Visted Madh island on the invitation of Raghu on Sunday 20th November 05. Was there from 8:00 am to 3:00 pm with Mahesh Sinha and Viraat Singh.
Hi Raghu,
Sorry for the delay. I have to give you a background about what happened that day after we finished our meeting with you. To keep everyone in the loop I am blogging it.
We finished at around 11:00 am with you and then proceeded towards the connecting road between mainland and Madh. We had Mahesh’s van and waited there for any trucks that may come. We waited for nearly 45 minutes but there was no action. Then we went towards Malvani to have some snacks. It was when we sat in the restaurants that we saw the first few trucks pass by. Instead of immediately getting up and following them we thought that they would start streaming in and we will have many of them to follow. When we came out we started around 12:05 pm. We moved on that road and came and parked ourselves on the connecting road. We did not have any trucks coming there and decided to go back and check. When we were returning we again saw some trucks but realised that they were going to AIR hence we were able to see them at Malvani and not at the connecting junction. Interestingly the AIR compound a little after Bageecha is seeing so many trucks carrying debris?
Then we came back and thought that we will stay some time near the big swathe that has been created next to the road a little before your building and then go and take some pictures from top of your building. While we were at that swathe some interesting things took place. I tried to take some pictures and one of the watchmen from the SP Paper building opposite came and objected. He showed me the board of Shree Mukhteshwar society next to the road and said that the office bearers should be there right now and we should speak to them. We generally bounced of the concern about the dumping that is taking place and he said that it was considerably less now etc. He gave us the names of Balkrishna Patil and Ganesh Raut. We were not sure but then since he would not let us take pictures we said we will drive ahead and atleast observe what happens within the compound of the Satya Sai Baba complex from the outside.
We drove and parked on the side of the gate. There was a group of 5-6 people there and they observed our coming immediately. We were not sure whether we wanted to speak to them now and decided we will put up an ignorant bystander act. Apparently the watchman we had met earlier had already sounded them about our coming and we didn’t realize that. This group came towards the gate and towards us and looked suspicious and started enquiring. We fibbed that we were standing for a friend of ours. Then one of them (Prahalad Mhatre) said what were you doing inside our property and why were you photographing. I told them that we were interested in environmental issues and had seen these garbage and fruit packs littered behind the mound and decided to photograph them. We were not aware that they had been sounded of about our interested in dumping and didn’t have the time to realize also because all this happened very quickly in less than ten minutes.
I realized that they had been sounded of and it was pointless trying to evade. I directly came to the point telling them that we were concerned about the amount of mud that had been dumped in the swathe and had received complaints form neighbouring residents that nearly fifty trucks were dumping debris everyday or so. Those guys first tried to bully us about our telling lies but then I did not go on the defensive or loose my cool and humoured my way through the situation by telling them about how in such matters everyone is cautious and if they are saying that they are doing nothing wrong then we could now have a good open discussion and clear any misunderstandings. They very proudly started narrating their achievements and offered to take us through their compound and the farms that they are developing. They mentioned how the Shree Mukhteshwar society was set up in 1959 and had only now been able to get going and and start their work. They mentioned that the whole village (these guys were mainly from Aksa) was a devotee of Shree Satya Sai Baba. They started of by complaining how the out outside world’s perception of them was either not there or was not construed properly. They mentioned about how they were responsible for saving so many people from drowning on the beach but the media just covers the efforts of some people without doing proper research. I will in just cover their viewpoints and what we discussed.
1. They feel that the whole notion of there being a free flowing creek where water flows from below Aksa bridge and connects with the culverts below the connecting road is wrong. They say that this is absolutely not the case and there are two barrages created by them in between which are stopping the water at both sides( I hope I am not reading the conversation wrongly at this point and anyway we will have a chance to clear this in the next Sunday meeting).
There is already landmass in between according to them. Then they showed us their farming which they are carrying out by treating sewage from the 400 odd families in the village. They are diverting the sewage through pipes, passing them through ponds, which act as filters at various stages, and then using this water for irrigation. They seemed a nice, hard working and innovative bunch.
2.They mentioned about how they are running the school, which provides schooling absolutely free of cost to 700 students from all the villages from Manori to Madh. They also mentioned that some of their students coming from absolutely illiterate parents were doing well and there were some in merit. They were also running medical facilities free of cost. We asked them how they were bearing the cost since offering free of cost doesn’t mean that no cost is involved. They mentioned that Baba is helping them with donations and there were doctors from Malad who were giving free consultation.
