G O A ' S M E G A C R O R E F I L M S C A N D A L Why is chief minister Manohar Parrikar rushing to recreate Cannes, ignoring rules, regulations and environmental concerns?
http://www.tehelka.com Issue dated May 1, 2004 Cover story of the issue. GOA'S MEGA-CRORE FILM FANTASY: HEADING FOR A FLOP Directed and scripted by Chief Minister Manohar Parrikar, the dream project of bringing Cannes to the sun and beach resort is mired in controversy and charges of serious bungling, reports VK SHASHIKUMAR WATER GENTLY lapping at seductively illuminated promenades. Landscaped water-fronts. Magnificent movies and stars at newly constructed multiplexes. Glitter and glamour. Cameras and the incessant glow of flashlights. This is all part of Goa Chief Minister Manohar Parrikar's fantasy, as he prepares to host the International Film Festival of India (IFFI), a la Cannes, in November this year. But the block-buster may well blow up in the government's face. Because laws have been bent and broken. Tenders for beautifying the city have not followed basic guidelines. Buildings have been demolished and trees arbitrarily cut. Goans are now beginning to agitate. Like all Indian government fantasies, this too has a dubious financial angle. Parrikar can afford the luxury of spending Rs 1 crore everyday, Rs 150 crore in the next five months and Rs 350 crore over the next two years. Opposition parties are now complaining to the Election Commission (EC) that the model code of conduct is being violated. NGOs in Goa too are raising the flag about the blatant disregard for rules and the environmental damage that is likely to ensue. But Parrikar is undeterred. He has had his eyes set on the controversial project ever since the government of India confirmed that Goa would be the permanent film festival venue. Parrikar entrusted the task of building the infrastructure to the Goa State Infrastructure Development Corporation (GSIDC) headed by him but little moved for over seven months. Strangely, full-scale work for building the infrastructure commenced only in mid-March and Parrikar, in the words of an insider, ran amok. One day before Parliament was dissolved on February 6, the Goa government issued a notice in local newspapers. The notice was described as an "expression of interest for development of entertainment facility including multiplexes for the permanent venue of international film festival of India'. Strangely again, the government did not call for a full-fledged tender-oriented process to decide on who would build the multiplexes. "Some of the tenders and work orders were issued two months ago. We're still issuing some of them. The work on the multiplexes were assigned through expression of interest, not tenders," Rajib Sen, GSIDC managing director, admitted. ASK NO QUESTIONS ---------------- Tenders, in fact, are being issued now at breakneck speed and with scant regard for procedures. There is no process of consultation with the residents of Panaji. When NGOs like the Nitol Jinn Trust (NJT) and the People's Movement for Civic Action (PMCA) protested and asked the government to take the people into confidence, they were rebuffed. "I will not share information with you. What can you do?" Parrikar apparently told them. This from a chief minister who went to town when his government legislated the state's Right to Information Act. * "The issue here is not whether the film festival should be held in Goa or not. The issues here are lack of transparency and planning. We want to know whether the government is following the law. We want to know whether the haste to put up the infrastructure will cause irreversible damage to our city," says Patricia Pinto, municipal councillor of Campal, Panaji. Why is Parrikar reluctant to part with information? Why too is the EC not taking note of the projects worth crores being commissioned after the code of conduct has come into place? More importantly, why did the BJP government in Goa wait till the elections were announced to commence work? BEND IT LIKE PARRIKAR --------------------- Parrikar's attempt at keeping information under wraps has only led to motives being imputed. There are reasons why the chief minister is being guarded. A group of architects who are closely associated with the project told TEHELKA that some tenders were issued before the plans were ready. For instance, the tenders for "improvement and beautification at Dona Paula Jetty to Miramar Circle inclusive of beautifying the promenade in this stretch" and "improvement and upgradation of the road from Betim ferry to Patto Bridge bus stand circle" was floated by the GSIDC on December 29, 2003 and opened on January 15, 2004. But the plans for these projects were placed before the standing committee of the corporation of the city of Panaji only on February 2, 2004. According to government rules, any infrastructure development project or intervention in the city must first be approved by the corporation and the Panjim Development Authority before it is forwarded to the GSIDC. (See