Go for no-go

Planning Commission has some sensible ideas

At a time when renewed concerns have emerged about power and coal shortage, the intra-governmental debate on the Union environment ministry’s “no-go” policy on 203 coal mines appears out of touch with reality. There is no denying that in the interests of environment and the livelihood of people in the affected areas, the government must have a strict and transparent policy. The country’s mining industry has not exactly covered itself in glory as far as environmental protection is concerned. Many of the concerns expressed by the Union environment ministry are well taken. Even so, the fact also is that Planning Commission estimates suggest that Rs 40,000 crore worth of investments in electricity, steel and cement are stuck as a result of the unilateral “no-go” policy. This accounts for around 7.5 per cent of India’s projected infrastructure investment in the next financial year and over a fourth of the Rs 1,59,000 crore to be invested in the electricity sector alone in 2011-12. Given that these mines account for reserves worth 600 million tonnes, more than India’s annual production of 500 million tonnes, it would be impractical not to exploit them at a time when surging demand is likely to keep global coal prices high. India currently imports 50 million tonnes of coal every year to meet the supply gap; by the end of 2012, this is expected to more than double to 120 million tonnes.

Can the twain of “go” and “no go” meet? The Planning Commission has offered several solutions: realign coal blocks so that miners in the current no-go areas get a portion of mineable area or offering the no-go losers relocated mines; ensure stiffer environment mitigation norms and more vigilant monitoring; double the afforestation requirements for coal miners, a creative way to meet the environment ministry’s valid concern for India’s forest cover. It may be argued that the solution reiterates the obvious: guidelines are already in place, it’s the compliance that’s the problem. But if the denuded, Mars-like landscape in the coal-mining belt is anything to go by, it is obvious that they are observed more in the breach. So clearly it’s time for the stick in the form of a specially created oversight body with powers to impose penalties on transgressors. A considerable amount of new mining is under the private sector aegis, pointing to the need for a stricter monitoring process. But the challenge doesn’t lie in setting up such an institutional mechanism; it lies in ensuring that compliance is not reduced to proforma self-certification or hostage to the rentiering of forest and environment ministry officials. In that sense, perhaps the time has come for an independent regulatory agency to formulate environment rules, ensure that they are followed and design penalties for transgressions. The Election Commission has proved a successful regulator of India’s vast and unwieldy election process. There is no reason the same structure cannot work in environmental regulation. And, just to be on the safe side, the government can find a retired civil servant to man the office!