3.They had complaints with generally the more urbane which would include you guys and us. They had a complaint as to how Harmony’s sewage was discharged raw into the sea and there were places on the beach where one had to leap over the sewage streams coming from Harmony.
I could basically sense that there was a suspicion and communication barrier between two sections here and tried to assuage them, comfort them and assure then that we were here to learn and not misrepresent facts. I also continuously mentioned how you would be really glad to meet them and they would have a very different view once they met you.
Based upon that I told them that we will have a detailed meeting next Sunday when Raghu and others who are interested could meet and we could do a detailed visit and see the barrages that they were mentioning. Maybe we could bring along a map and discuss things better.
Thursday, November 24, 2005
Sunday, October 30, 2005
My remarks to HT article "Greens go red" of 30th Oct 2005
Part I
General
Part II
The reason I started getting disillusioned with BEAG
Part III
Implications and what happened in the LBS trees issue
In case you do not have access to the article - which is also available on the online addition of HT - I have copied it as the first comment.
___________________________________________________________________________
Part I
General
In the light of the Hindustan Times article 'Greens go Red' of 30th October regarding the considerable differences among environmentalists in Mumbai it is important for me to publish my views as they are, in an undiluted manner. The report in HT in the starting made it seem as if this was some kind of a brownie points game where we filed the PIL for the sake of establishing an image over BEAG or something like that. At no point was the view communicated to HT in that manner and neither I nor MESN needs to engage in that after having so many years in the field genuinely supporting the causes we hold close to our heart. All that I spoke to HT was that I would never be a joint petitioner with BEAG on Sujata’s asking me whether this petition was along with BEAG. I went on to mention how so many of us have little faith in BEAG and so few are aware of the considerable differences and rift in the environmental community. I am sure Sujata spoke to more people.
When Sujata called me I had no idea of the article she was planning. She called me for updates on the LBS thing and the next thing talk came on to BEAG and it was soon over. The conversation lasted two minutes. It is important to clarify all this since the article did not go into the details of what the rift is all about and it would be very easy to ascribe it to frivolous reasons. Also the rift at least from my side is not in the insolvable domain. If things correct then I am most keen to work jointly.
There was absolutely no attempt at ‘blocking’ BEAG from ‘intervening’ in the matter. BEAG itself did not involve itself significantly with the issue. The issue was open for anybody to impact. If we would have spent our time in blocking anybody else the trees were sure goners with the courts soon enough going on vacation. And it would be naïve to believe that people can be blocked in such a manner.
I would consider it insulting if people were to believe that I was in some kind of a rush to beat BEAG to the PIL finish line and not for the love of the trees. BEAG was not even in the race even if it is to be considered so. After coming to know of it they sat on the issue for a week and did not decide to collaborate – which has been my past experience with them and doesn’t surprise me. The HT story seems to suggest so advertently or inadvertently and it is important I clear things. It was an extremely chaotic and stressful time thinking that every moment there was a threat to some wonderful 40 year old rain tree or the other. I was anyways piled up with huge amount of important work, all of which I left aside to get involved in saving the trees.
I will speak strictly for myself right now and not even for MESN, which is a newly formed organisation. Anyways my observations of and disagreement with BEAG go much before MESN. But rest assured there are a very large number of people who feel similarly or in the same manner. It is unfortunate that they do not wish to speak out lest it rock the boat and create unpleasant and embarrassing situations. But this hesitation is in essence weakening the quality of environmental dialogue in the city and in effect our ability to ensure a better environment. Hopefully the bold initiative of Sumaira and my sharing my experiences will bring some discussion to this most important issue.
The heading of the HT article is misleading. My full time occupation is certainly not to fight the BEAG. Give me a break, I have better things to do. I am extremely proud of being involved with saving the Lokhandwala mangroves patch till now at least – and this is the finest patch in the city – and also having given some direction for the other mangroves areas in the city. Besides I do take interest in many other issues. I would be stupid to spend all my time on BEAG. It’s only when somebody cares to take an opinion I speak out and I don’t sit on the fence.
