---------------------------------------------------------------------------
**** http://www.GOANET.org ****
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Support growing the reading habit among Goa's next generation of achievers
Bookworm Library and Magazine
Bluebelle, Tamba Colony, St Inez, Goa
Contacts: Tel: +91 9823222665 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am sure that you will find this article both topical and important for
general awareness. Thanks for considering it for publication. Best wishes.
Averthanus
_____
PLANNING FOR THE REGIONAL PLAN 2021.
Averthanus L. D'Souza.
The recent decision of the Digamber Kamat Government to
constitute a Task Force to advise the Government on how to proceed with the
formulation of the Regional Plan for Goa - 2021 is a step in the right
direction, although the presence of some representatives of the Real Estate
lobby and of the Goa Chamber of Commerce and Industry has raised some
controversy. Another important aspect of the constitution of the Task
Force which has been highlighted in the local Press is the desirability of
have the Task Force headed by a "technocrat" - or a professional - rather
than by the Chief Minister. There is a great deal of sense in that
proposal. From a purely protocol point of view, it is always desirable
that a Task Force or a Study Team which presents a report and its
recommendations to a higher body, in this case the Government of Goa, be
an independent body. It is very incongruous that the Head of the Task
Force is the Chief Minister himself, who is to receive the recommendations
of the Task Force. There is a clear conflict of interest involved in such
an arrangement. It would certainly enhance the credibility of the Task
Force, if the Chief Minister withdrew from it, and handed over the Chair to
a Professional, who would be able to steer the proceedings of the Task Force
without constantly looking over his shoulder to see what the Government
thinks about the issues under discussion. The representatives of the Real
Estate lobby and of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry should most
definitely be dropped from the Task Force. The Goan citizen is well aware
that the large scale sell-out of Goan land to builders and real estate
developers has been engineered by these powerful/influential lobbies. They
have a clearly definable vested interest in the recommendations which will
result from the deliberations of the Task Force; therefore, they will exert
themselves to the utmost to ensure that these recommendations do not in any
way hamper their own particular interests.
Priority No. 1.
The members of the Task Force, with the exception of those
mentioned above, are all well reputed, professionally competent and without
any personal axes to grind. They should be given the maximum freedom to
deliberate the issues, and to arrive at recommendations without pressure
from any quarters which have a vested interest in the outcome.
The first priority of the Task Force should be to scrutinize the
Goa, Daman & Diu Town and Country Planning Act, 1974. This Act was
deformed at birth. It is a very badly drafted piece of legislation, which
has no teeth, and which lacks vision. This Town and Country Planning Act,
is more concerned about internal administrative procedures to be followed,
than about professional planning for the State of Goa. At the time of its
drafting, no cognizance was taken of the advanced principles of "planning,"
which go beyond merely physical planning of the use of land. Planning,
properly understood, includes the development of social and cultural assets
of the State, in addition to the purely geographical and economic assets.
A good example of the lacuna in the 1974 Act is the absence of any mention
of tourism as a driver of development in the State of Goa. There is also
no indication of the growth of the "knowledge sector" and its impact on
physical planning in the State.
By all accounts, the Goa, Daman and Diu Town and Country
Planning Act, 1974 has become obsolete and ineffective. No positive
purpose can be served by simply tinkering with this piece of legislation to
enable the Government of Goa to proceed with the many plans that it has
(if, in fact, it has any) for the development of this lovely State. The
present indications are that all the recent developments, whether in
tourism, the knowledge sector, small scale industrial development, etc.,
have all been ad hoc and haphazard developments, which have given rise to
more social tensions than to harmonious development in the State.
It can be taken for granted that the Goa, Daman & Diu Town and
Country Planning Act, 1974 is a completely outdated piece of legislation
which should be repealed in toto , and which should be replaced by a
freshly drafted Town and Country Planning Act, which should be formulated,
not by bureaucrats, but by professional planners. Unless there is a
completely new Act, we will be involved in the counterproductive enterprise
of merely trying to fill the gaps which are growing wider because the
superstructure has been built on shifting sands.
Priority No. 2.
A very prominent and glaring shortcoming of the existing 1974
Act is that it does not respect the process of planning, which, even the
Planning Commission of the Government of India follows, viz. that all
planning should commence at the village level and move upwards via the
District level to the State level. One cannot sufficiently emphasize that
"participatory" planning is of the very essence of good planning. If the
purpose of planning is the benefit of the people, then, obviously, the
people should be asked about what benefits them. Only the wearer knows
where the shoe pinches. Recent events in Goa have convincingly shown that
when the Government "imposes" projects on the villages, it only arouses
their hostility and resentment. Whether it was the Nylon 6,6 plant, the
Metastrips project, the Zuari Agro-chemicals toxic spills or the allocation
of river-side areas for ship building yards, the local people have been
aroused, even to the extent of becoming violent in their protests. The
current agitations centre around the wholesale sell-out of land to land
sharks in the name of I.T. Parks, Infotech Habitats or Special Economic
Zones (SEZs). It speaks very poorly of a Government (whether Congress or
BJP) when it "imposes" development on the people without their consent or
participation. It goes against the basic principles of democracy when any
government exercises arbitrary powers.
