PREVIOUS

NB/4J/7.00

ߴ֟ ֵ : ֳ֬ , և ֆ , ֆ ߛ ו֮֟ ׾ֵ ָ , ֳ ָ ֮ ֲ ֤õ ֟ ֮ ׻֋ ֛ , ֯ ִֵ Ӭ

ֳ֬ ( ָ֕ ״) : ֯ ִֵ ״ֻ , ֯ ִ֯ ו֋

ߴ֟ ֵ : ֳ֬ , NDA ָָ ٣ ןֵ ֌ ӟ׻֟ , UPA ָָ ֮ ٣ ןֵ ֵ ߠ , ֕֙ , ¯׸ִ և ֮֟ ָ֮ , NDA ָָ ֵֻ ߕ̻ ߴ֟ ֜ , ߴ֟ , ϳ־, ִ ֮֟ ָ ִ ߕ ߴ֟ ָ ֛ פ ֵօ ִ֟ פ ֮֟ ִ֮֟, ֟׾, NDA ָָ ִֵ ֮ , ו ֻ ָ ֮ 2020 ׾֟ ֮֮ ֟ , ֟׾ ֕

ֳ֬ , ֢ ֮֮ߵ ֤õ ָ Ծ־ã ָ և ָ , , ֮ ֺ և ָ ִ ֮֟ ָ - ֺ ֵ ֵ ָ ֕֙ ײ֛ ֵ , - ߕ - ֓ , ײֵ , , ֌ , ֕ , ֛ , և , ß ָ߲ ֯ ִ֮ ־ ׯ֔ ֻ 16 ֋ ן ߙ , ֜ ״ֻ , 19 ֋ ן ߙ ֵ ֮ ߴ ״ֻ, 22 ֋ ן ߙ ָ֕ ֣י ֮ ֵ ָָ ָ߲ ֣י - ߴָ ֛ , ָָ ָ ֻ , ֻ, 55 60 ֋ ן ׻֋ ӡ ֜ և ָ ׮ֵӡ

ֳ֬: ֯ ִ֯

ߴ֟ ֵ : ֳ֬ , ״֮֙ ֮ ֟ ִ֯

ֻ ܟָ : ֲ ֟ և , ָ ֲ ֟ ״׮Ù ־ֲ ו֋

ߴ֟ ֵ : ֳ֬ , ָָ ãן ӳ߸ , ׻֋ ߴ֟ ָ ־֮֬ ֕ ָ֕ ָ ָ֟ ̸֕ ֮ ֺ ֮-֮ ߕ ֲ וֲ ִ ָ ״ֻ, ֮ ֺ , ϲӬ֮ ֺ NDA ֵֻ 8 ֤ ™ߵ ִ֤ , ו ߻ֻ ߮ ֮֯ , ߮ ֮֯ ָָ ֮ ִֵ ֓ פֵ, UPA ָָ Ծ־ã פ ... (־֮֬)

ֳ֬ ( ָ֕ ״) : ֲ ִֵ ײֻ , ֯ ך

ߴ֟ ֵ : ֳ֬ , ״֮֙ ִ֯ Ծ־ã פ , ָ֕ ֜ , ׻֋ ߴ֟ ֜ , ߴ֟ ָ ָָ ̸֕ , ׮ֵס֟ , ֣ ִ ֮֟ ֣ , ִ ֮֟ ֣ օ ֮ , ֮ ֟ ִ֯ ֮־֤ (ִ֯)

׮ ֵ (׿ִ ֻ) : ֳ֬ , և ֟ և ֜ ִֵ ֲӤ , ִֵ ֯ ִֵ ֮ ׿ ֟ - ָָ և , և ֜ NDA ̴֮ ß ̴֮ և և , UPA ָָ 2 ֻ ֋ פ ָ֕ ־ , 2004 ֲ ֢ ӳֻ , ֮ ֕ ֵ ֮ ֜ ֵ ָ פ ֟ , ָ ӡ ֮ פ ӡֵֻ ֮ פ ߬ ֟ և ֜, ָָ -ָ ֲ ָ ֓ ӡֵֻ ӡ , ָ ִ ß 4K/AKG ָ ֿ:

TMV-AKG/4K/7.05

׮ ֵ (֟) : ֯ ֳ ֻ ִ ָ ֣-֣ ָ և ָ ֟ ָ߲ ִ ֮֟ ֟ , ֻ ֟ ֟ , ֲֻ֟ ָ ׻֋ ָ ֟ ִ ָָ ָ ֟ , ֕ և, ׾µ ֋, ߤ ãן ָ-ָ ָ ֤ ו֮֟ ֓ , ָָ ָ ָ ֋, , և ֜ ֋ ָָ ִ ֮֟ ָ߲ ִ ֻ ߅

( ֳ֯ן ߚ߮ )

֣-֣ ָ ָָ ֻ ֋ -ߕֻ ֟ , ֟ ִ֮ ֜, ֜ ֋, ָ , ֲ ӟָ™ߵ ָ֕ ֜ ֟ , ָ ϳ־ ֛ ֲ ָ ׾֢ ӡ ־ֻ ֟ ֲ ָ ֵ ֟ , ָ ֯ ִ Ù , և , ֯ ו֋, ß ֋օ פ ָ-ָ ־ֻ ֋, ӡֵֻ , ִ , ִ ֲ ֛ ִ ָ ָ ֯ ָ ל ל ֤ , ׻֋ ֮ 700 ֵ ִ ״ֻ֟ ָ ֲ ֛ , ߴ֟ 925 ֵ , וִ ֛֯ (֮֮ߵ ֤õ ֵ ָ ) և ֮ ߋ 480 ִ ֵ , ֻ֟ , ֲ ֻ ָ ֮ ָָ ֟ ׸ãן ֲ ׳֮ ָ ֮ ֟ ֜ ֟ , ָ ֮ ֻ ״ֻ֟ ֛ߋ ִ֮ ָ ִ֮ ֮ ׯ֔ ָָ, ָָ ֤ ָ ֛ߋ ָָ ֋, ߋ , ׻֋ ָ ֮ , ֮ ֛ ߬ ֟ ִ ֤ ִ ֕ , ִ ֤ ֟ , ָ߲ ֟ , ָ߲ ֮ ֟ , ָ ߬ ֋, ִ ֤ ִ ֤ ֟ Ӥ ֤ , ו֮ ׻֋ ָָ , ٣ ןֵ ߅ ָָ , ָָ ֤ ׻֋ ߅ ִ ֮֟ ִ ו֮֟ , ִ ֮֟ ׻֋ ֣ և , ָָ , ָ֕ ֮ ָ , ָ ָ߲ ߓ ֮ , ָ ֌ ֮ , ָ ֮ ׸֯ , ֻֻ ֮ ? ָ ֟ ֟ , ָ ֻ ֟ ָ ֕, ֻ֋ և ו֮֟ ֜, ֜, ֲֻ֟ , ֮ ֮ ָ ֻ, ֮ ֯ ꌙ , ױ ֟ פ ֋ ָָ ֮֮ ׻֋ , ָָ ֮ ׻֋ ֮ ߴ֟ ׻֋ ӑ ӑ և ֤֕ ֟ , ...(־֮֬)... ֤֕ ׻֋ ֛ ֛օ ו ֤֕ ֯ ֻ , ו ֤֕ ֵ֤ ֯ , ֤֕ ִ ֮֟ ׻֋ ִ ֮֟ ֤֕ ִ ֮֟ ֻ ֛߅ ׻֋ ֯ ָ , ָ ֯ ָ ֮ , , ֯ ֮ ֮֟ ֮ꅠ ֣, ֮ ִ֯ ֮־֤ (ִ֯)