It is unfortunate that the discussion is being labelled as a fight (not just by HT) and Sumaira as a ‘disgruntled and eccentric element’ and not as an effort to bring some democracy and accountability to the NGO sector which is under some suspicion. If I am passionate about a public issue and wish to impact it for the better as opposed to being a spectator I am very well entitled to participate actively and question the strategies and methods of anybody and everybody involved in impacting the same issue. No one individual or organisation has a right to say that they will do the work and ask others to sit by and just clap for their efforts. This is when a whole lot of horrible things start happening.
I don’t think people have really understood the import of the issues raised by Sumaira in August. Whether BEAG is at fault or not the issues raised need discussion. Person after person has had horrible experiences in having absolutely worthwhile projects considered for funding by the MMR-EIS. Why is this happening and why is so little known of the projects which get funded? In the fast paced racy life that we lead in Mumbai it at times become more convenient to fall for glib well packed but hollow exercises. Coffee table concern is very easy to show as a means of ones responsibility. Being deeply involved is asking for too much.
And I think Sumaira is someone who has considerable work to show and cannot be dismissed as someone on the fringe taking potshots. She has done considerbale work on Noise Pollution. Has been involved in Alibag and is well entitled to ask the questions she is asking as a person concerned about the present and future of Mumbai.
I am not saying that everything that I am saying is correct. All that I am saying, and more importantly am amazed with is that no body is willing to have a discussion on such an important issue forget taking sides or agree on things.
As has very rightly been mentioned in the report I have considerable differences in the manner in which BEAG and Debi work and the difference has been for more than three years now. I certainly do not feel insecure with BEAG's publicity and its high profile PILs etc. I stopped hero worshipping BEAG long time back and certainly do not need to feel that way at all after knowing them closely and being thoroughly convinced that they have done more harm than good to Mumbai’s environment.
I have spoken about it sufficiently to the media and people who can and should be doing something to address the serious matters being raised. It is unfortunate that they have not chosen to address the matter, which in my opinion is even more serious than any of the environmental issues we are addressing. How far will we go in protecting the mangroves or the National Park or any other issue if the method of operation of the frontline NGO is completely not agreeable and a significant number of people feel that way? And is governance not our primary issue. And governance certainly doesn’t mean just the government. It very well covers civil society also.
Our unglorious culture of blind worship has unfortunately not spared communities, which would be expected to behave in a brave and scientific manner. Sycophancy and back scratching rule the roost in naturalists and environmentalists. There is more than considerable lethargy in the naturalists community to do anything for actually safeguarding the environment and most people find it convenient to piggy back on BEAGs efforts by singing hosaanas without really understanding the issues and the methods how they can be impacted in. Much more importantly most people do not hold any kind of monitoring to see whether in all these years of operation of NGOs like BEAG we have achieved any significant change in our issues. At some times in the past when on yahoo groups I have raised the issues Debi has tried his best to obfuscate the key concerns and taken advantage of the emotional Indian public by driving the dialogue along emotional than scientific lines. I also received hate mail from one gentleman who seemed more concerned about BEAG than the issues themselves.
Nature has become another Bollywood like thing. Many people go to multiplexes to see Shahrukh and Rani dance and naturalists go to forests and natural areas to see butterflies and birds dance. They don’t do a thing about participating in saving the habitat and when their conscience hits them about not doing something even after being aware the next best thing is to endorse views of any NGO on the table. Most people will not even open their eyes to the fact that PILs have also limited role to play and in many cases are failing. PILs have become a short cut to cover for our failure to being engaged with the executive and the legislature. And on such foundations credibility of organisations like BEAG gets built up.
Part II
The reason I started getting disillusioned with BEAG
My fundamental grouse against the BEAG is their involvement in the mangroves issue. BEAG has just mastered the art of filing high profile PILs, getting positive hearings and then tom tomming about it in the media. It has absolutely no grass roots work to show and in fact they have played a considerable role in dampening the spirits of most grassroots individuals/organisations. The experience of most grassroots groups trying to save the mangroves in Mumbai has been negative with them. Of late to save their face and the obvious contradiction they have started some engagement maybe.
There too in Lokhandwala Complex Debi chooses to not getting in touch with the group for information but individual members, which creates some confusion because obviously there are people who are not ware of all the aspects and feel elated when they receive a call from ‘ Mr. Debi Goenka of BEAG who is doing such wonderful work in saving the mangroves of Mumbai.’ I do not know also why Debi and BEAG behaves so. It reminds me of my times in school in fifth and sixth grade, where there used to be these bunch of highly insecure classmates who use to be into a huge amount of game playing, behind the back scheming etc. just to maintain ranks and beat the others at it. For them the joy of learning and education didn’t mean a thing. I hope some of them too read this note.
