October 14, 2008

CPI(M) central committee members meet Jyoti Basu




Kolkata,13th Oct.: Members of the central committee of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), who are here to attend the three-day meet of the body, took time off on the second day of deliberations and visited veteran Marxist leader Jyoti Basu at his Salt Lake residence on Monday.


Mr. Basu reportedly expressed happiness on seeing his party colleagues and spent some time with them.


The 94-year-old leader also had a photo session with those who called on him.


In response to requests made by him on grounds of health, the CPI(M) leadership had relieved Mr. Basu of his responsibilities in the Polit Bureau at the 19th Party Congress held earlier this year in Coimbatore. He, however, was made a special invitee to the body besides continuing to be a member of the party’s central committee.



Mr. Basu has not been able to participate in the ongoing central committee meeting for health reasons.


Among those who visited him were CPI(M) general secretary Prakash Karat, party’s West Bengal State Committee secretary Biman Bose, Tripura Chief Minister Manik Sarkar and Brinda Karat — all Polit Bureau members.


Third alternative


Besides other issues, the CPI(M) central committee is discussing the issue of alliances with like-minded secular non-Congress parties for the coming Lok Sabha elections. The need for a third alternative at the national level has been heightened in the wake of atrocities on minorities in different parts of the country, the CPI(M) leadership believes.


Criticism


Speaking to journalists, central committee member Shyamal Chakravarty ridiculed Trinamool Congress chief Mamata Banerjee’s remark here on Sunday that the CPI(M) would not win even one seat in the coming Lok Sabha polls. He said she had erred in her forecast and “the figure four should be put before the zero” that Ms. Banerjee had spoken of — thus suggesting that the party would win in 40 seats [of a total of 42 in the State].

Singur: Defeat This Anti-People Politics

EDITORIAL
October 12, 2008
PEOPLE'S DEMOCRACY
THE opponents of the Left Front in West Bengal led by the Trinamul Congress chief Mamata Banerjee have, unfortunately, succeeded in driving out the Tata’s car manufacturing unit from Singur. They have, thus, with the mere support of less than 10 per cent of the owners of the acquired land who have not taken the compensation cheques, adversely affected the future prosperity and improved livelihood for a large number of people in the area as well as the process of industrialisation that would have generated greater employment opportunities. As we have repeatedly argued in these columns earlier, the disruptive violence mounted both in Nandigram and Singur were basically political in nature. Through these movements, the Trinamul Congress and other opposition to the Left Front are seeking to consolidate their support base. In the final analysis, it is for the people of Bengal to decide on the type of politics that they would want.

Mamata Banerjee has not merely ensured the exit of the Nano project from Bengal but being the loyal steadfast ally of the BJP in the NDA, she facilitated the project’s re-location to Gujarat. Remember, she continued to remain with the NDA and, thus, in a way endorsed the communal carnage unleashed in the state by the BJP’s Narendra Modi government.
Be that as it may, voices in the corporate media, despite the stark realities of why the Tatas have shifted from Bengal, cannot refrain from their usual CPI(M) bashing. “Don’t just blame Mamata” screams the editorial of The Economic Times. Some others have been less aggressive, but nevertheless hold the CPI(M) and the Left Front government responsible and, in the process, eulogise Mamata Banerjee by comparing her to David in his fight with Goliath (Business Standard), or, portraying her as “India’s saviour” (Prem Shankar Jha, The Hindustan Times)! The latter justifies this by reference to an alleged electronic media footage of policemen brutally attacking “unwilling farmers” in the process of acquiring land at Singur. There is no iota of any evidence of either the source or the credibility of such footage that few others seem to have seen. This is followed by graphic description of how the villagers’ consent was “obtained” through police excesses: “Are the blood and tears of the poor a necessary price of development?”

Such descriptions remind us of the times, in early 1970s, when graphic accounts of the advance of the US army operations in its war against Vietnam in Saigon, were being filed as `eye witness accounts’ from the Press Club in Bangkok. As the evening advanced, such `eye witness accounts’ became more ‘spirited’. In the event, it was Vietnam that triumphed over the US army and liberated Saigon and the rest of the country.