graphic.) NEVER MIND THE ENVIRONMENT -------------------------- TEHELKA has in its possession the plan for the film festival complex and details about the various projects to "beautify" Panaji. The cost has been nominally fixed at Rs 50 crore. The sum was supposed to have been spent over nine months, but four months have just been washed away by the high tide of inaction. The beautification includes improving parking facilities, jogging tracks, landscaped water-fronts along the Mandovi River, a footpath along the river, toilet facilities, a new bridge in place of Patto Bridge to ease traffic to and from Panjim, subways for pedestrians and expansion of the road to make way for a four-lane boulevard. Cutting of trees is to be avoided wherever and whenever possible, but the widening of roads "requires acquisition of land and cutting of trees". The government's plans also call for the beautification of the sea-front "by providing a landscaped promenade all along with beautiful, illuminated walkways". But here again, it is the fine print that is worrying. The brief is that "water should lap the road" along the riverfront and sea-front promenades and for this, major dredging of river Mandovi is being carried out. The government is now trying to pass this off as "de-silting". "Basically, what we're doing is de-silting and there's no environmental impact of that as such," says Sen. But this is far from the truth. Any construction activity on the riverfront or sea-front requires clearance from the Goa Coastal Regulatory Zone Management Authority. The tender that was floated by the GSIDC clearly mentioned the activity along the riverfront as follows: "River dredging work on the Panjim bank of the River Mandovi from Patto Bridge upto Miramar and dredging sand bars at the mouth of the River Chapora in Goa." The government wants this work to be undertaken at the cost of Rs 6 crore. The fact is that no mention is made of "de-silting". Technically, under government of India laws, no construction work can commence at the waterfront without the submission of the environment impact assessment study. The state government has overlooked this aspect. Parrikar has justified the dredging on Mandovi River as a 'de-silting' exercise. But the Goa Action Group (gag), a conglomerate of NGOs, says that whether it's dredging, de-silting or dumping of mud into the river along Patto Bridge, it would still require clearances from different government agencies. The GAG alleges that Parrikar is trying to hoodwink people by claiming that the government has ordered de-silting of river Mandovi because sewage from the Panjim city has blocked the sewage line dumping effluents into the river. In fact, the controversy over whether it is dredging or de-silting forced the government to ask the National Institute of Oceanography (NIO) to undertake an environment impact assessment study. Despite the NIO's official statement that it will take a month to make an assessment, the dredging on the Mandovi continues. In the process, the government is only endangering the future of the city and its residents by deliberately ignoring the mandatory environment safety approvals. Nandkumar Kamat, a renowned Goan ecologist, says, "There's a lot of flooding in the interior areas of Panjim that is yet to be addressed by the government. All rivers change their courses unpredictably over a period of time. We don't know when and how the Mandovi would o that. So it is dangerous to disturb the river bed." The Tiswadi island, on which the city of Panaji is located, has its own unique ecosystem. Water seeks its own level and a change in one area is transmitted by tide to another. A decade ago, two bridges built across the Mandovi resulted in the alteration of the riverbank across Panjim, along the Reis Magos coastline. "A strip of the beach was submerged after the construction of the two bridges. And now, to prevent the land from caving in, they have dumped concrete blocks along the bank," says the owner of a marine salvaging firm. A letter written by Claude Alvares, founder of the Goa Foundation, to the chairman of the authority, DS Negi, on April 13 is also revealing. "At the last meeting of the Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority, we were asked to approve (though it was not on the agenda) a proposal of the Goa government for development along the Mandovi river... We cleared all those sections of the proposed development (that) did not involve any work within the river. Sections that proposed development work within the river were held over for an environment impact assessment to be submitted to the authority by the NIO.... I was flabbergasted to discover a huge excavation on the river-bed opposite Neelam Restaurant. Two excavators were in fact within the river-bed dredging the area. They were doing this indiscriminately.... Further up, by the side of the existing Patto Bridge, I found that extensive dumping of mud within the riverine area had been carried out. When approving this section, we had clearly stipulated