangrove plantations, we don’t find the seriousness that we require. Ten-eleven years ago, we had Alia, a super cyclone that left behind a lot of misery. And till today, we have not received the payments. We have pleaded again and again, throughout this year, that we need to replant mangrove plantation saplings and that we need to grow the mangrove plantations more. But, there is no reply. The Rural Development Scheme was the minimum that we expected, but did not come through. After that, I would like to draw your attention to the deadly impact on crops. This one will be common to you, to me and to all of us. You know what happened with this super heat this year, from the middle of April. The wheat crop got parched, shriveled up and the procurement has been about five per cent less. Wheat was at five per cent less than last year. I think it was four and a half per cent less than last year and I raised this issue again and again and it is a very dangerous thing. After that, the heat wave was followed by delayed monsoons. West Bengal is a victim of this delayed monsoon like many other States. What happens in a delayed monsoon for the paddy crop is that you are unable to cultivate it at the time that nature has given and you are forced to contract your contract activation period from a good 120-day crop to an 85-day crop and productivity comes down. This is all an effect of climate change and we better realize that we are all contributing to it. That is the worst part of it. We can’t blame the elements of nature all the time. I had mentioned to the hon. Food Minister about our food stocks and he told very emphatically that it is very satisfactory. I have reasons to believe that it is not as satisfactory because the procurement of kharif and the yield of rabi
is sensitive enough to worry. This is a national problem. So, we need not score points on each other. One of the World Bank’s Reports that came out, — the hon. Minister, I am sure knows about it, — which says, “the Climate Investment Opportunities etc., paints a picture that is very, very dangerous.” New Delhi had 47 degrees in April which was unprecedented. We have gone through extraordinary spikes in
temperature, but the World Bank predicts that this is only child’s play. Through the G-20 Climate Risk Atlas, they have said that heat waves across India were likely to last 25 times longer by 2036. Many of us hope to live till 2036. So, by 2036, — not me, I am not talking about myself, I am talking about Imran — we are likely to last 25 times more. I would beseech of the Minister that even if half the figure is true, if given by the JT Climate Report, what are we doing about it? Carbon emissions remain extremely high and the IPCC’s worst case emission scenario puts India at one of highest risk countries. We know everything about it. Up to 75 per cent of our workforce, which is 380 million people are exposed to what we call heat-exposed labour. Dr. Amee Yajnik just spoke about it. The point is, India has also the additional disadvantage, from this point of view, from generating one of the highest humidities in the world, being a tropical climate. So, it makes us worse than many others. The bottom line is that they say that about five per cent of India’s GDP is at risk. Will somebody please clarify; is five per cent of India’s GDP at risk? We talk about six per cent and seven per cent and quarrel for seven months, whether it will be seven per cent or 7.1 per cent! अगर इस बीच में5 परसेंट आ जाए, तो कहाँरह गए? 2 परसेंट! इसके बारेमेंभी बात करनी चािहए। So, we need to understand that we have to go through certain cold chain facilities and the cold chain facilities hardly cover five per cent, but without
this cold chain facilities, our pharmaceuticals and vaccines would be destroyed. Many of our high value crops would be destroyed and one
disruption, thanks to our heat wave, means perishment. What are the figures? They said that in Covid-19, India lost approximately 20 per cent of temperature sensitive medical products and 25 per cent of vaccines were destroyed due to broken cold chains.So, I am putting forward this picture before the hon. Minister who is well aware of this, but the response is what we see. I am coming to that part of it. There are reports how this year’s heat wave was affected. Sir, only in the first nine months, we have lost 2,775 lives! We have affected 1.8 million hectares of crop area! More than 4 lakh houses have been affected! Sir, India recorded extreme weather events for 241 days out of 273 days this year! We are not talking about tomorrow or the day after; we are talking about this year! We have gone through the extreme
weather events for 241 out of 273 days. Out of these, Madhya Pradesh went through the worst, followed by Himachal Pradesh and Assam. Sir, this is what we are going through. But, more than this, the cause of alarm that we have on this side of the House is that there is dualism in the Government. I cannot use the word ‘hypocrisy.’ It may be a little too harsh. There is dualism in the Government policy. While there is energy for development, there are certain energies even for environment which I don’t deny. But, there are, at the same time, events like 130 sq. kms. of the most ecologically fragile region of the Great Nicobar Islands being put to slaughter, put to slaughter, and, Sir, no one is bothered about it! So, we have, what I call, these erratic movements. You are doing something about environment here. I must say that the hon. Minister has done an excellent job at Sharm El-Sheikh by getting the Western countries, at least, to agree
to India’s proposal. I say it is good. But, at the same time, his Ministry is giving licences, his Ministry is permitting the slaughter of forest land! The most ecologically fragile Himalayas are being put in some sort of tourism! Sir, you cannot have dualism. You cannot use your left hand and right hand to negate each other. But, that is what is going on. If we make a list of number of deviations that this Ministry has made in the last 5-7 years on the issue of environment that would call for a special discussion and I would be happy to speak on that.Sir, the figures that I have mentioned are alarming and fossil fuels are the root cause of it. It is just about 170 years old. Much of the developed world used it 170 years ago, 150 years ago and we, in the under-developed part of the world, at that point of time, using it for the last
100 years. It is not the end of infinity. We are inviting the next ice age. The ast Ice Age came about 11,700 years ago. And, we are hastening the process towards the next ice age that is the least I can say. But, I am glad that, at least, the Government at COP-27 in Sharm El-Sheikh could come to some common understanding.I would submit, Sir, that special fiscal measures be introduced and special taxation measures needed if we want to build up the fund. Thank you.