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: The Short Duration Discussion on steep rise in the prices of essential commodities is concluded. The reply will be tomorrow. Now, we shall take up the Half-an-Hour Discussions.

ߴ֟ ִ þָ֕ : ָ, כ ֟ ևԅ ïߓ օ

ֳ֯ן : ֲ ֵ , ïߓ

ߴ֟ ִ þָ֕ : , פ ָ, ïֻ ֮ פ օ ָ, ïߓ

ֳ֯ן : ߻ ִ ֙ և ֵ ִֵ ֵ Except Congress (I) party, all other parties have exhausted their time. (4/ָ ָ ֿ:)

RG/HMS/7.10/4L

ߴ֟ ִ þָ֕ : maiden speech , extra ֋߅

ֳ֯ן : Half-an-Hour Discussions ׻Ù ...(־֮֬)...

ߴ֟ ִ þָ֕ : ֮ maiden speech

ֳ֯ן : ֋, maiden speech ә ..(־֮֬)

ӕֵ ֈ : ָ, ״֮֙ ־

ֳ֯ן : Please cooperate. ֯ ߛ ...(־֮֬)... ִ ...(־֮֬)...

ߴ֟ ִ þָ֕ : ׮־ , ֲ ־ֲ ״֮֙ ־ ו֋

ֳ֯ן : ־ֲ ״֮֙

ߴ֟ ִ þָ֕ : ָ, ׻ ו֋ ־ֲ ״֮֙ ־ ו֋

(Ends)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* Pp 583 Onwards will be issued as Supplement.

RG/HMS/7.10/4L

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Now we will take up the Half-an-Hour Discussion. Shri T.R. Zeliang.

 

HALF-AN-HOUR DISCUSSION ON POINTS ARISING OUT OF ANSWER TO UNSTARRED QUESTION NO.191 GIVEN ON 3RD MARCH, 2006, REGARDING EXTENSION OF RAIL LINE FROM DIMAPUR/DHANSIRI TO IMPHAL

 

SHRI T.R. ZELIANG (NAGALAND): Mr. Deputy Chairman, Sir, thank you for allowing me to mention the grievances of the people of the North-Eastern Region and, Nagaland, in particular.

Sir, way back in 1980, a survey was conducted by the Railway Department to open a new railway line from Diphu-Karong via Peren District, Nagaland, and the same was submitted to the Railway authorities for their consideration. Pursuant to this, the then hon. Minister of Railways, Shri Nitish Kumar, laid the foundation stone of the Diphu-Dhansiri-Karong on 17th November, 1998. The said function was graced by the Chief Minister, Deputy Chief Minister and the Members of Parliament from Manipur. It was believed that the North-East Frontier Railways proposed to link Manipur by a 123 km. railway line from Diphu-Dhansiri to Karong. This new rail line was to pass through one district in Assam, two districts in Nagaland and one district in Manipur covered by multi-ethnic groups of people in this region. This new rail line, if implemented, will be a new era for the nation towards trade gateway to the South Asia corridor.

Sir, I had raised this question in this august House to know the intention of the government and, in reply to my supplementary question, the hon. Minister clearly stated that the new rail line, Jeribam-Tupul (Imphal), recently inaugurated by the hon. Prime Minister was in lieu of Diphu-Dhansiri-Karong...

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: You put your questions. You cannot make a speech.

SHRI T.R. ZELIANG: I have to give facts and figures. The Chief Minister of Manipur suggested an alternative arrangement, that is, Jeribam-Tupul. The Karbi-Anglong Autonomous District Council protested against the approved new rail line, which was passing through the Dhansiri forest. Sir, here, the intention is politically ill-motivated as there was no objection from any quarter ever since the survey was conducted in 1980 and till the time the Supplementary Budget provision was made in 1997-98. Thereafter, the foundation stone was laid by the former Railways Minister, Shri Nitish Kumar, at Karong on 17th November, 1998, when the former Chief Minister, Deputy Chief Minister and all the Members of Parliament of Manipur graced the occasion. I have a copy of the said programme if anyone is interested to have a look at it. The Environment and Forests Ministry has also issued the clearance certificate. Now, what is their justification in changing the alignment or shifting the project from North to South? Is it because it will be shorter in distance? Or, will there be lesser number of bridges and tunnels? Or, is it just to avoid the State of Nagaland?

(Continued by 4M)

4m/7.15/ks

SHRI T. R. ZELIANG (CONTD.): This is my first question.

Mr. Deputy Chairman, Sir, I have no objection, whatsoever, if the Railway Minister wants to provide new rail lines to Tupul/Imphal from any direction, but why should it be with the intention to scrap out Nagaland from the project? If the later rail alignment is more viable and feasible, why do all goods transport or buses use the National Highway 39 that is passing through Nagaland? I think the hon. Prime Minister was not briefed properly before the inauguration of the new project. For example, if the Nagas of Nagaland or Manipur come out and protest that they will not allow the National Highway 39 beyond their land, will the Centre agree? Or, will the people of Imphal Valley agree to travel by the National Highway 53 -- Jeribam-Silchar-Guwahati? They will never agree because there will be a difference of more than 200 kms. in distance. So, I would like to question: why set aside a project which has taken almost two decades to get the final approval? Therefore, my humble submission to this august House is that the Government needs a proper study on ground before taking such an arbitrary action.

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: You are making a speech. You just put your question.

SHRI T. R. ZELIANG: I will take a few minutes more. Sir, I have to explain it.

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: This is Half-an-Hour Discussion. You put your question. The Minister will reply. Then, you can put further supplementaries.

SHRI T. R. ZELIANG: No, no. Sir, Half-an-Hour Discussion means I have to make my submission and explain. Otherwise, the Minister's reply will not be proper.

It is pertinent to point out that it belies reason as to how the railway track passing through the Kaziranga National Park is legal, while the railway line passing through the Dhansiri Reserve Forest is illegal, despite the fact that the Ministry of Environment & Forests had given its `No-Objection Certificate' to this project. If the Railway Ministry so desired, the alternative alignment could have been diverted easily within the five sq. km. area.