In conjunction with the need to ensure participatory planning by
the people while preparing the Regional Plan 2021, it is mandatory to ensure
that the requirements of the 73rd. and 74th. Amendments to the Constitution
of India are respected. Heretofore, the Chief Town Planner of the Government
of Goa has shown scant respect for the Constitutional provision. He claims
that he is only bound by the Provisions of the Goa Town and Country Planning
Act, 1974, which does not require him to consult with anybody while
preparing a Regional Plan or any other Plan.. Such arrogance has been
institutionalized.
Priority No. 3.
There is urgent need for a "structure of planning" as well as a
clear description of the "process of planning" Under the obsolete 1974 TCP
Act, the structure of planning is not clear at all, except for the fact
that the Chief Town Planner is responsible, at the behest of the Government,
to formulate a Plan, whenever requested. Although the Chief Town Planner
is not required to consult with anyone in the course of preparing a Regional
Plan, the incompetence of his Department is starkly evident by the fact
that he has contracted out the task of formulating a Regional Plan to a
Consultancy Firm which has no inkling whatsoever of the ground realities in
Goa. The discredited Regional Plan 2011 was a classic example of a Plan
which was prepared behind a desk, without any ground work being done. No
field studies were undertaken. No verification of data was done. The
Consultancy firm merely relied on the data which it had collected from the
different Departments of the Government of Goa. Even the demographic data
was taken from the 1991 Census, although the 2001 Census figures were
available at the time of preparing the Plan.
One of the striking anomalies in the 1974 TCP Act is the
existence of a Town and Country Planning Board - a useless and incompetent
Board which has no clear function. Even though, according to the TCP Act the
Board can make recommendations to the Chief Town Planner on the Plans
submitted to it, it is incompetent to make technical recommendations
because of the very nature of its composition. It is constituted of
bureaucrats and industrialists, whose qualifications in Planning are
questionable. It merely serves as a post office which forwards the
recommendations of the Chief Town Planner to the Government. It is like a
benign tumour in the planning structure.
Another striking anomaly in the entire structure is the
existence of the various Planning and Development Authorities. According to
the TCP Act, 1974, these PDAs are constituted by the Government, and are,
for all practical purposes, autonomous bodies, with their own (Boards)
Committees to advise them, and answerable directly to the Government. .
The TCP Act, 1974 is silent about the relationship between these PDAs and
the Chief Town Planner. In fact, there is no "working relationship"
envisaged between the CTP and the PDAs. The result of this grave lacuna is
that the PDAs have prepared development plans without reference to the
larger Regional Plan. Also these Outline Development Plans do not follow
any common principle. The result is that we have had disparate plans for
each of the "Planning Areas" notified by the Government, which are like a
patchwork without any overall design or coherence.
With regard to the "process of planning" the TCP Act, 1974 does
not provide any direction to the CTP on how he should proceed to prepare a
plan. Except for the fact that the CTP is responsible to prepare the Plan
or plans, there is no indication on how he is to go about this task.
Priority No. 4.
The Task Force set up by the Government should apply its mind
to the problem of defining the relationship between the Chief Town Planner
on the one hand, and the Local Bodies - Panchayats and Municipalities - on
the other. The existing TCP Act, 1974 is completely silent on this matter.
The result has been a lot of confusion in the working relationship between
the Panchayats and Municipalities and the TCP Department. Many
Municipalities, including the Panjim Municipal Corporation interpret the "No
Objection Certificate" issued by the TCP Department as a "permission" to
proceed with the construction proposed. The Local Bodies are, in fact, the
Licensing Authorities, and can refuse building permission even if the TCP
Department issues a N.O.C. from the planning point of view. The
Municipalities are not aware of this distinction, and the Act itself does
not provide them with any help on this account. Interpretations are varied
and even contradictory.
Even though the TCP Department is not normally an "executing
agency" there have been many cases where constructions have been directly
undertaken by this Department, in some cases, under the personal supervision
of the Minister for Town and Country Planning. In these cases, the Local
Municipalities were not even consulted in regard to the particular projects
undertaken by the TCP Department, even though, legally, they are the
Licensing Authorities for any project within their jurisdiction. The TCP
Department has been known to override the authority of the Municipalities or
Panchayats whenever it has suited it. The new legislation should take care
of defining the relationship between the "Planning" authority and the Local
Bodies.
Conclusion
The Task Force has a limited focus on advising the Government to
prepare a transparent, viable and useful Regional Plan for Goa upto the year
2021. This is a formidable task for any Task Force. However, this
particular Task Force will do well to be aware that the many anomalies in
planning and executing plans in and for Goa, is part of a much larger
structural problem of having a multiplicity of authorities which work at
cross purposes most of the time. Even at the best of times, they "carry on"
their work without reference to other Departments. We face a sorry state of
having one Department excavating the roads within a week of their being
paved over by another Department. Inter-Departmental coordination is an
idea that does not seem to have occurred to the Government of Goa.
Averthanus L. D'Souza,
D-13, La Marvel Colony,
Dona Paula, Goa 403 004.
Tel: 2453628.