that we were approving it because it did not require any dumping or work within the river.... The excavation of the river bed, particularly in that part of the river's estuary, is indeed a gross coastal regulatory zone (CRZ) violation and so is the dumping of the mud to reclaim portions of the river adjoining the bridge.... The activity of dredging is bound to affect the ecology and stability of the river. We are quite aware that minor intrusions in the past have had negative impacts on the estuary closer to the sea.... I am extremely distressed that the permission given by the authority has been misused in this manner.... The Supreme Court of India has given clear directions that the CRZ notification should not be violated. The authority must, therefore, come down hard on such violators." In this case, the violator is clear. It is the Parrikar-led BJP government in Goa. The reclamation of the river is in full stream to build a new alternative Patto Bridge. Mud has been heaped along the riverbank for the expansion of the road to make a four-lane boulevard along the film festival site. The GSIDC claims that this is just an embankment for driving piles for the four-lane stilt bridge and would be removed once the bridge is built. Incidentally, the tender advertised by the government on March 23 for the "design and construction of the new bridge at Patto in Panaji including approach roads" is for Rs 10 crore. Since the tender was advertised at the time the model code of conduct was enforced by the EC, it was a clear violation of guidelines. I AM THE LAW ------------ Perhaps aware that it would be violating law after law, the government foresaw resistance from various quarters and issued an ordinance as a safeguard. The Goa (Issue of Single Point Clearance for International Film Festival) Ordinance, 2004, promulgated in early April, gives the government the "power to change the zone of any area for the purpose of implementation of various projects connected to International Film Festival of India which otherwise is vested in the Planning and Development Authority or Department of Town and Country Planning Act 1975". Under this Ordinance, the government will have the "power to inspect, visit, review and monitor any project and its implementation, execution, operation, and management through its official or officials and the persons in charge of project shall be bound to give full cooperation." This single window clearance enables the government to ride roughshod over all legitimate concerns of the people of Panaji. It allows the GSIDC to bypass all legal and mandatory procedures. Obviously, the haste to approve massive infrastructure plans without public scrutiny has led to questions being asked about how the government is spending the money. Incidentally, the state annual budget for this year shows only Rs 5-crore allocation for IFFI infrastructure. But rules obviously don't matter. Take this, for example. The Central Public Works Department manual clearly states that for major works, especially those estimated to cost more than Rs 5 crore, tenders should be invited by following the two-cover system, the technical bid cover and the financial bid cover. The price-bid cover of only those bidders will be opened and compared, who have been pre-qualified after opening up the technical bid. The GSIDC on 29th March published a tender notice inviting bids only in one cover, where both the technical information and price quotations were to be enclosed. "I have never seen such a flagrant violation of government guidelines by a public sector corporation especially when the chief minister himself is the chairman of that corporation," says Aravind Bhatikar, who retired as the chairman of Mormugao Port Trust in 1996. The NJT, that Bhatikar heads, alleges that the government has subverted the tendering process. The NJT, along with other NGOs like PMCA, Goa Desk and Bailancho Saad, plan to launch a vigorous people's movement against the waste of public money under the guise of IFFI. In fact, a public interest litigation (PIL) is being drafted, accusing the government of having committed public money under a cloud of secrecy. MULTIPLEXES, NOT DEVELOPMENT ---------------------------- A controversy is also brewing over the planning of the IFFI infrastructure itself. "More than Rs 50 crore will be spent on cinema-viewing facilities in a city that has a population of less than a lakh. The facilities are going to be used for 10 day sin a year. The government has planned to build a new multiplex, reconstruct a nearly 75-year--old cinema hall, National, for Rs 9.5 crore. It also plans to modify two existing cinema halls, Ashok and Samrat, at a price tag of Rs 7 crore and build a temporary festival theatre to be pulled down after two years, for Rs 20 crore. "This criminal waste of resources could be redirected to Goa's primary needs -- sewerage systems, drinking water, solid waste management, improvement in roads and electricity, and upgradation of health services," says Bhatikar. BUILD