I would also like to point out the inherent peculiar topography of the North-East Region, which is virtually land-locked, having no waterway or rail connectivity. Even the air service is an apology to air service because there is only one ATR and one Boeing which fly on different dates and their departure is uncertain till the last minute and, very often, flights are cancelled without any valid reason. I would like to know, when air services from Calcutta are available for going to every nook and corner of the country, why has the State of Nagaland been singled out for this step-motherly treatment? Moreover, the Guwahati-Dimapur air service has been discontinued since 2004-05.

Ever since the inception of the Statehood of Nagaland, there stands in the map of Railway only a stretch of five kilomters of rail line, which, I must say, is a national shame. Depriving this North-Eastern State of rail connectivity tantamounts to ostracising the State from the mainland and, that too, after two decades of the birth of the State which sends a wrong signal to the people of the North-Eastern Region.

I would like to draw the attention of this august House to the State of Bihar which, incidentally, has repeatedly produced several Railways Ministers. The State of Bihar has a provision for 35 new railway lines during 2006-07 Budget, in addition to 7,300 kilometers of the National Highway network. Why is the Minister so reluctant to provide two rail lines to this part of the North-Eastern Region? The Government should see to it that the State in which people buy tickets for their travel should be an important consideration for the sanctioning of railway lines. If the State which has the Railway Minister belonging to it is the only barometer for laying of new railway lines and projects, it is high time that this mischievous practice was stopped and sanity restored in the distribution of railway projects on a more rational basis.

(Contd. by 4n/tdb)

TDB/4N/7.20

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Mr. Zeliang, you just put questions. After that, the hon. Minister will reply. If you make such a lengthy speech, then, how can the Ministry reply to all that? Or else, you could have handed-over a copy of your statement to the hon. Minister.

SHRI T.R. ZELIANG: Sir, I have already put the question, and the hon. Minister has already answered it. But, this is necessary for the House to know all these details.

Sir, the Common Minimum Programme of the UPA Government at page 16, paragraph 1 states, "All North-Eastern States will be given special attention to upgrade and expand infrastructure." I would like to know whether snatching away a small rail line which was to pass through Nagaland for the first time after 40 years comes within the definition of giving special attention to upgrade and expand infrastructure. I will cut short my speech. Let all these be the thing of the past. Therefore, I earnestly reiterate our demand for construction of railway lines passing through the State of Nagaland, as promised, be made a reality instead of a nightmare. I understand that there are differences between the present Railway Minister and the former Railway Minister, Shri Nitish Kumar. However, they cannot have their battlefield in the State of Nagaland, and I wish to emphasise that we don't deserved to be their casualties. The Indian Railway should not be limited to the tri-junction of Ram Vilas Paswan junction to Nitish Kumar junction and to Lalu Prasad Railway station.

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: This is not a question.

SHRI T.R. ZELIANG: Sir, I am grateful to the Government for adopting a new policy to extend rail line nationwide to non-railway regions which should include the North-Eastern Region also.

Sir, I have a few suggestions to make. If the Chief Minister of Manipur literally still insists the new rail line to Imphal to bypass the State of Nagaland, the Railway Ministry should consider to extend the rail line, at least, up to Karong via Peren district of Nagaland, which is the rice bowl of the State as well as the oil-bearing area. This new rail line can be taken up within the purview of an approved project of 1998 by the Northeast Frontier Railway. The moment you reach Karong, the rail line can be extended to many other districts of Manipur and Nagaland, including the capitals of both these States.

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: How many more pages are left? Please tell us.

SHRI T.R. ZELIANG: Sir, only half-a-page is left. The Government of Nagaland has submitted the following proposals for extension of new rail lines with Cabinet decision during 2003-04, which went into the deaf ear of the Railway Ministry. The proposed new rail lines in Nagaland are pertaining to foothill areas only where mineral deposits like coal, petroleum, gas, etc., could be explored. These rail lines are: Chumukedima under Dimapur district; Nuiland under Dimapur district; Merapani under Wokha district; Watiyin under Mokokchung district; Liangmen under Mokokchung district, Tuli under Mokokchung district, Yanglok under Longleng district; Naginimora under Mon district and Tizit under Mon district.

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Mr. Zeliang, I will not be allowing you to put any more supplementary. I am making it very clear to you. Once the Minister replies, I will have to switch-over to the other question.

SHRI T.R. ZELIANG: Sir, only half-a-minute. ...(Interruptions)...

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: You are not understanding it. You are just going on reading, reading and reading. ...(Interruptions)...

SHRI T.R. ZELIANG: Sir, I want to know whether the Railway Minister will consider this important proposal. Secondly, last, but not the least, if this railway line is restored in future, it would be the main trade route to ASEAN. I also want to know whether the Centre is seriously looking at its "Look East Policy". If so, let us not defeat this kind of a concept in the interest of the nation. Thank you, Sir. (Ends)

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister, before you make your reply, let the statements be made by the Ministers. Shrimati D. Purandeswari.

STATEMENT RE. HUNDRED AND FIFTIETH REPORT OF DEPARTMENT-RELATED PARLIAMENTARY STANDING COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT AND HUNDRED AND FIFTY-NINTH REPORT OF DEPARTMENT-RELATED PARLIAMENTARY STANDING COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT

 

THE MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT (SHRIMATI D. PURANDESWARI): Sir, I lay the statements on the Table of the House. (Ends)

STATEMENT RE. EIGHTH REPORT OF DEPARTMENT-RELATED PARLIAMENTARY STANDING COMMOTTEE ON SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EMPOWERMENT.

 

THE MINISTER OF SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EMPOWERMENT (SHRIMATI MEIRA KUMAR): Sir, on behalf of Shri P.R. Kyndiah, I lay the statement on the Table of the House. (Ends) (Followed by 4o)

kgg/4o/7.25

STATEMENT RE: STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN THE SEVENTH REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENT-RELATED STANDING COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EMPOWERMENT

THE MINISTER OF SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EMPOWERMENT (SMT. MEIRA KUMAR): Sir, I lay the statement on the Table of the House.

(Ends)

STATEMENT RE: STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN THE HUNDRED AND FORTY-SECOND REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENT-RELATED STANDING COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, ENVIRONMENT AND FORESTS

THE MINISTER OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (SHRI KAPIL SIBAL): Sir, I lay the statement on the Table of the House.

(Ends)

STATEMENT RE: STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN THE ELEVENTH, TWELFTH, THIRTEENTH AND FOURTEENTH REPORTS OF THE DEPARTMENT-RELATED STANDING COMMITTEE ON RAILWAYS

THE MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS (SHRI R. VELU): Sir, I lay the statement on the Table of the House.

