For our own future's sake 3
A plan we can rely on is one that is honest about alternatives and impacts
- Rahul Goswami
There is an urgent public need to examine the assumptions contained in the
interimreport of the Task Force on the Regional Plan for Goa 2021. Among those
that should have been opened to studied discussion is this one, on page 54:
"Thus, additional housing needed by 2021 will be in the range of 1.69 lakh
(ie total 4.44 lakh minus 2.75 lakh existing in 2001). Of these, 85% of the
houses will be required by the middle classes, the lower middle classes and the
economically weaker sections of Goan society and migrants who also fall in the
above category. The upper middle class will need the remaining 15% of total
required housing ( i.e about 0.25 lakh units)"
There's no explanation about how such massive numbers for Goa have been
calculated. Whose estimates are they? Does the government of Goa have only
this one set of estimates? Are they a private sector calculation? Is our state
government cognisant of the impact of an 'add more now-think of consequences
later' policy for property development? If the interim report is an indication
of the ability to look ahead and plan sensibly, impacts five and ten years
hence are not being considered right now.
What does 169,000 new dwelling units mean? And what does the 85:15 ratio
mean?
* There are 144,000 flats to be built. If the average-sized residential
building contains 20 flats of between 70-100 mt sq, this will mean 7,200 new
residential buildings are being proposed for Goa for the next 12-odd years. Are
we to expect that all over Goa, the construction of 48 buildings a month will
be permitted - every month for the next 144 months!?
* That's the 85% part. The other part is a lot more land-hungry. What will
25,000 "upper class" dwelling units mean? Does it mean luxurious condominiums,
row houses or villas with en suite swimming pools and valley vistas? Whatever
their shape and format, each of these will have a built-up footprint of no less
than 400 mt sq. How much is the total impact? It is one thousand hectares. How
big is that? Only 6 out of Pernem's 26 panchayat areas are each bigger than
that total, only 4 out of Bardez's 33, only 2 out of Tiswadi's 26, only 5 out
of Bicholim's 22.
Think of it as a very large entire panchayat being constructed, paved over,
concreted, fitted with dense plumbing and electricity (but shoddy sewage and
worse garbage disposal) and put on sale. All in just ten years. And that's just
for the rich new residents and settlers. That's what this interim report is
baldly proposing.
The interim report has made no attempt to map or understand the continuing
absence of vital social services in rural Goa. Take primary health centres
(PHC). In Bicholim, 16,036 people living in 6 village panchayats are more than
10 kilometres away from
1
---------------------------------
the nearest PHC. In Pernem it is 39,047 people in 14 panchayats (Pernem has
25), in Sattari it is 6,621 people in 23 panchayats, in Tiswadi it is 15,550 in
6 panchayats, in Canacona it is 12,994 people in 3 panchayats, in Quepem it is
8,416 people in 15 panchayats (Quepem has 35), in Sanguem it is 34,168 people
in 26 panchayats (Sanguem has 45).
Who says so? The central Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, through one
of its autonomous institutions, the International Institute for Population
Sciences (Mumbai) in its 'Ranking and Mapping of Districts, 2006'. Who doesn't
say so? Our 'independent' Task Force doesn't. And here we are only talking
about services that are available on paper, on a map, as a destination, not as
a reliable and life-saving quality.
Planning tasks for Goa for the next ten years must include analysing the
impacts of major policy - whether housing, tourism, industry, human resource
development. This interim report should have covered already considerable
ground in comparing, evaluating, explaining, forecasting, identifying issues,
presenting data, and zooming in on vulnerabilities and opportunities for
self-reliance.
If the Task Force had been primarily concerned about how to present the
consequences of different kinds of economic development for Goa -
agriculture-based, hi-tech industry-based, port-based, etc - it might have
devoted much more effort to choose analysing impacts. For us in our
municipalities, our urbanising panchayats and our vaddos, we are worried about
how consequences compare with each other, for that's how we make long-term
decisions.
Goa's economy must be included at many levels, some of which are already
being changed from bottom up (labour) and from top down (where investment comes
from and how returns are used). For us, planning is about alternatives, and
alternatives is what this Task Force's interim report is extremely short on.
Will shipping and logistics spread from the Mormugao-Verna region? Where to and
what impact will that have? How will small rural businesses stay viable in the
talukas that need themmost for their ability to root employment and capital? Is
there policy in place to ensure this or does it need to be drafted? Is the huge
public capital expenditures being best used in that kind of infrastructure -
for example a new north-south expressway - and what if the public capital was
distributed over many smaller, more locally-oriented, needs, such as the
provisioning of sanitation, sewerage and waste disposal systems? Would that
dispersal have a wider and deeper economic benefit for
Goa's households and panchayats?
We don't have the luxury of going back to decisions if they turn out to hurt
us and to hurt Goa - we are too small and vulnerable to allow that and our
natural resources are far too valuable to squander. That means we don't have a
margin of error any more. That's been eroded in the ten years of reckless
'development' till now. The interim report carries the threat of more such
mistakes. We simply cannot afford any more.
[ Published in the Gomantak Times, today 09 June, 2008 page A8. ]
---------------------------------
Messenger blocked? Want to chat? Here is the solution.
