[The activists' campaign against the Bill appears to be yielding positive results. And, the "political" opposition is now apparently much better informed. It looks rather likely that the draft Bill will be significantly revised.
The draft Bill provides two categories of caps on liabilities: for the operators affiliated with the Central Government it is 300 million SDR; for other operators it Rs. 500 crore (adjustable to a minimum of Rs. 100 crore). The overall cap per incident, which applies to the GoI, is 300 million SDR. The implications are self-evident: two categories of operators are envisaged - public, with higher liability cap of 300 million SDR, and private, with much lower liability cap of Rs 500/100 crore. The Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace (CNDP) written submissions dated June 18th and 28th and oral submission to the Standing Committee on June 24th made this point amply clear. Also the aspect that given the unique nature of nuclear industry with its catastrophic potentials, the entry of private players, with profit making as the prime motive, as operators could just spell disaster. Apart from many other points, the other major point made was that there must not be any fixed overall cap on liabilities. That'd be a tremendous injustice to the victims. It has got to be openended. These points are being constantly hammered.] I/III. http://www.indianexpress.com/news/To-appease-BJP--govt-makes-changes-in-nuclear-Bill/659261 To appease BJP, govt makes changes in nuclear Bill *Swaraj Thapa* Posted online: Thu Aug 12 2010, 08:18 hrs *New Delhi : *Buckling under pressure from the BJP, the government on Wednesday decided to incorporate several changes suggested by the Opposition in the civil nuclear liability Bill and bring a redrafted legislation next week with the hope that the move would pave the way for its passage in the ongoing monsoon session of Parliament itself. The government now proposes to circulate the redrafted Bill to members of the Standing Committee for Science and Technology next Monday, take it up for discussion and adoption on Tuesday, and table it in the Rajya Sabha on Wednesday. Since the two-month period of the Standing Committee is to end tomorrow, chairman T Subbirami Reddy, sought a one-week extension from Rajya Sabha chairman Hamid Ansari for the committee. The BJP, however, kept its cards close to its chest on Wednesday, refusing to commit themselves to the passage of the Bill despite the leader of the House, Pranab Mukherjee, convening a meeting of the BJP top brass early morning to break the deadlock. Mukherjee sought the cooperation of the BJP leaders — L K Advani, Jaswant Singh, Murli Manohar Joshi and Yashwant Sinha, besides both leaders of Opposition Sushma Swaraj and Arun Jaitley — and said the government would try to address their concerns. Should the BJP accept the government’s proposed amendments, the Left parties would remain the lone Opposition to the Bill. Sources said in the meeting on Wednesday, the BJP demanded that the Bill be redrafted while raising questions on key provisions, including cap on the compensation to be paid in the event of a nuclear accident, the tilt towards private players, and the need for becoming a member of the Convention on Supplementary Compensation (CSC). “The committee cannot hustle through the proceedings,” senior leader Jaswant Singh told reporters after the meeting. The BJP, especially, was of the view that the Bill is primarily aimed at bringing in private players at some stage in the future. However, Minister for Science and Technology Prithviraj Chavan, who was also present, is understood to have assured the BJP leaders that there were no plans by the government to allow private operators for the next 20 to 30 years. Additionally, he said this could not be done without changing the Atomic Energy Act. The BJP leaders sought to know why the government was rushing through the legislation, when several other legislations are pending with the Standing Committees. The sources said neither Mukherjee nor his junior colleagues responded when asked if the Bill was being pushed to time it for US President Barack Obama’s visit. II. http://www.hindu.com/2010/08/12/stories/2010081257101200.htm *Nuclear liability bill must be India-specific: Sushma* Special Correspondent *“We are not opposing the bill for the sake of opposing it”* NEW DELHI: The government and the Bharatiya Janata Party seem to have conceded some ground to each other on the proposed nuclear civil liability bill in the process of trying to arrive at an agreed text. The BJP's earlier stance was that the government was paving the way to bring in private players as nuclear plant operators and limit their liability. And if this sector was not to be opened to private players, the bill was not needed. This view was repeatedly articulated by Arun Jaitley and other senior party leaders. However, on Wednesday, Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha Sushma