I started my active grassroots involvement with protecting the mangroves in June 2001 with the Lokhandwala mangroves in Andheri. Among the first people I approached was Debi expecting considerable help in terms of the authorities to approach and the kind of letters to write. I received no help. I did not mind because I felt they must be extremely busy with the kind of work they do.
Around that time itself I noticed the complete destruction of 500 acres of mangroves areas in Millat Nagar. I was extremely pained because on a BNHS bird watching trip in November 5, 1998 I had observed the destruction start only from a small corner of the 500 acres area. By December I had brought the matter sufficiently to the notice of Debi who was managing committee member of BNHS also. Unfortunately I did not do so in writing and was very intemperately told the same by Debi in April 2002 when I fell out with him over the issue.
Millat Nagar mangroves 1996
From June 2001 to December 2001 I had brought the matter sufficiently to the notice of a lot of environmentalists and authorities in the city. 200 trucks were dumping debris over there everyday in the most blatant violation maybe in the country. There was no response to that either from Debi or BEAG or some other venerable individuals and organisations in the city. Later on others in the neighbourhood started waking up to it. Praveen Chaudhary and Sunjoy Monga joined in and after significant work we managed to get papers and government reports, which suggested how permissions had been given by government agencies, how certain agencies had taken strict objection to the project and how they had been over ruled.
Millat Nagar Mangroves 2001
We also got minutes and reports of various government committees formed since 1995 on all of which either Debi Goenka or Shyam Chainani were represented. The same Millat Nagar mangroves were also mentioned in reports and their value was recognised.
On one of the crucial days 22nd April, 2002 when Pravin Chadhari sought to confront the Collector with the information gathered (I was down with fever and hence could not attend) Debi met Pravin and handed him over a file which had exactly the same information gathered by us stating that the same maybe useful in our efforts.
That incident really blew my mind off. Subsequently by September through our meetings with the Ministry of Environment and Forests the permission to develop a golf course was withdrawn. The MOEF accepted that it was in many ways negligence on their part because they completely relied on the papers provided and the permissions and reports of local authorities, which were completely manipulated.
On April 26th, 2002 I first publicly confronted Debi in a meeting of Times Foundation suggesting to the participants that instead of just environmental audits it is time we did audits of environmentalists themselves many of who have become high profile only on the back of their smooth talking and ability to feed the media. In fact their ability to feed the media has also led to a whole generation of people being fed with some half truths and being led to believe some complete misconceptions about the working of society and government.
The files provided by Debi and the matter collected by us conclusively proved that BEAG was well aware of what was happening in Millat Nagar since the very beginning. Nothing stopped them from moving the courts in 1999 itself, something, which they did subsequently in 2003 again due to the considerable pressure built up and riding on the back of our efforts with the city being led to believe that BEAG was doing so much for the city’s mangroves. So much? Or so little? The 550-acre mangroves of Millat Nagar were squarely destroyed because BEAG chose not to act in 1998 when I brought the matter to their notice.
What stopped BEAG from making available the same file in June 2001 itself? What stopped it from meeting the courts in June 2001 itself? My brain was then just beginning to loose its innocence and learn legalities and PILs but to people who had been in it for decades it should not have taken much to figure out what needs to be done.
One of the excuses that I heard from Debi in 2002 was that citizens are also indifferent and it is impossible for BEAG to be aware of every problem in the city – NGOs should also bring violations to BEAG’s notice. Well that was exactly what I did (again after 1998) in June 2001 till December 2001. BEAG did not do a single thing about it then also. Forget doing something (to discount for their being so busy) they did not have something to say and did not provide any direction about what to do. Maybe they were too confident that all the dust would settle down since these were not individuals or organisations with deep pockets (like BEAG) and would not be able to sustain themselves for long.
The grassroots movement to save mangroves in Mumbai has completely been started by first the residents of Versova in 1998, Girish in Mahim, Nicky and the Gorai residents and then by me and it is to date being sustained by the work put in by almost the same individuals even now. Only a few new individuals, have been added over the years, amazingly in such a big city with so many people with so much spare time to have coffee table discussions about how the city is going to the dogs and what should be done etc. and money to squander on so many inessentials in the name of doing their bit for the environment.