(Ends)

HALF AN HOUR DISCUSSION ON POINTS ARISING OUT OF THE ANSWER GIVEN IN THE RAJYA SABHA ON 3RD MARCH, 2006, TO STARRED QUESTION NO.191 REGARDING 'EXTENSION OF RAIL LINE FROM DIMARPUR/DHANSIRI TO IMPHAL' (CONTD.)

~~~

THE MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS (SHRI R. VELU): Mr. Deputy Chairman, Sir, I will be brief. The work of construction of this Diphu to Karong was included in the Budget of 1997-98 at a cost of Rs. 1,600 crores as the first phase of the link between Imphal and Dimarpur. Requested approval of the project was also received in 1998. But, then, there was an objection from Karbi-Anglong Autonomous District Council, which expressed reservations saying, "We will not allow this project because it is the violation of the Constitution because this Autonomous Council should have been consulted before taking up the project." This is point number one. Number two, they also stated, "You come with a kind of approach paper and also have consultations with the Railway Board." These are the things they have put as conditions. That is why it has taken a long time.

By then, the successive Chief Ministers of Manipur wrote letters to the Railway Minister saying that this was being delayed. In 2000, the Chief Minister insisted that you better have the connectivity from Jiribam to Imphal, which is about 97 Kms. involving Rs.727 crores as an expenditure against what we mentioned, Rs.1,600 crores. They said that this was cost effective as also it involved the three States of Assam, Nagaland and Manipur, the question of getting clearances--environmental clearance, forest clearance and other clearances--will definitely take a longer time, but it was easy with one State, namely, Manipur. So, they approached the Government and the Government in lieu of the earlier proposal, in the CCEA meeting which was held on 2.12.2003, approved the proposal and the work was included in the supplementary Budget of 2003-04.

Sir, we are not here to discriminate against any State. In fact, as the hon. Minister was saying, with regard to all the seven sister States, we have been trying to do something on connecting those State capitals. In fact, I would like to mention here that with regard to Arunachal Pradesh, the work of new line from Harmuti to Itanagar is in progress. The same is about Tripura also. The Kumarghat-Agartala line is sanctioned and the work is in progress. The target of completion is 2006-07. In the same way, about Manipur. The work of the new line from Jiribam to Imphal, which the hon. Member has mentioned, is to be completed in 2010. In the same way about Nagaland, Kohima. I would again like to mention that we are not against any State. In fact, the projects have gone to the Planning Commission. They are all being apprised so that we will have this Dimarpur to Kohima, about 88 Kms, which will be involving Rs.911 crores; it is being apprised by the Planning Commission. So, Nagaland is not being deprived of any railway line. This is being apprised by the Planning Commission. (Contd. by 4p)

KLS/SCH/4P-7.30

SHRI R. VELU (CONTD): Once it comes with reference to the Planning Commission's appraisal, we will take further action. In fact, as the hon. Member has already mentioned, Nagaland-Dimapur-Tuni railway lines are available in those places. Now, he was mentioning that many proposals have been submitted to the Railways. We look into them to see which are feasible in terms of our parameters and take further action which is according to our normal procedure for sanctioning projects. I think with these words, I must say that the project, which he was mentioning, was only in lieu of Jeribam-Imphal project, which has been taken up. It is more economical in terms of cost as well as the years of completion, clearance etc.