Sir, thank you for allowing me to ask a supplementary. ‘Project Lion’ is something that is very close to our hearts. I would like to ask the Minister that how much fund has been allotted for this project, and is there any plan to increase this allocation?

Sir, the first question that I would like to ask is this. The Public Service Broadcasting is now being mandated on all TV channels of India. Public Service Broadcasting was the mandate of Prasar Bharati. Now, has Prasar Bharati failed? This is my first part of the question. The second part of the question is: Why is this mandate? Why are you monitoring? Why is punishment being imposed for a good cause
like Public Service Broadcasting? Sir, I did not say that Prasar Bharati had failed. I had asked the hon. Minister whether he finds Prasar Bharati lacking? I had asked three questions and none of the replies have been given. Sir, my second question is: Why did you issue it?
Now, you are telling me what has been done. I had asked whether Ramayana and Mahabharata would fit in Public Service Broadcasting and whether this Public Service Broadcasting can be adjusted or fresh programmes need to be done. None of these have been replied to.

Sir, I have a point of order. Sir, I have a point of order on these Rule 267 notices which seven Members have submitted. The hon. Chairman had requested last time that any Member submitting a notice under Rule 267 should refer to the rule to be suspended. Sir, I have two points to make for your consideration. Number one, I have a list here of the last three Rule 267 notices accepted by the hon. Chairman. The three are, demonetisation on the 16th of November, 2016; –in the last six years, there has been none — the farmers’ suicide in April, 2015, that is the second last one; and the third last one is attack on secular fabric of our country, 18th of December, 2014. The precedence of these last three Rule 267 notices is that none of them needed to link it with a rule, none of them. I have two points only. They were supposed to say why these three are important issues. These three were taken up. My second point is, since the hon. Chairman has been asking, I have also done some study and I want to share it with the House, what the rule is, the common rule for accepting any Rule 267 notice is Rule 29. Sir, kindly look at Rule 29, which is about the List of Business. The Rule clearly states that. What all these Members are asking the Chairman to do is to apply Rule 29, which gives him the prerogative to change this List of Business. In other words, drop the Zero Hour and bring up these subjects. So, what is the issue, Sir? Please clarify and let us know. Thank you.

Sir, at the outset, I may please be allowed to give a short background of the 2019 Act, that is, New Delhi International Arbitration Centre Act before I deal with the present Bill. If I refer to the Act of 2019, it says inter alia, and I quote, “And whereas the International Centre …” There was an International Centre for Alternative Dispute Resolution. There was a Centre; and it was set up in the year 1995 under the aegis of Central Government and registered under the Societies Act, as mentioned by Vivek Tankhaji. Now “Whereas the International Centre for Alternative Dispute Resolution has not been able to actively engage and embrace developments in the arbitration ecosystem and to create a reputation par excellence keeping pace with the dynamic nature of arbitration over more than two decades.” “And whereas it has become expedient to take over the undertakings, etc. …” On 2nd March, 2019, an Ordinance was promulgated to take over that Centre, its assets, moveable and immovable, everything, and the fund. So, in 1995, that Centre was set up by the Central Government and it was taken over by way of promulgation of an Ordinance on 2nd March, 2019, after a lapse of 14 years. I am not saying that the previous Government was responsible for that or the present Government is, but the fact remains that it took 14 years for the Government to understand that that society of arbitration was not functioning as per international, or any other standards. That Ordinance was challenged by the International Centre for Alternative Dispute Resolution, the earlier Centre, in the Delhi High Court and the Delhi High Court granted stay initially. Ultimately it was vacated, but in between, the Government was pressing hard and a question was raised in the court as to what was the hurry. Then, the learned Counsel — I hope I remember it right; I have gone through the records — appearing for the Government said, “We have committed before the World Bank and by 19th May, 2019, we shall come out with some positive results.” So, it was committed before the World Bank by the Indian Government that by such and such date they would come out with some positive results and that was the reason for the hurry. So, an Ordinance was hurriedly promulgated and on the same day that old Centre was taken over. Shortly thereafter, the new regime came in 2019, as we all know, and the Cabinet passed a Resolution approving this New Delhi International Arbitration Centre Bill. The Bill came to the Lok Sabha on the 10th of July, 2019 and the Rajya Sabha passed it on 18th July, 2019, in just eight days. The