Even the new people do not possess sufficient skill sets to engage in protecting their mangrove areas and have their own disappointments to share with BEAG. All new efforts are being supported by us with the BEAG conspicuous with its absence.
Satellite mapping has become such a big issue in October after the HC hearing. In the late nineties a committee was formed consisting of MMRDA, BNHS and IIT Bombay to look into everything that is being re-discussed now. Who is guilty of delaying the original plan? And why are questions not being raised? And why are people who are raising questions being called 'disgruntled and eccentric'.
Had organisations like BEAG decided to be collaborative and supportive then the mangroves of Mumbai would have been completely saved long back. But BEAG has made the whole thing so confused and cloak and dagger that we have only lost mangroves. And that’s true for almost every issue they have been involved with as is clear in any conversation coming up in any section of the society.
Part III
Implications and what happened in the LBS trees issue
Instead of engaging in developing the skills of the ordinary citizen to engage himself or herself in environmental issues, instead of encouraging dialogue amongst various stakeholders in the city and country, instead if engaging in transparency and capacity building during a crucial phase of the environmental movement in the decade after the Rio Summit in 1992 BEAG did almost everything which weakened the environmental community and our capability to deal with our environmental issues.
And what’s the harm or what’s wrong when Sumaira questions their presence on so many committees in MMRDA. Or for that matter a report on the PILS they file and their budgets and annual reports etc.? Are we talking democracy here? Isn’t this symptomatic of the complete lack of questioning in the country and the attempt to discourage everybody who asks inconvenient questions? It fights the causes in public interest and then chooses to not interact with the same public.
Coming to the LBS Marg trees issue. A local resident Mrs. Satya Saran first brought the issue to my notice on 16th October 2005. Having travelled extensively through that road in 2000 and being in love with the trees, there was no way I would not get involved in protecting them. I immediately sent out a mail on all the important yahoo groups and my email list. By 19th October a good portion of the city was aware about the issue. By 19th October I and Mrinal Mhaiskar had taken a detailed survey of the road accumulating 80 photographs of the trees and the traffic and other conditions of the road. Bina Balakrishnan a Transportation Consultant whom I know well was concerned with the issue and offered here help for the transport planning part. She also got in touch with Debi about the matter. I had mentioned to her about the numerous phone calls to MMRDA officials and efforts in vain to contact T Chadrashekhar. She in a conversation conveyed the same to Debi who told her that he could arrange for a meeting or conversation on the matter with T Chandrashekhar and I should call him if I feel the need for the same.
I found it extremely improper that a public official should be available for conversation through channels only and not when desired by whosoever decides to contact him over an important issue. To my furious mind it seemed only logical that the epitome of intransparency in the NGO world should be able to be able to arrange for a meeting with the epitome of intransparency in the bureaucratic world. I did not take the offer. There was no ego issue at all. I had had ten conversations with MMRDA officials till them pleading with to halt the tree cutting for some time and suggesting a meeting between us so that a joint survey could be taken. They sat proudly in their ivory castles. T Chandrashekhar had more time to meet World Bank officials than to meet people from his own country on whose supposed behalf he was carrying out the development. It was almost as if you employ somebody to work for you and then after establishing himself in the job and taking the salary and the goodies that somebody chooses to do as he pleases caring two hoots for you.
And then Mr. Debi Goenka suggests he can arrange a meeting and more interestingly asks me to call for it. It seems the ego issue was more on his side. Why can’t he call me and suggest the same directly? Forget me if he has issues. Why can’t he get involved on his own and save the trees instead?
As regards the PIL there was no discussion with BEAG. And why should there be? Had there been an atmosphere of cordiality with BEAG they would have been my first stop for doing the PIL but when you don’t have even that then the question doesn’t arise. Debi called me (more like messaged me to call him) and informed that they were planning to go for a PIL and what was the status. I was next to the court then and an hour from filing the case and informed him of the same suggesting another PIL would now be unnecessary. Anybody can go to the courts for a public issue. BEAG has just made it seem that they are the only one’s who can do it. Of course our great culture whose greatness evades me expects blind worship and respect for elders and people who give you birth (somewhere I am a product of BEAG whom I venerated through the 90’s) even if they are doing more harm to you and I did not do that when I chose to go to the courts directly.