Swaraj conceded “such legislation is indeed needed, but it must be India-specific.” She also said the party would accept the government's assurance that there was no plan for opening up the nuclear sector to private operators. The government that had capped liability at the first level at Rs. 500 crore was now prepared to consider the Opposition demand for “unlimited liability” to be administered entirely through a claims commissioner, instead of splitting up the liability at two different levels. “If the bill is re-drafted and shown to us, if it is India-specific, we can agree to it. We are not opposing the bill for the sake of opposing it; we do need such a law,” Ms. Swaraj said. She added her party did not think there was any need for India to contribute to and become a member of the Convention on Supplementary Compensation. “We can set up our own fund. We have suggested that.” She said during the meeting after “listening to us,” Mr. Mukherjee said “there could be some meeting ground.” The government indicated it was ready to hold a similar dialogue with the Left parties, but they, it said, seem to have taken a “political decision” not to support the bill. The government rejected a suggestion by the Opposition it was in a hurry to get the bill through Parliament ahead of the visit of United States President Barack Obama. “We have to get the bill through. That is our responsibility, as it is also to try and take other parties along. We need the bill and that is recognised by the Opposition too. What has that to do with Mr. Obama's visit?” As he came out of the meeting with Mr. Mukherjee, Mr. Jaswant Singh said the BJP cannot be “hustled.” He conceded that a national law was necessary and nuclear civil liability arising should cover any accident — not only new nuclear plants but also existing ones as well as those in the strategic sector. Mr. Bansal said the government was making an effort to get the BJP on board, but primarily the power and responsibility for drafting the bill rested with it. III. http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/Nuclear-bill-Panel-gets-one-more-week/articleshow/6296544.cms Nuclear bill: Panel gets one more week 12 Aug 2010, 0519 hrs IST,ET Bureau NEW DELHI: The Opposition on Wednesday managed to put off tabling of the NuClear Liability Bill by at least a week, but unfazed by the lack of consensus over it the government was planning to take up the legislation in the ongoing monsoon session of Parliament itself. The standing committee on science and technology, which is scrutinising the legislation, was to finalise its report on Thursday. However, after a meeting convened by finance minister Pranab Mukherjee with top BJP leaders, the parliamentary panel was given a week’s extension. “We have not arrived at a consensus yet. It cannot be rushed. It should be guided by national priority. A number of issues have to be addressed,” BJP leader Yashwant Sinha said after the meeting, which was attended by L K Advani, Sushma Swaraj and Arun Jaitley. BJP conveyed to the government that the report should not be finalised “at gunpoint” as it was a key piece of legislation to provide relief to the victims of a nuclear accident. Opposing the bill in its present form, BJP demanded a new legislation which would be India-specific and victim-centric. According to sources, the government was willing to consider two concerns raised by the Opposition — a “no fault compensation regime” with payouts to be decided by the Claims Commissioner and doing away with the Convention for Supplementary Compensation (CSC) for nuclear damage. They said that since the government had assured them that private operators will not be allowed for 20-30 years, there was no need for CSC. BJP argued that in the context of only public sector being allowed in India to operate nuclear plants the bill has no relevance and if it is designed to safeguard the interests of American suppliers of nuclear power plant, then there has to be adequate provisions for proper compensation and criminal liability in case of any accident. If the government takes up the bill in its present form, it will have to count on each of its allies like BSP, SP and RJD to ensure its passage. BJP and the Left have made it clear that they will oppose the bill. Even if the bill, which is essential for operationalisation of the Indo-US nuclear deal, scrapes through in Lok Sabha, the government will find it difficult to get the nod of the Upper House, where the UPA is in a minority. At the meeting, the BJP leaders asked the government whether it was in a hurry to bring the bill because of US President Barrack Obama’s impending visit to India. However, the government did not respond. BJP might give a dissent note on the report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee looking at the Civil Nuclear Liability Bill if its concerns are not taken into account by the government. -- Peace Is Doable -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB.