SHRI T.R. ZELIANG: The distance between Jeribam to Imphal is 223 kms. And again Jeribam to Diphu is another 300 kms. So, the entire length of road is more than 500 kms whereas Diphu to Karong, Imphal is within 200 kms. So, will people prefer to travel via Jaribam-Silchar to Diphu - Guwahati, the main line of the country or will people prefer to go through this Nagaland-Karong-Imphal which is 200 kms? There is a difference of 300 kms. I am talking about that, Sir. That is why I am asking whether you are going to restore all the projects which have taken 20 years to get approval. Now after approval you are talking about Kohima. How long will it take to get approval? You are going to scrap it. This is a very tricky one. ....((Interruptions)... We can never get it. The Government should reconsider to restore all projects which were already approved...((Interruptions)...

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister, would you like to respond?

SHRI R. VELU: This has got a different angle about roads and other things. This will be examined and further action will be taken if it is feasible. ....((Interruptions)...

 

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: He has told that he will examine it. Next question.

(Ends)

HALF-AN-HOUR DISCUSSION ON POINTS ARISING OUT OF ANSWER GIVEN IN THE RAJYA SABHA ON 3RD MARCH, 2006 TO STARRED QUESTION NO.91 REGARDING "POLLUTION IN GANGA"

 

ֳ֯ן: ֻ ܟָ ֯ ̸ ׯև ׻֋օ

ֻ ܟָ (ָ Ϥ): ֳ֯ן , ֲ ֯ ֮֟ ֳ ֻ ֮ , ֕ ־ֻ ָ ִ֮ , ו֮ ־ֻ , ֣ ֣ ß֮ ֻ ٴ ־֮ֆ ־ֻ ֮֟ ִֵ , ֮֟ ־ֻ ֮ ׻֋ ֯ ִֵ

ֳ֯ן , ֮֯ ־֮ֆ, þã, ָ ߾֮ ֻ ׾ֵ ָ ֓ þָ ִֵ פ , ׻֋ ֯ ָ ߾֮ ׻֋ פ ֯ , ִ, ֻ֟, ָþ֟, ִ פ ֯ פ , ß֮ ֣ ٴ ־֮֋ ָ ִ , ߾֮ פ ָָ , ָָ פ Ϥ ֮֓ ׻֋ ָ-ָ ֮֋ ֻև ָ -ָ ֵ ֓ օ

֮־ָ, פ ֮֯ ִ ֤ , פ ָ , ִ ֤ ֕ ֤ և , Ӥ ֻ և ֕ פ ָ ֤ ֻ ֟  Ӌ-֋ ֮ ׬ ן ֵ ו ִ ֮ ֤ ֮ ֯ ֮ , ֮ ֱ ֮ ׻֋ ִ ֟ , ֕ פ ֤ ִ , ׮׿֟ ָ ִ ֋օ

ִ ֤ ӲӬ , ָ ָָ ֳ ״ֻ ֓ , ֳ֯ן , ֕ ־ֻ ֤ ׸ָ ׮֮ ֤ פ ָ ֲ ֤ Ϥ֟ , ֲ Ϥ֟ ֟ , פ ֯ ß ̸ ָ֕ ֲ֤֤ ֮ ״ֻ , ֯ ֋ ֲ ָ֕ ֮ 10 ߙ Ԯ ֮ ֟ , ֲ ׮֮ ֻ ֤ ִ ָ֕ ֵօ 4Q/MCM ָ ֿ:

MCM-SSS/4Q/7-35

ֻ ܟָ (֟) : וִָ ߕ ߕ -ֻә ׮, ִ ٙևָ, 00 ӛ ־ ׮֙ ָ ׮֮ ֻ ֯ ֤ ֤ Ӥ ֮ ֵ׮ ָ ֻ֟ Ϥ֟ ֤ ֙ Ӥ 70 ߙ ֟ , 70 ߙ ֤ ֤ ָ Ϥ ֲ ׬ וִָ ֻ ׮ ִ ٙևָ ֮־ָ, ֯ ߮ פ֮ ֮ ֛ ߮ ֣ ֻ ָ֟ ӛ ָ ָ ָ ֵ ֋, ָ ָָ ֯ ִ֬ , ӡ , ָ֕ Ӥ, 00 ָ Ӥ ֵ ֋, ֕ ֟־ָ Ӥ ֮ ָ և ָ , ֯ ֲ ֮֟ ָ ִ ֻ ׻֋ ֿ , ָ ֕ ߕ Ϥ ָ, , ֋ ִ ֻ ָ֤ ևՅ Ӥ ָ ִ ֻ ꅠ 10 ߙ Ӥ ֤ ֤ ֲָָ Ӿ ֛ , Ӿ Ӥ Ӿ ָ ֯ ߮ ֮ ֱ ״ֻ ָ ֯ ו֋ ֲ Ӿ ֻ ֻ֟ ߮ ֮ ׮֟ , ߻ ֮ ׮֟ ֕ ָ֕ Ӥ ָ-ָ , ֯, , ִ , ߴָ ִִ ߴ׸ ֵ׮ ֕ ֣ ָ ָ Ԥ ָ ָ ֳ֯ן , ׮֮ ֻ ֮ ֤ ֤ ֮ Ϥ֟ פ ִ ߾-֮ ׾֟ ָ ָ ֔׻ֵ ֮ ߾ֵ֮֮֯ ָ ֋ ֕ ֤ Ӥ ֯ ֮ Ӥ ֻ ߾ ו֮ ״ֻօ ֻ Ӥ ָ ־ ߻ ֮ ָ ֟ ֮ ֮ Ӥ ׮֟ ׮׿֟ ָ ִ ֟ , ֵ֮ ֟ ֳ֯ן , ֲ ָ֟ ߕ ϲӬ ӡ ֮ ֲ֕ ָָ ָ ֤ ֤ , ֮ ֟ 1997 Ӥ Ù ֮ ֻ 韾 17 ֤õ ֤ߵ ״ן ֮ ״ן ָ Ϥ ־ , Ӿ ֻ ֵ , ֤ ֤ ׮ָ օ ֳ֯ן , ֕ ϲӬ ӡ ָ ֯ ֮֟ ָ ֮ ִ ׻֋ ֋ ִ ָ ׻ֵ ֵօ Ù ֮ ֻ ו֮ ϲӬ ӡ ֮ ִ ֋ ֱֻ ָև ֋ ָ֕ 00 7 ֻ ְ ֤ ֕ ׬ָ, ԓָ ֱֻ ָև ևԅ ֯ ֮֟ ֤ Ӥ ֯ ִ֮ ֟ ֮ פֵ օ ֮֮ߵ ϟ֯ ֤ ִֻ ֵ օ ֳ Ӥ ֮֮ߵ ִ ֻ ֤ ֵօ ֤ ׮֤ פ ֵ ו ָ ߵ Ϥ ߴ և ֣ ϲӬ ָ ևԠ ׸ ָ֬ ָ ׬׸ ָ ֮ ׸ ָ և ָ ֻ֟ ֣ ׸ ӡֵֻ ָ ֤ ֟ ׸ ֵ֟ ֵ ָ ߙ ә פ ֋ ߙ ә ֵֻ ֟ Ϥ֟ ֮ ֤ ֤ Ӥ פ ֟ ߙ ׻֋ ֋ , ׸ Ӥ ֵ , ֳ֯ן , ֯ ִ֬ ֯ ֋ ߻ ֮, ׮֮ ֻ ָ, ֕ ִ߮ Ӥ Ԡ ֻ ßָ ֣ ״ ߓ ֻ ֻ ָ ֟ ֵ ֕ ϲӬ ӡ ֮ ֲ֕ , ָָ ָ ֮ ֲ֕ ֕ ֱֻ ָև և ֲ ֮ ֻ ׸ , ָ ָև ׸ ֕ ֲֵ Ӥ ״ן ׸ , ӡֵֻ Ӥ ׸

(4R ָ ֿ:)

NBR-GS/4R/7.40.

ֻ ܟָ (֟) : ӡֵֻ Ӥ ׸ ֳ֯ן , ֯ ִ֬ ֕ ָ Ϥ Ӥ ָ ֲ ֤ Ϥ֟ , ָ֕ ֯ ִ֬ ӡ ָ ֯ ֮ ֮֓ , ߾֮ ֮֓ ß֮ ֲ ֯ ֤, ו ٴ ־֮֋ , ו ֕֟ , ֤ Ϥ ֮֓ , ֯ ָ ױ, ֯ ֤ ֤ߵ ״ן ֮ ӓ և ־ ֯ ã ӓ ֵ ו Ӥ ֮֯ן׮׬ , ו Ӥ ֮־׬ָ ã֋ , ו Ӥ ֮ ן׮׬ , ו Ӥ ָָ ԓָߠ 녠 ֯ ӓ ֵ֮ ו ִ֬ ӓ ֤, ֮֟ ״ֻ ׌ ָ ֻ Ϥ ֵ , ָ-ָ ֵ׮ ָ , ָ ֮ ֻ ִֵ , ֻ ֲ , ֯ ָ֕ ֓ևօ ֮־֤ (ִ֯)

ֳ֯ן : . ֮ ״֡

֮ ֤ : ֳ֯ן , ..

ֳ֯ן : פ , ֯ ִ֣Ԯ ו֋

֮ ֤: ֳ֯ן , ֻ ܟָ ָ ־ֻ ֵ , ִ֣Ԯ ׮׿֟ ָ ֵԾ

ֳ֯ן : ֯ ֤ ֟ . ֮ ״֡

DR. CHANDAN MITRA (NOMINATED): Thank you Mr. Deputy Chairman, Sir. I am really grateful that we are having this debate. The matter has been raised during the Question Hour on Friday and the hon. Minister was also present at that time. So, I am sure, you and other hon. Members of the House are fully aware of the very serious situation prevailing in the holy city of Varanasi which is the holiest spot, I would say, not only for the Hindu community but for the entire country. The situation of Ganga at Varanasi, which has been, from time immemorial, the place where people have come and paid respects not only from all over the country, but all over the world is in a pathetic condition, despite twenty years of the GAP. It is truly, I think, ironic that we are having this discussion just the day after the death anniversary of Shri Rajiv Gandhi who was the initiator of the Ganga Action Plan twenty years ago and raised so much hopes and aspirations of the people of India by undertaking this Plan.