NOW, SCRAP LATER ---------------------- The jewel in the crown of Parrikar's dream project is the main festival theatre that is coming up in the area where Panaji's famed Campal Football Stadium once stood. The stadium, the brainchild of Goa's first chief minister late Dayanand Bandodkar, has been demolished to make way for the festival theatre. "Next to the Kala Academy, there's an old football stadium where a temporary festival theatre with a capacity of 1,500 is being built. It will be a prefabricated steel and glass structure," says Sanjit Rodrigues, Panjim municipal commissioner and nodal officer for IFFI. When citizens' groups protested the demolition of the football stadium, Parrikar assured them that this Rs 20-crore festival theatre would be "temporary" and that after two years the football stadium would be rebuilt. The chief minister's promise is being questioned because the tender issued for the project stated clearly that the work involved "reinforced concrete, structural steel, civil and architectural works..." Parrikar had gone on record saying that 90 percent of the material used for building this temporary structure can be used later while building a permanent structure. "Technically, what Parrikar says is feasible. Of course, it can be dismantled and rebuilt elsewhere," says Bruno Dias Souza, former director of the School of Planning and Architecture, New Delhi. "But then there must be an overall plan in which this dismantled structure could again be reassembled. The problem is that we only know that the temporary structure will cost Rs 20 crore. But in reality it will cost more because of its re-usability. It is like buying a Maruti 800 and then trying to retro-fit it. So the cost incurred is not only in buying the car but also in redesigning it. And here the government is not telling people how much more it will cost," says Souza. According to Rodrigues, the government of India has designated Goa as one of the five convention centre destinations in the country. When the convention centre comes up, this temporary theatre is supposed to be fitted in at that location as a multi-purpose auditorium. But when is the convention centre going to come up? "That is not certain right now," Rodrigues says. The convention centre in Goa has been officially projected by the GSIDC as a Rs 1500-crore project. In any case it can't come up in the next two years and Rodrigues says that the temporary structure "can't last more than two years". So if Goa is to be the permanent venue for IFFI and if the convention centre does not come up in the next two years, will the government dismantle the proposed "temporary festival theatre" and rebuild another temporary venue of Rs 20 crore at some other site? IN THE NAME OF TOURISM ---------------------- Worse is the state's attempt to link the film festival with tourism. "We will get more infrastructure in the form of convention halls and theatres and this will generate interest throughout the year. The government wants to attract big meetings, seminars and conventions in Goa and pack its tourist calendar," says state tourism secretary Suryanarayanan. The government's strategy seems to be to capture up-market tourism. But it is misplaced because, as the government itself admits, "only backpackers are coming to Goa". According to Suryanarayanan, "slowly with the IFFI, when over 1000 top VIPs and approximately 10,000 people will come to watch the movies, interest will be generated." But citizens' groups have other concerns on these grandiose plans to boost tourism. "A representative of the Cannes film festival organising committee suggested that Goa required a partying atmosphere and floating casinos. She said that it needed to be a 'fun place' for the festival to be successful. We are opposed to that kind of attitude," says Martins of Bailancho Saad. "Alcoholism and prostitution are a part of the casino culture which the government is trying to promote through IFFI. We consider that a threat," says Martins. Clearly, the government's strategy is based on assumptions and not hard-boiled thinking. The assumption is that staging the IFFI will bring big spenders to Goa and "slowly the income can be doubled and tripled in three to four years in the form of high taxes on high spenders". Goa generates Rs 500 crore from tourism -- one third of its GDP. And instead of improving its services infrastructure -- that might actually attract more tourists -- it is spending Rs 350 crore over two years on beautifying Panaji and building eight large cinema viewing facilities where the existing three dilapidated theatres play mostly soft porn movies. "In my opinion, the IFFI is going to be a non-event since it is not expected to be a hi-fi glittering event like Cannes. The government is misleading the people by creating hype. The festival in Delhi did not attract more than 20-30 foreign delegates. The chief minister has publicly announced that 1,500 foreign delegates would attend the IFFI. All this is nothing but grand-standing. The manner in