That’s about it to the LBS issue. We went with our course and frankly speaking its not difficult for people to intervene in such issues. It’s only because people have not developed these skills and I would also say are lazy that an MESN or a BEAG has to come in the picture. Of course the other trend I think is of professional NGOs handling issues. Just like when you want to move your furniture or paint your building or clean your street you call an agency, simlarly when you want to save trees, or fight against encroachments or beautify your area ou call upon a professionally run agency which has built up considerable expertise and in this case goes by the NGO tag - atleast till now.
The environmental and social issues of Mumbai are imminently solvable. We have the ability to achieve a better Mumbai but that will certainly not happen in the current atmosphere of hostility and suspicion and infighting and turf battles and inflated egos within the civil society itself. Just the government or commercial forces are unnecessarily being made to be seen as the sole reason for many of our problems. What we need is intergrity and committment and an approach which involves greater communication and is inclusive of other stakeholders.
I must also clarify that I am not a difficult kind of a person who keeps getting in trouble. I am irreverent and anti-establishment but only when required and certainly not for the sake of it. I do like to keep a questioning and analytical approach and love to develop my opinion through my own independent, no strings attached means and refuse to blind worship. All this certainly doesn’t mean good for people who like to operate in an intransparent unaccountable manner.
It is very important to keep the past in context when I choose to build considerable bridges of cooperation with the BEAG and was completely disappointed with their secrecy bound suspect ways.
General
Part II
The reason I started getting disillusioned with BEAG
Part III
Implications and what happened in the LBS trees issue
In case you do not have access to the article - which is also available on the online addition of HT - I have copied it as the first comment.
___________________________________________________________________________
Part I
General
In the light of the Hindustan Times article 'Greens go Red' of 30th October regarding the considerable differences among environmentalists in Mumbai it is important for me to publish my views as they are, in an undiluted manner. The report in HT in the starting made it seem as if this was some kind of a brownie points game where we filed the PIL for the sake of establishing an image over BEAG or something like that. At no point was the view communicated to HT in that manner and neither I nor MESN needs to engage in that after having so many years in the field genuinely supporting the causes we hold close to our heart. All that I spoke to HT was that I would never be a joint petitioner with BEAG on Sujata’s asking me whether this petition was along with BEAG. I went on to mention how so many of us have little faith in BEAG and so few are aware of the considerable differences and rift in the environmental community. I am sure Sujata spoke to more people.
When Sujata called me I had no idea of the article she was planning. She called me for updates on the LBS thing and the next thing talk came on to BEAG and it was soon over. The conversation lasted two minutes. It is important to clarify all this since the article did not go into the details of what the rift is all about and it would be very easy to ascribe it to frivolous reasons. Also the rift at least from my side is not in the insolvable domain. If things correct then I am most keen to work jointly.
There was absolutely no attempt at ‘blocking’ BEAG from ‘intervening’ in the matter. BEAG itself did not involve itself significantly with the issue. The issue was open for anybody to impact. If we would have spent our time in blocking anybody else the trees were sure goners with the courts soon enough going on vacation. And it would be naïve to believe that people can be blocked in such a manner.
I would consider it insulting if people were to believe that I was in some kind of a rush to beat BEAG to the PIL finish line and not for the love of the trees. BEAG was not even in the race even if it is to be considered so. After coming to know of it they sat on the issue for a week and did not decide to collaborate – which has been my past experience with them and doesn’t surprise me. The HT story seems to suggest so advertently or inadvertently and it is important I clear things. It was an extremely chaotic and stressful time thinking that every moment there was a threat to some wonderful 40 year old rain tree or the other. I was anyways piled up with huge amount of important work, all of which I left aside to get involved in saving the trees.
I will speak strictly for myself right now and not even for MESN, which is a newly formed organisation. Anyways my observations of and disagreement with BEAG go much before MESN. But rest assured there are a very large number of people who feel similarly or in the same manner. It is unfortunate that they do not wish to speak out lest it rock the boat and create unpleasant and embarrassing situations. But this hesitation is in essence weakening the quality of environmental dialogue in the city and in effect our ability to ensure a better environment. Hopefully the bold initiative of Sumaira and my sharing my experiences will bring some discussion to this most important issue.
The heading of the HT article is misleading. My full time occupation is certainly not to fight the BEAG. Give me a break, I have better things to do. I am extremely proud of being involved with saving the Lokhandwala mangroves patch till now at least – and this is the finest patch in the city – and also having given some direction for the other mangroves areas in the city. Besides I do take interest in many other issues. I would be stupid to spend all my time on BEAG. It’s only when somebody cares to take an opinion I speak out and I don’t sit on the fence.