Sir, I speak on this subject with authority of having visited Varanasi to examine the situation on the spot only two months ago as a part of the delegation in which Mr. Tariq Anwar, a fellow Member of this House and the then Member, Mr. Balbir Punj were also there. There were three Members from the Lok Sabha. We went to do on the spot survey of the situation in Varanasi. Sir, the situation is so serious that the river in Varanasi, leave alone the water being fit for drinking, it is not even fit for bathing according to the WHO guidelines. The river is on the verge of dying. The oxygen level in the river has fallen to precarious proportions. The fish are dead. And, if you go by a boat, along the river, you find bubbles rising from methane gas. That happens as a result of the pollution and garbage that is being disposed into the river. Sir, we went on a boat from Varuna to Asi. The city of Varanasi gets its name from these two rivers. Varuna and Asi become as Varanasi. So, these two rivers flank the holy city of Varansi. When you reach the point where river Varuna discharges into river Ganga, you get a putrid smell, because the entire garbage is coming into the river Ganga. At the other end, the Asi River is no longer a river. It is a pure drain. It is as polluted as Najafgarh drain here in Delhi and other such drains. All this water is flown into the river. Sir, all along the route, sewage pipes discharging water and untreated waste into the river. All this was supposed to have been checked by water treatment plants. Several plants have been built along the way. But, those plants do not operate. There is no electricity to begin with. And, these plants are heavily dependent on electricity and, since there is a power shortage in UP, as in the rest of the country, the plants are inactive most of the time. In fact, at the time of the heaviest sewage disposal in the morning, there is power cut and water comes in untreated and flows into the river.

(CONTD. BY VP "4S")

VP/7.45/4S

DR. CHANDAN MITRA (CONTD.): So, this is for everybody to see. It is no new development. It has been going on for years and no plan has so far been made on how to stop the discharge of absolutely untreated sewage into the river.

Sir, the specific point which I want to make, and on which I would seek the Minister's response is this. There is a plan which was submitted several years ago as a solution to this. The solution is very simple. It is not a very costly solution. The solution was to construct a drain along the ghats of Varanasi. Starting from the Asi River to the Varuna River, you go along the ghats, and a cover drain was to be constructed so that all the sewage that is flowing into the river could come into this. As you know, the city of Varanasi is at a height from the Ganga. All the sewage water that is coming in should discharge itself into this particular drain and the drain would run along the entire length of the riverfront of Varanasi. It would then be taken by a pipe across the river and be discharged in an uninhabited island in the middle of the river. Now this plan, with Japanese technology, has been there for several years. It is a far less costly plan than what is being proposed by the State Government, that is, to build more sewage treatment plants. Sir, sewage treatment plants have been set up and they have been ineffective. Now, this simple technology which will relieve the problem almost completely, has not been implemented. For seven years a litigation has been going on between the Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam and the residents of Varanasi, including the Varanasi Municipal Corporation which had passed a unanimous resolution approving this plan. Now, according to the Nagar Palika Act, it should be the responsibility of the Varanasi Municipal Corporation to devise a plan, and for the Centre to allocate the funds through the State Government for its implementation. By ignoring the local authorities and not taking the local factors into consideration, this scheme of bringing in more machines, more water disposal plants, sewage disposal plants and consuming power, totally impractical, which will cost a lot of money. We have already seen that this