Amidst such anti-Left vitriol, certain substantive issues have been raised that require attention. First, why did the Left Front government acquire arable land for industrialisation instead of barren land? The answer is simple. There is less than 2 per cent of land in West Bengal which is barren. Secondly, why did the Left Front government not persuade the Tatas to give a share or stake to the land owners in the company or the project that is to be set-up on this land? Again, the answer is simple. What we require is a new central law for land acquisition in the country.
Land currently being acquired all over the country (5 lakh acres of arable land in the last three years has been acquired) is being done under a law enacted by the British while the rail roads were being constructed way back in 1894. The CPI(M) has been demanding that this anachronism must be immediately removed by enacting a new law that will take into account the nature of compensation including providing a stake in the future of the project not only to the owners of the land, but also to those dependent upon the land for their livelihood. This has to be a legal arrangement under law. This cannot be left to the whims and fancies of individual corporate houses or the state governments. The need for a negotiation on this must simply not exist. This needs to be enacted under law.

Unfortunately, during these last four years or so, especially when the drive for the Special Economic Zones began aggressively and the issue of land acquisition came to the fore, no new law has seen the light of the day. This needs to be urgently addressed.
Thirdly, the common refrain is that the Left Front government failed to provide adequate security forcing the Tatas to leave Singur. That is not the reason as Ratan Tata himself has stated for the Nano project to leave. Indeed, adequate protection was provided and the state government was discharging its responsibilities towards the maintenance of law and order. The Tatas, however, took a stand that unless everybody cooperates, they are not going to continue to remain in Singur. One can, surely, disagree with such a position. For, after all, no one can say that they shall build their house in a locality only when all others living there will give an assurance that their house will not be burgled. However, like Mamata Banerjee, the Tatas also have an equal right to take an unreasonable position.
In any case, the net result is that Bengal and its people have been denied, temporarily and only in this particular project, the opportunities and advantages arising from such industrialisation. As argued in these columns in the past, what Bengal and its people require to advance further is rapid industrialisation on the basis of the consolidation of the land reforms and attendant increases in yield and productivity in agriculture. This has been a decision arrived at after long discussions in the Left Front and amongst the people and this was emphatically endorsed by the people in the last elections to the assembly when the Left Front won a whopping two-thirds majority on the basis of an election manifesto whose major thrust was for rapid industrialisation. The current opposition is, in fact, a negation of the people’s mandate.

It is, therefore, upto the people of Bengal to decide, when the opportunity arises, to endorse this negation of their earlier mandate or to reject such politics which are acting against the interests of the state and its people. In other words, the politics that led to the re-location of the Nano project from Bengal also needs to be re-located elsewhere in the interests of greater prosperity of Bengal and its people.

Who Prevented The Singur Project From Being Implemented?


by BIMAN BASU


THE exercise of setting up Tata Motors’ small car project in West Bengal began on May 12, 2006 when the Bengal chief minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee and Tata group chairman Ratan Tata met at the Writers’ Buildings. Based on those discussions, on May 18 in the presence of the Bengal chief minister and the industries minister Nirupam Sen, Tata announced that they are ready to invest in the automobile sector at Singur for producing their rupee one lakh small car, Nano.



It was also spelt out that in the main complex, directly 2000 people would be employed. However, in the adjacent ancillary industries, the employment would go up to 10,000. These figures exclude the people who will avail themselves of the benefits through setting up of shops, bazaars, lodges, and accrue other social benefits out of the social activities in and around Singur.
Based on the discussions with the Tata Motors, the government of West Bengal initiated the preliminary preparations to go for the small car project unit at Singur in Hooghly district. Accordingly, the government started the acquisition of land at Singur and this move was supported by a big rally of peasants. The slogan given by the peasantry of Singur was ‘we want industry to be set up at Singur.’


INTRANSIGENT OPPOSITION

In the month of October the same year, the state government called an all-party meeting to identify the land for acquisition purposes and to prepare a land map for the factory. The TMC boycotted the meeting and gave a call for a 12-hour bandh. It is found that after the visit of West Bengal Industrial Development Corporation (WBIDC) officials, the TMC gave another call for bandh against the setting up of the industry at Singur. The government started simultaneously training the young men and women of the peasants’ families of Singur to provide future employment to them at the proposed factory.