It is unfortunate that the discussion is being labelled as a fight (not just by HT) and Sumaira as a ‘disgruntled and eccentric element’ and not as an effort to bring some democracy and accountability to the NGO sector which is under some suspicion. If I am passionate about a public issue and wish to impact it for the better as opposed to being a spectator I am very well entitled to participate actively and question the strategies and methods of anybody and everybody involved in impacting the same issue. No one individual or organisation has a right to say that they will do the work and ask others to sit by and just clap for their efforts. This is when a whole lot of horrible things start happening.
I don’t think people have really understood the import of the issues raised by Sumaira in August. Whether BEAG is at fault or not the issues raised need discussion. Person after person has had horrible experiences in having absolutely worthwhile projects considered for funding by the MMR-EIS. Why is this happening and why is so little known of the projects which get funded? In the fast paced racy life that we lead in Mumbai it at times become more convenient to fall for glib well packed but hollow exercises. Coffee table concern is very easy to show as a means of ones responsibility. Being deeply involved is asking for too much.
And I think Sumaira is someone who has considerable work to show and cannot be dismissed as someone on the fringe taking potshots. She has done considerbale work on Noise Pollution. Has been involved in Alibag and is well entitled to ask the questions she is asking as a person concerned about the present and future of Mumbai.
I am not saying that everything that I am saying is correct. All that I am saying, and more importantly am amazed with is that no body is willing to have a discussion on such an important issue forget taking sides or agree on things.
As has very rightly been mentioned in the report I have considerable differences in the manner in which BEAG and Debi work and the difference has been for more than three years now. I certainly do not feel insecure with BEAG's publicity and its high profile PILs etc. I stopped hero worshipping BEAG long time back and certainly do not need to feel that way at all after knowing them closely and being thoroughly convinced that they have done more harm than good to Mumbai’s environment.
I have spoken about it sufficiently to the media and people who can and should be doing something to address the serious matters being raised. It is unfortunate that they have not chosen to address the matter, which in my opinion is even more serious than any of the environmental issues we are addressing. How far will we go in protecting the mangroves or the National Park or any other issue if the method of operation of the frontline NGO is completely not agreeable and a significant number of people feel that way? And is governance not our primary issue. And governance certainly doesn’t mean just the government. It very well covers civil society also.
Our unglorious culture of blind worship has unfortunately not spared communities, which would be expected to behave in a brave and scientific manner. Sycophancy and back scratching rule the roost in naturalists and environmentalists. There is more than considerable lethargy in the naturalists community to do anything for actually safeguarding the environment and most people find it convenient to piggy back on BEAGs efforts by singing hosaanas without really understanding the issues and the methods how they can be impacted in. Much more importantly most people do not hold any kind of monitoring to see whether in all these years of operation of NGOs like BEAG we have achieved any significant change in our issues. At some times in the past when on yahoo groups I have raised the issues Debi has tried his best to obfuscate the key concerns and taken advantage of the emotional Indian public by driving the dialogue along emotional than scientific lines. I also received hate mail from one gentleman who seemed more concerned about BEAG than the issues themselves.
Nature has become another Bollywood like thing. Many people go to multiplexes to see Shahrukh and Rani dance and naturalists go to forests and natural areas to see butterflies and birds dance. They don’t do a thing about participating in saving the habitat and when their conscience hits them about not doing something even after being aware the next best thing is to endorse views of any NGO on the table. Most people will not even open their eyes to the fact that PILs have also limited role to play and in many cases are failing. PILs have become a short cut to cover for our failure to being engaged with the executive and the legislature. And on such foundations credibility of organisations like BEAG gets built up.
Part II
The reason I started getting disillusioned with BEAG
My fundamental grouse against the BEAG is their involvement in the mangroves issue. BEAG has just mastered the art of filing high profile PILs, getting positive hearings and then tom tomming about it in the media. It has absolutely no grass roots work to show and in fact they have played a considerable role in dampening the spirits of most grassroots individuals/organisations. The experience of most grassroots groups trying to save the mangroves in Mumbai has been negative with them. Of late to save their face and the obvious contradiction they have started some engagement maybe.