original Bill of 2019 was neither referred to any Standing Committee nor discussed in any Select Committee. I am referring to these developments to underline the fact that in the earlier case, the Government was under pressure from the World Bank, and the intention was not as is being spelt out by the Government now, that they want to develop an international centre, an institute of national importance, etc. That was not the real intention; the real thing was pressure from the World Bank. Be that as it may, it is stated here that the only purpose of bringing this Amendment Bill is to change the name of the Centre from ‘New Delhi International Arbitration Centre’ to ‘India International Arbitration Centre’ and to make some other small amendments and rectifications. My question to the hon. Minister is as to whether rules and regulations have been framed during the past three years under this Act, whether the objects and functions to be exercised by this Arbitration Centre have already been set up and to what extent these have been fulfilled. For example, Section 14 of the 2019 Act says, “Objects of the Centre” — I am not going into the details of the Bill, but just make some bullet points — ‘to bring targeted reforms to develop it as a flagship institution for conducting international and domestic arbitration, to promote research study, providing training, etc., to provide facilities and administrative assistance for conciliation, mediation and arbitral proceedings and to maintain panels of accredited arbitrators and conciliators’. Even in his opening remarks, the hon. Minister said that they wanted to create a panel of arbitrators, and so on. My question is: during the past three years, how many of these objects have been implemented by the Government? Section 15 of 2019 Act, the original Act, contains certain provisions and, says: (a) to facilitate for conducting international and domestic arbitration and conciliation in the most professional manner; (b) to provide cost effective and timely services for the conduct of arbitration and conciliation at national and international level; (c) to promote studies, etc., etc. Now, there are seven such functions to be performed by the New Delhi International Arbitration Centre. My question to the hon. Minister is: Has this Institution at all become functional as per Section 15 of the Act during the past three years? If so, to what extent? Now, there is nothing more to elaborate or elucidate because I should confine myself to the present Bill. Now comes the question: Why ‘New Delhi’ and why ‘India’? That has been explained by the hon. Minister very carefully and in a nice manner. He said that there are so many institutions under the name and style of ‘New Delhi Arbitration Centres’, etc. The Government has come to understand or know of this after a lapse of three years. When the 2019 Bill was originated, neither the Legislative Department nor the Law Ministry, as a whole, or any other authority of the Government was aware of existence of such ‘New Delhi Arbitration Centres’ in the country! It took them three years to know, understand and come before the Parliament to spoil its valuable time for the change of name, and with this speed, we are going to establish an international centre of excellence for arbitration, mediation, etc! Who will come to India? Those who are going to Stockholm or Paris or London or Singapore, will they come to India if we move in this direction with such time that we took three years to change the name of the institution? So far as I understand, neither the rule, nor has the regulation been framed under this Act. The Government is concerned only with change of name to show that here is a bigger Arbitration Centre; for the past 14 years nothing happened, but we have done it. What you have done, you are denying it. You have come with a Bill to change the name. I am not opposing it. Don’t laugh at me; I am not opposing it. I am putting some relevant questions. If you satisfy any Member of this House by replying to these questions, I will be the happiest person. What is in a name? It reminds me the act 2, scene 2, of Shakespeare’s epoch-making drama ‘Romeo and Juliet’ wherein Juliet’s famous soliloquy was, and I quote: “What’s in a name? That which we call a rose By any other name would smell as sweet.” Juliet meant to say that Romeo would still have all the perfection he had even if he were not called Romeo. Whether it is called ‘New Delhi’ or ‘India’, it matters little to me. And, I know that for those, who will be interested in international arbitration, it will be meaningless whether its name is ‘New Delhi’ or ‘India’ because everybody knows that New Delhi is the Capital of India. Even though the smell of the rose, ‘New Delhi’, is not less than that of ‘India’, yet it need not be undermined too. Similar is the position regarding this Arbitration Centre. Finally, there is a trend, and I must say that without any reason or rhyme, this renaming of roads, railway stations, places, stadiums, medical colleges, etc., is happening. Therefore, on introduction of such a Bill today for the change of name of an Act, I would like to know whether it will be a regular feature in the future for renaming other Acts also. Thank you, Sir.