plan is ineffective. I would like to know from the hon. Minister: What is its status here and why it is not being implemented? We MPs submitted a memorandum when our delegation went there at the invitation of the Sankat Mochan Trust, which is doing a lot of good work there. Mahant Virbhadra Mishraji has been at this for so many years. He still bathes in the river everyday, which, actually, very few people risk doing now. As an hon. Member was saying, like in the Yamuna, if you actually have a holy dip in the Ganga today, you will come out an unholy man because of the rashes that are likely to erupt in your body. In this situation, given the very serious nature of the crisis and the faith of millions and millions of people that is involved, this matter has to be taken up on a war footing. The Ganga Action Plan phase II for Varanasi has been held up for so many years. Sir, I appeal to the Minister to give urgent consideration so that the Ganga that has become maili is restored to a situation where we can still say " ֮ օ" (Ends)

SHRI PRASANTA CHATTERJEE (WEST BENGAL): Sir, this Ganga Action Plan was later renamed as the National River Conservation Plan. It was expected to cost Rs. 3,780 crores, but till March 2006, an expenditure of Rs. 2,500.39 crores reported to have been incurred. Now, Sir, it has just now been mentioned that the plan target of STP, that is, Sewage Treatment Plan, was not achieved. Whatever little was achieved, that also went down due to very poor maintenance. Then, Sir, at the stretch between Kanpur-Allahabad-Kannauj, water quality of Ganges has been monitored. Pollution has been found to be higher than the limit. Due to the existence of a large number of leather and chemical industries, water is being further polluted.

Pollution in the Yamuna River is also a matter of grave concern. The quality of water is below standard in Delhi due to heavy discharge of sewage water. The same is the situation in Agra. It is like a dirty canal. I had an opportunity to visit those places, and I found that the overall progress is poor. Even some of the facilities created like electric crematorium etc., become non-operational shortly after commissioning.

(Continued by PK/4T)

ASC/PK/7.50/4T

SHRI PRASANTA CHATTERJEE (CONTD.): In Allahabad, Haridwar and Kanpur, such crematoriums started in 1991, and stopped operating in 1997, due to non-payment of electricity bills, etc. I remember that once the CAG also made a very serious comment against the Ganga Action Plan. Then, it is found that half-burnt dead bodies are being thrown in the Ganges, because of the non-functioning of the electric crematorium; and, the people's temperament is also like that. There is lack of scientific temperament. So, that is further polluting the river water. Then, the problem of solid waste management is there. I would like to inform the Minister that even in the Mid-Term Appraisal Report, it has been advocated that an independent evaluation would be useful for such stocktaking, because a very huge amount has been spent. The meaningful coordination between the State Governments and local bodies with active participation of the Ministry of Environment and Forests is necessary. I want a definite answer from the Minister. Thank you. (Ends)

ֵԾָ ֮ ӡֵֻ ֕ ӡ ( ִ ֵָ ): ָ, ֮֮ߵ ֤õ ϴ פ Ϥ, ֤ ֻ Ϥ ָ ؓ֟ ֣ ֠ ֮֮ߵ ֤õ ָ ֮ ֮ ֵ ֮ ׻֙ ֲָ ֟ ֤õ ֮֯ ãן ֲָ ָ ו ָ, ֱև ׳ֵ֮ þ ֕߾ 1985 ָ օ ֤ߠ ָ פ ã , ߾֮ , ֓և ֮ ״ֻ֟ ߮ ֮ ״ֻ֟ ָ ֵָ ו ָ ָ߸ ִ׮ֵ , פ ֤ þã ֲָ ֤ þã ֋, ָ ָ פ ָ, ֯ ׮־ פ ֵ , ־ ִ ָ Ϥ Ù ֙ Ù , Ϥ֠ , ӛÙߵֻ ֙ , Ϥ ָ ևә , ו֮ ֟ ֻ֟ , runoff from agricultural fields, dumping of burnt and half-burnt bodies, ֮֮ߵ ֤õ ֵ֟ ־ ָ Ϥ ָ Central Pollution Control Board ָ ֮ ֮ , 29 ָ ֋֛, ֵ֟ ֮ פ , , ߻ פ ׸׮ֵֻ , ׸׮ֵֻ , ֛ ݮߙ , ֛ ִõ ׻֋ ֳ Ù 껛 ֺ ָ, ֮ Ù ֲꌙ ִֵָ ӛ Ù ָ Ù 껛 , ָָ , Ù ־֮Դ , Ԯ ߕ ָ֮ ײ , ֲ ִõ ֵ ָ ֲ 1985 ֕߾ ֮ ֮ -1 ָ , ֮ 2000 ֻߙ օ ֮֠ ֮ -2 1995 ָ ֵ ִ ִ -1, 1993 ֻ ֵօ (ֿ: 4Uָ)

NB/4U/7.55

ִ ֵָ (֟) : magnitude ָ ָָ 1995 decision ׻ֵ ָ פ ֱև ִ National River Conservation Plan ׻ֵ ֋ ֕ ָ ָ ֮ פ conservation ֻ ִ Ganga Action Plan II 5 פ 29 ָ פ ָ ֕ 34 פ conservation ִ ֻ , 160 towns schemes և 20 ֕ ֵ ֻ ׻֋ ָ approved cost , 4,735 ֋ ִ funding pattern - ֕ ָ 70 ןֿ֟ Government of India 30 ָ Ù Ganga Action Plan, Phase I 100 ָ ֻ , ױ 1997 50:50 , ֕ 70:30 ֻ Japan Bank of International Cooperation soft loan , 85:15 ָ ֻ