However, this was not liked by the TMC. They started assaulting the peasant families of the area. A few days after the incidents when the government declared Section 144 in the area, and did not allow the TMC chief to go there to create vandalism in the villages, she returned to the West Bengal assembly, which was, then in session. She, not being a member of the assembly, came inside the assembly, called upon the TMC legislators and shouted out a wrong version of the incident with concoctions and lies aplenty. And then she gave a reckless call for wild ransacking of the assembly premises, including destruction of the properties of the assembly.


In her presence, the vandal activities were perpetrated by her legislators, damaging in the process property worth several lakhs in the lobby and the library – and the incidents were telecast live on TV channels. They also carried on vandalism within the chamber. After the mischief made by her party’s members, she gave another bandh call the next day. This is just like thieves who after stealing the goods, shout out ‘Thieves! Thieves’- and then make good their escape! What a shameful exercise this was – indeed it was a black day for the state assembly.



2006 witnessed many more anti-industrial activities by the TMC and their cohorts of different varieties from right reactionary to the left sectarian forces along with the so-called civil society patronisers. In the beginning of 2007, the same TMC attacked the WBIDC office without any reason whatsoever and if there is any reason it is only known to the attackers.


2007 also rolled on with lots of irrational and undemocratic activities unleashed by the TMC. These anti-industrialisation forces drawing people, especially hoodlums, from different parts of the state wanted to break down the walls on the perimeter of the factory, hurled bombs, and also attacked and injured five security guards of the factory.



In the beginning of 2008, the Kolkata High Court passed a verdict on the case against land acquisition in Singur lodged by the TMC and their patronisers. In its verdict the High Court clearly stated that the land acquisition is in accordance with the law of the land and thus legally valid. It further declared that the land acquisition was done for the sake of public interest.



The chief minister on different occasions wrote letters to the Trinamul chief inviting her for discussions. However, the latter refused to enter into any parleys. On the contrary, she declared that she would make a ‘great fun’ out of the entire governmental effort. In the third week of August of this year, TMC along with its rainbow alliance commenced blockade near the factory at Singur with a huge amount of expenditure, started to stay there, and made extensive arrangements for food and lodging sponsored by the rainbow combination and their patrons.


BLOCKADE AND AFTER


On August 20, the engineers and other staff of Tata Motors, comprising of both foreigners and Indians, were returning from the factory to their lodging, they were menacingly obstructed by the TMC-led protestors. At this point, the Tata Motors announced that they might think in terms of shifting out the factory away from Singur. During this critical period, the governor of Bengal started to negotiate with the TMC and organised different kinds of meetings where the Bengal chief minister and the industries minister as well as the panchayat minister took part. In certain meetings of this kind, the TMC chief and the chief minister took part in discussions in the presence of the governor.



It was decided through discussions that two persons from the TMC and two from the state government would discuss to find out the ways and means of solutions of the impasse that had rapidly developed. It was unfortunate that the representatives of the TMC did not want to keep on record what they had suggested at the meeting. Nor would they allow any minutes of the discussions to be kept and maintained. This very strange development was never opposed by the governor who wanted to act as the facilitator.



After all this, the new package was announced. The package covered very well the scenario of benefits of the land losers and the sharecroppers, including the agricultural labourers. The industries minister pointed out for the benefit of the people of Bengal that the new package signified a quantitative improvement on the earlier schemes. Apart from a 50 per cent hike in compensation for land, the package also included 10 per cent additional cost of the land price for the land acquired as contained in the earlier package. The beneficiaries can either utilise the funds through business initiative and / or via purchase of land elsewhere in the area.



After all this meticulous pro-people, pro-poor, pro-peasantry exercise, the setting up of a big automobile hub could not materialise at Singur. On October 3, the final curtain was rung down by Ratan Tata who declared that the small car project could not viably start functioning from Singur and that regretfully the Tata Motors would withdraw the project to elsewhere. This sad announcement just during the festival seasons deeply traumatised the people of Bengal, and not just of Singur.

TEMPORARY SETBACK


It is a fact that closing down of the Singur automobile unit temporarily created negative impact on our battle for industrialisation. However, we do not want, by any means, to halt our onward march for the development of Bengal’s economy, and to create jobs for the millions of young men and women of the state. We cannot and must not forget that about 84 per cent cultivable lands in Bengal are in the hands of the small peasants, marginal farmers, and the rural poor, which was made possible through redistributive land reforms in the interest of the exploited masses.



