Why is Tamil Nadu opposing the Centre’s latest guidelines on Cauvery basin? | Explained
The story so far On June 22, Tamil Nadu’s Water Resources and Rural Development Minister N. Anand made public the State government’s opposition to the
The story so far On June 22, Tamil Nadu’s Water Resources and Rural Development Minister N. Anand made public the State government’s opposition to the latest guidelines, cleared by the Union Ministry of Jal Shakti, regarding appraisal of water resources projects in the Cauvery basin. While participating in a debate in the Assembly on the contentious Mekedatu dam project proposed by the Karnataka government, Mr. Anand said his government wrote on June 9, expressing “strong reservations” over the guidelines, which, he added, had been prepared “unilaterally.” So far, Karnataka, another principal riparian State in the basin, has not commented on the issue. Why have the guidelines been prepared? The latest set of guidelines is a continuation of what was done in 2017, pertaining to major, medium irrigation and multi-purpose projects on inter-State rivers or their tributaries. The Central Water Commission (CWC), which is the author of the guidelines and the apex technical body in the field of water resources, had stated that the previous guidelines were prepared before the establishment of the Cauvery Water Management Authority (CWMA) in June 2018. The Authority has been set up to ensure the execution of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal’s (CWDT) final award of 2007, as modified by the Supreme Court in its judgment in February 2018. As the CWMA is, in the CWC’s words, the “regulator and implementer” of the final award, it becomes mandatory for the Commission and State governments concerned to approach the Authority for views, while pursuing any proposed irrigation and multipurpose project including extension, restoration and modernisation (ERM), or drinking water supply project or industrial project or hydro-electric project or pumped storage project in the Cauvery basin.
What is the purpose that such guidelines seek to serve? Though the States are required to establish the soundness of their water sector proposals after taking into consideration several factors such as inter-State or international aspects, environmental impact and intended benefits, the CWC has found, more than once, that the State governments take their own time to respond to its comments or observations of other Central scrutinising agencies on the project proposals made at the time of examination. Many a time, some projects have become even more irrelevant by the time the States send their replies. As a result, either the projects have to be abandoned or require drastic modification. It is for the purpose of avoiding any such delay and providing clarity that such guidelines are being revised and updated at regular intervals. In fact, the States have to secure the Commission’s nod even for preparing detailed project reports (DPRs). Once the CWC’s approval is given for the DPRs, the project proponents will have to approach, for clearances, other agencies such as the Union Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change for Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) reports and the Union Ministry of Tribal Affairs for rehabilitation and resettlement plan reports in the event of anticipated displacement of tribals. What do the guidelines on the Cauvery say?
The BriefWire