ֳ֯ן , ָ ֛ ִõ ֕ ָ National River Conservation Plan 932 schemes ֻ , וִ֮ 570 5,364 MLD handle ִ ֮ ֵ֮ , ו approved cost 4,735 ֋ ׻֋ ָ 10th Plan fund allocation , ִ 1,672 ֋ ֛ ִ ֟ ߅ first phase, 2000 complete , second phase ֻ ָ ִ first phase, 2003 ֵ օ ֕ ִ pollution load , handle ׻֋ 3,064 ֋ ־ֿ ָ Ùߙ ָ פ pollution ׸ , ׻֋ ֲֻ֟ ֕ ו֮֟ ָ approved cost pollution load , ֕ ָ ֲ handle ׻֋ 7,358 ֋ requirement ֟ ևԅ Central Pollution Control Board , 1985 ֲ ֤ pollution load , 1,340 MLD օ ֌ ָ ߅ ִֵ 882 MLD load ׻֋ ֮ 65 ָ load ׻֋ sanction ֵ օ ֮ ֤, ֕ ָ 2,538 MLD pollution load Ganga Action Plan, First Phase 882 MLD Second Phase 780 MLD handle ֤ , 876 MLD ױ ֋օ ֲֻ֟ pollution load ִ֯ ׻֋, ֕ ֲ 1,300 ֋ ־ֿ ߅

ֳ֯ן , ֯ - ֮ܵ ֜ , ֕ ֮ ָ tributaries ָ 40 50 ֲ֤, upstream area ֻ ־ֻ , ִ ״ֻ֮ ֻ פ ־ֻ

4wAKG ָ ֿ:

AKG-GSP/4W/8.00

ִ ֵָ (֟) : pollution ֲ treat ־ֿ ߅ ֮ ֛ ָ ֮ܵ ר pollution load , ׮ֻ֯ ߾ , handle ׻֋ capacity develop ֮֮ߵ ֤õ ײֻ וֲ ֮֯ ָ capacity sewage treatment plants ֮ פ ָ ָָ, ֕ ָָ ׮ֻ֯ ߕ supplement , support , ֮ ևօ facilities create ֟ , running maintenance וִָ Ù ־֮Դ ֤õ ֟ , ו֮ ֵ֟ facility create և, ֤ ֵֻ ֵօ ִ ֲ ֛ defaulter , և , ָ ӡ דֽ ׻ , ָָ ߮ דֽ ׻ - 2004 ׻, 2 2005 ß 2005 녠 ֯ facilities create և , maintain ו֋, ײֻ֕ ו֋ ֻև, ֣ ָ facilities create և ָ untreated water פ ֋, facility create ! ׬׸ ָ֮ ״ֻ ֻ ֮ ֕֙ ߕ ׻֋ Ù ִ ָӓֻ , facilities create , ֵ֤ ֵ , ֮ ׸ facilities create , ִ ֮ Ù ֻ ִ ֲֻ֟ ָ stakeholders , ־֮Դ , Ù ־֮Դ , ׮֯׻֙ߕ , ֲ ״ֻ ִ ֛օ ײ general awareness ֮ ֛, ֲ ֮ ֛, פ ֮ ֟ ꅠ

ָ, ײ֮ ֟։ ָ ֟ ևԅ ָ second phase ֻ , 160 ò ִ ׻ֵ ֵ , וִ ָ ָ Ϥ ָ ִ ֻ Japan Bank of International Co-operation ָ ׻֋ 552 soft loan ׻ֵ ׻֋ ָ ָָ ֣ agreement ֵ DPRs և , , process ֻ cabinet approval ָև ֻ ֮֮ ߴ ו֮֟ ֻ ֋, financial year end ֋, ָ level , ל օ

ָ, ֮֮ߵ ֤õ controversy ָ ֵ֟օ ־֮Դ כ Ù ־֮Դ ß־ ֟ , ӕ ֻ ׮ִ ã֮ߵ ׮֯׻֙ ߓ ֯ ִֻ , ߴ ֵօ 5-6 ֻ ֵօ 41 ֯ ߴ , ֻ և , improvement օ ָ ָָ Ù ־֮Դ ß־ ֮ ֟ , ӕ ֮ ӕ , loan agreement sign ֵ ãן ߅

ָ, Phase-I achievements , ָ perception ֵ פ ֻ ֛֛ (4/֋֋ ָ ֿ:)

4x/HMS-SK/8.05

ִ ֵָ (֟) : Ӥ -- ֛֛ ֮֮ߵ ֤õ ֟ ֟ ֮ ָ ӡֵֻ mandate, "bathing quality" Drinking ׻֋ ֯ ֱ ֛օ

, ֮֟ ָ ָ ָ Ùߙ - ֮ , և0և00 ֮֯, ֮։ ã ׸֓ 0000 Ùߙ ֙ ׻֙ ָ 27 ߙظ Ù ֙ ׻֙ ׸ ָ֬ ָ ָ-Ùߴ ֙ ׻֙ 00 000 00 000 1986 ױ ֤ 2005 ױ ִ פև ָ ֤ ֈ Ùߴ ֲ׸ 00 000 86 ֲֻ ִ ֤ ֈ Ùߴ 86 ֲֻ ִ , ױ כֵ֛ ו֮֟ , , ָ ӕև ֮֯, ֤, ֮։ ָ ׻֋ ߴ ָ ָָ ֮֯ әֻ֮ ָ֮ ֤, ֮֯ ֮։ ׻֋ 1100 ֋ ִ֮ ߴ 같 ״ֻ ֲ֤, ֮֯ ֮։ ִõ ָ ߅

, ָ ָָ ӲӬ ָ ϵ ֕߾ ֮֯ ֤ ֱ ִ ָ 160 ò ִ ֻ ֵ ָ Ϥ 13 ߴ 댿ӛ , ָӓֻ 37, ָӛ 2, ײָ 18, ֻ 165 ֟ ָߕ ׻֋ ߮ ߴ ָ 2 268 ߴ 2 댿ӛ ֵ ָ ִ ֻ , ֮֮ 2 ָ -߮ ָ ָ, ֮֯, ֲ֤ ֮։ ׻֋ ָ ֵԾ ӡֵֻ ֮֮ ֲ ֮ ָ ֮

, ֟ ֟ ߓ פ ־ֻ ־ֲ פ ֺ ֻ 75 ֋ 2 פ ׯ֔ 6 ֻ , ָ ָ և ...(־֮֬)...

ָ֕ : ֯ פֵ ?

ִ ֵָ : 6 ֻ 222 פ ִ ֕߾ Ӭ ֵֻ ֤ פ ֮ ׻֋ ָ ϵ ׻֋ ֲ ֤ ִ Ù ֕ ֛֛ ֯ 00 ָ ֵ֟ ָ ߕ ָ ֲ ֮֮ ָ ָ , ֱ , ָ , ֕߾ ֮֯ ו ָ 000 ָָ 0 ִ֮ 韾 ֤ ֵ , ׾ פ֟

(ִ֯)

ֻ ܟָ : ָ, ֯ߴ ֟ ӡ ֓ ־ֲ פ, 000 ֕߾ ֮֯ ָ ֤ ֟ ֵօ ָ, ֮ ֮ Ӥ ײ׻֋ә ׮֌, ָ֕ ו ֟ Ù 㴴֮ ֻ 17 ֤õߵ ״ן ֮߅ (4 ֵ/ߋ־ ָ ֿ:)

PSV-YSR/4Y/8.10

ֻ ܟָ (֟) : ׸ ӡֵֻ ֲ ִ߸ ִõ , ֮ ָ֟ , ӡ ָָ ֮ ־ , ӡ Ù ֵ ָ ...(־֮֬)...

ֳ֯ן : ־ֲ ...(־֮֬)...

ֻ ܟָ : ָ, ָ, ״֮֙ ...(־֮֬)... ֟ ו֋, ָ ֮ ו֋ ӡ ֤ ־ֲ , ֮ ו֋, ָ

ӡ ֮ ־ , ֟ ֮ ָ ָ ѓ ִ ׻ֵ ѓ ֮ ָ ֯ ֕߾ ֮֯ ֱ ֮ , ָ ֯ ֕߾ ֮֯ , ׸, -- ãֆ ֱֻ, , ֕߾ ֮֯ ֲָ , ãֆ ֱֻ ѓ ֯ , ֮ ͇ ֯ ִ߸ ֕߾ ֮֯

ִ ֵָ : ָ, ֮֮ߵ ֤õ Ù פ ...(־֮֬)...

ֻ ܟָ : ֻ֟ ָ, Ù ײֻ , ִ ָ ߵ ӡֵֻ ߵ ׻ פ ֵ Ù ֤ ֕ ֮ ֛ ֟ ֯ ֤ߵ ״ן ߴ ו֋ ßָߵ ѓ ו֋, ָ ָ ֵ ֵ, ׻ ָ , ֕ ֯ ו֋ ָ ֮ ֯ ֕ ו֋ ֙ ָ ֤ ֤ ָ ֯ ֤ ֮֟ ߙ ә ָ ߵ ִ ײֻ ֱ ֟ ߵ Ϥ ׬׸ ָ ֡ ӡֵֻ ׸ ֯ ִ֬ ӡ ױ ָ ֯ ֕߾ ֮֯ , ֯ ִٯ֟ , ߵ Ϥ ѓ ״ן ֮ 㴴֮ ֻ ״ן ׸ ׮־ ָ ֻ ו֋ Ù 㴴֮ ֻ ״ן ֮ , ָ ßָߵ ֤ߵ ״ן ֮ ָ ѓ և ֋ - ָ֤ ֋ ֮ ֻ ִֵ ֻ ָ־ע ֻ , ׻֋, ֮֟ ׻֋ ֯ ־ֲ , ֤ ל օ

ִ ֵָ : ָ, ֮֮ߵ ֤õ ֮ Ù , ֮֯ ײ׻֋ ׮֌ ׻״֙, ָ֕ ָ ׮֙ ֣ ו֮ ִ , ִ֮ Ͽ ֵ , ָ ֤ Ϥ֟ ֻ 187 ֮ և, וִ֮ 112 effluent treatment plants ֋ ֋ , ֵ ֮ 75 ֮ פ

ָ ֮֮ߵ ֤õ ו , ײ׻֋ ׮֌ ׻״֙, ָ֕ , ߵ Ϥ ׸ ׸ ָ ־ֻ ֤ ָ ִ ָ ־, ֮ ׮ßָ ָ ֮֮ߵ ֤õ ָ , ָ ֟ , ֯ ֟ , օ ...(־֮֬)...

ֻ ܟָ : ָ, ֤ ִֻ ֮֟ ֮ ӡ ׻ פ, ־ֲ ֟ ָ ֤ ִֻ , ӡ - ßָߵ ״ן ѓ ? - ٻִֵ ֵә ֮ ֮ ָ ѓ ? ֲ ֵ ֣ , ֳ ֕߾ ֮֯ , ֟ ֕߾ ֮֯


MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: The discussion is over. The House is adjourned to meet tomorrow at 11.00 a.m.

.....

The House then adjourned at fourteen minutes past

eight of the clock till eleven of the clock

on Tuesday, the 23rd May 2006.

PREVIOUS
MAIN