It is a great irony that the destructive forces that always remained with the landlords, big and small, and jotdars (rich peasants) in rural Bengal, suddenly started shedding profuse amount of crocodile’s tears for the marginal farmers and other victims of the member of the feudal society. They tried to befool these sections of people.



If we draw the correct lesson from the history of industrialisation, we find that all battles in Europe had to be waged seriously against the feudal elements. We are sharply aware of the fact that Bengal had an important position in the industrial map of India in the days gone by. However, these industries were traditional in nature. They could not compete effectively in the market without modernisation and gradually over time were shattered by the immutable laws of the market forces. It should be taken note of that Bengal was discriminated against in the issuing of licences, and this went on for more than two-and-a-half decades. Bengal was handicapped by the discriminatory policy of freight equalisation as well.



In 1994, the then Bengal chief minister Jyoti Basu announced a new industrial policy and gradually infrastructural development projects were undertaken for modern industries as well as the renovation of the traditional ones. A sustained campaign, and an improving industrial climate, were shaped by and were based on the increased purchasing capacity of rural Bengal.


It can hardly be denied that around Rs 30,000 crore worth of industrial products are being purchased in the rural market, leaving aside the urban centres. Through this process, at a time when the state government started receiving a positive response from different types of investors, TMC, and its cohorts started to try to make the wheel of progress grind backwards.


DEFEAT THESE FORCES OF DARKNESS


The directionless and aimless opposition had always thought that industrialisation would always be marked out as the success of the LF government; they never could think of whether opposition to industrialisation, especially pro-people industrialisation, would help the people of our state. They even shrilly shouted ‘we would not allow industry to take roots in Bengal because that will not help the peasantry.’



These ugly forces always pretended to be the friends of peasants and farmers and never considered that the highest amount of cultivable land are in the hands of poorest of the poor in the rural areas, incomparable with any other part of the country. Due to the fragmentation of land and the pressure of population through the increase in the families and family members, land is gradually becoming unviable as a source of livelihood.



Their implementing a game plan to put a halt to the development of Bengal by getting direct patronisation of reactionary forces both here and abroad and spending crores of rupees for their malicious campaign based on falsehood, the so-called important personalities who were present with them in every form of campaign are also coming out with funds from their shady sources.


These forces of darkness not only oppose industrial growth but also the infrastructural development through a violent mode and method, which would certainly vitiate the ambience of peace, unity, and amity amongst the people of Bengal. They wanted a few dead bodies to help along their nefarious game plan. The GOWB would not oblige them.



We are sharply aware of the fact that the overwhelming majority of the people of the state especially the younger generation want the development of agriculture, industry, infrastructure, and job opportunities to facilitate a real and tangible economic growth of our Bengal.


Therefore, for the development and growth, the entire democratic masses of the people and especially the young men and women, must come forward to defeat the retrogressive elements who want to see the peace of the graveyard.

Singur industrialisation must continue: Biman Bose

KOLKATA: Left Front chairman Biman Bose on Saturday urged the West Bengal government to continue with its industrialisation programme in Singur, saying that this should be done to accommodate the local youth who had taken training in various trades in anticipation of an industrial project.

“They have been trained for months, selected and now they are deeply frustrated, the State government should see how they can be accommodated… the agenda of industrialising this area should go on,” he told a press conference.

“It is sad to see the exit of the Tatas from Singur, but other projects could be tried out here.” Industry Minister Nirupam Sen on Friday said that State government owned the land acquired at Singur and there was no question of returning it.

Mr. Bose also wanted a mass campaign to expose the people who had indulged in destructive politics, spelling the doom of the project. At a pressmeet elsewhere in the city, Trinamool Congress chairperson Mamata Banerjee said that the withdrawal by the Tatas from Singur was a victory for a people’s movement. She also said that all industrialists were welcome to invest in West Bengal and “it is myth that the industrialisation process will be halted due to one individual ….”

Mr. Bose said that while the TMC had repeatedly been called for talks over the last two years they had refused to come to the table, choosing the path of agitation instead. Even an appeal by veteran leader Jyoti Basu fell on deaf ears. He mentioned in this context that the voice of a majority of people was throttled by the Opposition and a project was derailed although 11,000 out of the total 12,000 land owners had given a thumbs up to the project. Mr. Bose also criticised the Congress for speaking in one voice with the TMC.

He said that India-U.S. nuclear deal would impact the country’s sovereignty.