which the projects for the IFFI have been conceived and the manner in which it is being executed, it is widely seen as an unabashed attempt at collecting funds for the BJP," Bhatikar says. Suryanarayan, however, is convinced that tourism will get a 40 percent filip. "We can go for two to three hours of cultural shows which can be priced and packaged with the hotels and tour operators so that sound and light shows can be held throughout the year like in Bangkok and Hong Kong." Long run shows in theatres is what the government thinks will bring in droves of tourists. There were 17 lakh domestic tourists in the last season and 130 charter flights from Russia that disgorged tourists onto the beach paradise. According to the tourism secretary, tourists are complaining that "there are no places left where they can spend a good amount of money". He is also sure that the VIPs will turn up. His argument: "Cannes did not happen in a year. It took decades. So, we have to make it happen with proper advertisements and publicity here and abroad." BUT WHO'S PAYING? ---------------- What is worrying the Goans is whether they will have to pay for Parrikar's Rs 350-crore fantasy. The chief minister has gone on record having said that he would try and get Rs 50 crore from the Centre. But where will the remaining Rs 300 crore come from? "That is not decided yet. The Centre will probably pay a part of it, but how much and in what form. I don't know," says Sen, adding, "The film festival per se will not bring the money back. But it will have huge spin-off effects as far as high-end tourism is concerned. We are confident of the chain effect of the festival to recover the money spent." But as Souza (see column) points out, the plans for the film festival complex cannot exist in isolation. They have to be in context with plans for the city. That's exactly what the government has not done. Souza says any plans that is piece-meal could have disastrous consequences for the city city of the size of Panjim. But Sen affirms the piece-meal nature of GSIDC's plans saying they are moving on a case-to-case basis. It is the Parrikar government's fantasy after all. So what if this means disregarding environmental concerns, building laws and fundamental precepts of urban design. In a few days, a ministerial delegation headed by Goa's Power Minister Digambar Kamat will go to Cannes. The effort to bring Cannes to Goa is on track. The BJP's dream project is on a roll. -- With inputs from Sanjukta Sharma and Mayabhushan Nagvenkar. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- GOA FILM FESTIVAL: GRANT PLANS OR GRAND SCAM? ------------------------------------------------------------------------- THE EXACT SEQUENCE of procedures that the government must follow for the execution of any mega project: * According to government guidelines, once the consultants (architects and designers) finalise the plans for a project, it is submitted for approval to the Town and Country Planning Department. A copy of the plan should also be submitted to the Panjim Planning and Development Authority for vetting. * Once approved, the Corporation of the City of Panjim must issue clearance licences for the work to start. If trees have to be cut for the proposed project, then a separate clearance from the Conservator of Forests must be obtained. * According to the Town and Country Planning Act, unless there is a licence, nobody (including the government itself) can demolish or build anything. Buildings were demolished and trees cut nonetheless. After public protests, the contractor entrusted with the task of cutting down trees obtained a licence to do so from the Department of Forests. * After these formalities, the project has to obtain the approval of the Coastal Regulation Zone Management Authority (CRZMA). In such cases, the CRZMA also calls for a detailed Environmental Impact Study. Projects that come up close to any waterfront require mandatory CRZMA clearance. In this case, the project was started without any such clearance. Public protests forced the government to commission an environmental impact assessment study. The National Institute of Oceanography, which has been entrusted with the task of carrying out the study, says it will take at least a month to finish assessment. But the construction work is in full swing. * Finally, tenders for such projects can only be issued after the mandatory clearances and obtaining of licences. Yet, tenders were issued and contracts signed before such procedures were adhered to. More importantly, the tenders were issued much before the plans for the projects were finalised. THE PARRIKAR BYPASS: When the government realised that citizens' bodies might contest its deliberate breach of law, it passed an over-arching ordinance that enabled it to set up a single window clearance body for the execution of the IFFI project. This will inevitably make dissent difficult. It also helps the government evade accountability. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- GUEST COLUMN/BRUNO DIAS SOUZA: The public has been asked to shut up ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Where it usually takes two years to start up, the government aims to complete the construction in five months I must say I don't have first hand information about how Goa is preparing itself for the IFFI. But I know this much. There have been short cuts. This is what I have gathered from architect friends who are closely involved in the construction of various venues around the city. One firm is to handle the main complex while the rest will be under several architects. This is a problem. As far as the intervention in the city is concerned, the plan has to be an integrated one. The main complex for the film festival must be integrated with the plan. It should not be done in a piecemeal manner by several architects. There should be one architect with the overall responsibility for integrating the various building interventions in the city of Panjim. In the modern context, this person functions as the urban designer. The film festival complex will be part of the city. Its context is the city. In the fact of such a massive and lasting impact on the infrastructure and character of the city, one has to take into account the environment of the city, both man-made and natural. So, before any building activity for a large-scale project starts, an Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) is crucial. If it is the river, in this case the Mandovi, then the EIA must respond to questions like -- how will the new constructions affect the river? How will it affect the topography? Will the lives and livelihood of those dependent on the river be threatened? Equally important, in a small city like Panjim, is a social impact study. The study will have to look at the impact on pedestrians, traffic and heritage buildings in the heritage Campal area. The architects start on their 'building forms' (designs) only after the completion of such studies. The conclusion from these studies must be factored into the design. Then comes the question of visual impact. What about aesthetics? Will all the interventions planned for Panjim actually beautify the city? It will beautify in the sense of nice computer pictures -- promenades with pretty flowers and all that. But it can destroy the old world charm of the city. What is ironical is that while globally urban designers are engaged in de-congesting the city centres, Panjim seems to be attempting the reverse. People who have been awarded the contract have not given much thought to these things. They have failed to see an integrated plan. I am also worried that there is a rise in the pressure on the city's infrastructure without a concurrent improvement in its services. Panjim's public utility services just do not work. Instead of improving the quality of life, the government is hell bent on superimposing the film festival on its citizens. No wonder this project has gone a bit too fast. In most countries, including India, sketch designs of such projects are made after the preparatory studies are completed. The plan is, then, projected to the public to elicit their response. The idea is that the government should be able to generate a public debate on the project and be transparent about the cost and end us. The idea is to get the people to participate. They should feel a sense of ownership and pride about the project. But here the public has been asked to shut up. And I am concerned. I would say that it would have at least taken two years to get started. The government reportedly wants to build the infrastructure in five months, spending at least 30 crore a month. Technically, anything is possible. But why this haste? Because the government wants it. Period. It would be foolish to expect anything else than a shoddy job and bad, hasty planning. Eventually, the cost-benefit will hurt Goa. Goa's citizens must ask the government who will pay for this? For its maintenance? Will there be more taxes to raise funds? Cannes was a well-known tourist destination before it became a part of the cinema world's calendar? How can a few thousand high society people attending the film festival enhance tourism in the state? [Bruno Dias Souza is former director of the School of Planning and Architecture, New Delhi. He spoke to VK Shashikumar.] --- * This is factually incorrect. The Goa Right to Information Act was passed by Pratapsing Rane's Congress government. It is however true that Manohar Parrikar has himself used the law to dig up information when he was in the Opposition, and has repeatedly promised transparency when he has been in power. ########################################################################## # Send submissions for Goanet to [EMAIL PROTECTED] # # PLEASE remember to stay on-topic (related to Goa), and avoid top-posts # # More details on Goanet at http://joingoanet.shorturl.com/ # # Please keep your discussion/tone polite, to reflect respect to others # ##########################################################################