Date:21/06/2007 URL: http://www.thehindu.com/2007/06/21/stories/2007062151011100.htm

Opinion - News Analysis

We want consensus, not confrontation, on industrialisation: Buddhadeb

Marcus Dam

The Left Front completes three decades in power in West Bengal today. Chief MinisterBuddhadeb Bhattacharjeespeaks of his hopes and plans for the future and of the somewhat difficult times gone through recently. Excerpts from an in terview in Kolkata:

— Photo: Sushanta Patronobish

Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee: “It is very difficult for traditional Left parties to understand the need for modern industries.”

Anniversaries are a time for renewing pledges, re-ordering priorities. The Left Front is set to enter its 31st year in power. What lies ahead?

I’m trying to prioritise our programmes and am concentrating on four major issues. Our pledge is to improve the quality of life of the poorest of the poor who still live below the poverty level. This is my major responsibility. Secondly, to consolidate our successes in agriculture. Thirdly, speed up industrialisation of the State which has already gained a momentum. Finally, paying more attention to social sectors like education and health.

The third to be mentioned in your priority list — greater industrialisation — perhaps has drawn the most flak.

I am still trying to build a consensus, not confrontation on the subject, with all political parties including the Opposition. It is true that in two areas there is some opposition; one is Singur, the other, the proposed chemical hub. But in most other areas a consensus is emerging regarding projects that are to come up and this is very encouraging.

In regard to Singur and Nandigram too, I tried my best to discuss matters. As for the former I have tried to explain how we persuaded Ratan Tata to set up a factory there despite all the difficulties. But, because a portion of land there is agricultural land we are facing some problems. A majority of the farmers have handed over their land but a small number still oppose the handing over.

But I have told them [the Opposition] there can be no rollback regarding the project. I am still ready to talk to the Opposition, particularly on matters relating to the rehabilitation of those people who have given their land. What is critical is we have to care for them, whether the plots given away were voluntarily done so or otherwise. But the Opposition is telling us “no”; that they will not discuss anything and instead want the acquired land to be handed back. This is not possible.

In Nandigram because of the opposition I decided not to set up a chemical hub there. After that I sent a letter to all the parties that I want to discuss with them the future of the project, which is a very important one for the State. We need this chemical hub but unfortunately before we could convince the people of Nandigram, they were misled into opposing it.

Has Nandigram put the clock back as far as industrialisation is concerned?

It sent a wrong message no doubt but in practical terms, if you look at the other projects we are in the midst of discussion or have almost finalised, none has been rejected and nobody concerned has sent any negative signals to the government saying that they will no longer be coming [to the State] because of what happened at Nandigram.

On what happened there on March 14, I could not also assess the situation that there would be such a violent resistance from the other side when the police went in. I had waited two and a half months before the police entered and would have waited another five months had I known it could turn out this way.

It has been seven years since you began heading the Government. Looking back, was March 14 the most difficult day in your tenure so far?

I feel so. How can I accept the situation being at the helm of affairs? I have leant some lessons from the unfortunate incidents in Nandigram. There has been a sense of acute disappointment, even frustration. Therefore I am moving very cautiously now. But there can be no compromise on my policies [with] regards [to] industrialisation. Before we could reach the people there the Opposition had misled them. But for the sake of Nandigram I just can’t change my policies and say there is no need for industry. The upcoming generation will not accept this line.

There are fresh rumblings of discontent being heard at Singur.

There are many factors responsible. There are a group of NGOs being patronised by some foreign agencies and there is also corporate competition. The latter is the Tata Group’s problem; mine is that some people including the Left-minded and some Left parties fail to understand the significance of an automobile factory coming up in West Bengal that provides for 4,000 direct job opportunities and attracts a host of ancillary units with huge employment-creation potential.

As your agenda for industrialisation takes you to other parts of the State do you see the likelihood of a recurrence given that land use is characterised here by its intensiveness and also that the opposition seems de

termined to carry its campaign against the acquisition of farmland for industry across the State?

The search for consensus will continue, even when it comes to other parts of the State. In most cases I believe it will be arrived at but in the event of any controversy arising I will be writing to the various opposition parties as I have done as regards the chemical hub. It must be remembered that the industrialisation programme is not one of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) or the Left parties but aimed at serving the interests of the people of the State.

What if the desirable responses are not forthcoming?

Then it makes it a very difficult situation. Look at what is happening in Gujarat, Maharashtra, Karnataka. In these States though the ruling parties and the opposition have their political differences when it is a question of an important project or development, there almost is a consensus among all parties. But unfortunately it is so far lacking as far as West Bengal is concerned. The opposition here does not seem to be playing a responsible role.

There are projects like the one involving the Salim Group over which there is already some confusion among the people. Therefore we have decided that we need to go ahead cautiously. Unfortunately there are some parties even in the Left Front which are failing to understand the importance of the whole package envisaged. Here there is need for us to take them into confidence, particularly those within the Front, and move cautiously.

There are evidently some undercurrents of discontent even within the Left Front. How do you intend to calm the waters?

What is happening is quite natural. When we previously had conducted struggles for land reforms they were essentially anti-feudal in nature and democratic too. As for these programmes, the development of panchayati raj, there was as total unanimity within the Left Front. But now the question is whether West Bengal can keep clinging on to the legacy of its agricultural success. We feel that we have to move fast from agriculture to industry and that is where the problems emerge because of the new situation.

Questions like whether or not we need industry, foreign investment, arise. Traditional Left parties just can’t cope with the situation. But what I feel is that they will gradually understand the need for modern industries.

Yes, there are certain areas of differences within the Left Front but when we discuss the problem of how to meet the expectations of the young generation I tell them this is a generation that wants industry, business, the service sector. And it is for this generation that we have to more forwards for industry. They finally accept the position but it is very difficult for traditional Left parties to understand the need for modern industries. But I think there will be no major problem on this count.

So you are having to contend with opposition from two fronts — within the Left partners as well as the Opposition parties?

First we have to solve the problem inside the Left front. We have to get the confidence of our partners in the Front and discuss again and again whether there is any genuine [issue] and bridge the information gaps. We have to convince all [on] our need for big industries and foreign direct investment. And then we have to face the Opposition. Sometimes there has been opposition from this end just for the sake of opposition; there are arguments offered. Wherever we go to set up industry or factories they set up some Bhoomi Ucched Pratirodh committee or other [laughs].

In the past 30 years in governance has there been such tension, pressures within the Left Front as there are now?

We have [had] some difference in the past too but the problems now are new because we are in a new situation.

Change throws about its own set of dilemmas?

Exactly, that is exactly what is happening here. But I just cannot compromise on this point; the new generation wants us to move ahead.