There too in Lokhandwala Complex Debi chooses to not getting in touch with the group for information but individual members, which creates some confusion because obviously there are people who are not ware of all the aspects and feel elated when they receive a call from ‘ Mr. Debi Goenka of BEAG who is doing such wonderful work in saving the mangroves of Mumbai.’ I do not know also why Debi and BEAG behaves so. It reminds me of my times in school in fifth and sixth grade, where there used to be these bunch of highly insecure classmates who use to be into a huge amount of game playing, behind the back scheming etc. just to maintain ranks and beat the others at it. For them the joy of learning and education didn’t mean a thing. I hope some of them too read this note.
I started my active grassroots involvement with protecting the mangroves in June 2001 with the Lokhandwala mangroves in Andheri. Among the first people I approached was Debi expecting considerable help in terms of the authorities to approach and the kind of letters to write. I received no help. I did not mind because I felt they must be extremely busy with the kind of work they do.
Around that time itself I noticed the complete destruction of 500 acres of mangroves areas in Millat Nagar. I was extremely pained because on a BNHS bird watching trip in November 5, 1998 I had observed the destruction start only from a small corner of the 500 acres area. By December I had brought the matter sufficiently to the notice of Debi who was managing committee member of BNHS also. Unfortunately I did not do so in writing and was very intemperately told the same by Debi in April 2002 when I fell out with him over the issue.
Millat Nagar mangroves 1996
From June 2001 to December 2001 I had brought the matter sufficiently to the notice of a lot of environmentalists and authorities in the city. 200 trucks were dumping debris over there everyday in the most blatant violation maybe in the country. There was no response to that either from Debi or BEAG or some other venerable individuals and organisations in the city. Later on others in the neighbourhood started waking up to it. Praveen Chaudhary and Sunjoy Monga joined in and after significant work we managed to get papers and government reports, which suggested how permissions had been given by government agencies, how certain agencies had taken strict objection to the project and how they had been over ruled.
Millat Nagar Mangroves 2001
We also got minutes and reports of various government committees formed since 1995 on all of which either Debi Goenka or Shyam Chainani were represented. The same Millat Nagar mangroves were also mentioned in reports and their value was recognised.
On one of the crucial days 22nd April, 2002 when Pravin Chadhari sought to confront the Collector with the information gathered (I was down with fever and hence could not attend) Debi met Pravin and handed him over a file which had exactly the same information gathered by us stating that the same maybe useful in our efforts.
That incident really blew my mind off. Subsequently by September through our meetings with the Ministry of Environment and Forests the permission to develop a golf course was withdrawn. The MOEF accepted that it was in many ways negligence on their part because they completely relied on the papers provided and the permissions and reports of local authorities, which were completely manipulated.
On April 26th, 2002 I first publicly confronted Debi in a meeting of Times Foundation suggesting to the participants that instead of just environmental audits it is time we did audits of environmentalists themselves many of who have become high profile only on the back of their smooth talking and ability to feed the media. In fact their ability to feed the media has also led to a whole generation of people being fed with some half truths and being led to believe some complete misconceptions about the working of society and government.
The files provided by Debi and the matter collected by us conclusively proved that BEAG was well aware of what was happening in Millat Nagar since the very beginning. Nothing stopped them from moving the courts in 1999 itself, something, which they did subsequently in 2003 again due to the considerable pressure built up and riding on the back of our efforts with the city being led to believe that BEAG was doing so much for the city’s mangroves. So much? Or so little? The 550-acre mangroves of Millat Nagar were squarely destroyed because BEAG chose not to act in 1998 when I brought the matter to their notice.
What stopped BEAG from making available the same file in June 2001 itself? What stopped it from meeting the courts in June 2001 itself? My brain was then just beginning to loose its innocence and learn legalities and PILs but to people who had been in it for decades it should not have taken much to figure out what needs to be done.
One of the excuses that I heard from Debi in 2002 was that citizens are also indifferent and it is impossible for BEAG to be aware of every problem in the city – NGOs should also bring violations to BEAG’s notice. Well that was exactly what I did (again after 1998) in June 2001 till December 2001. BEAG did not do a single thing about it then also. Forget doing something (to discount for their being so busy) they did not have something to say and did not provide any direction about what to do. Maybe they were too confident that all the dust would settle down since these were not individuals or organisations with deep pockets (like BEAG) and would not be able to sustain themselves for long.
The grassroots movement to save mangroves in Mumbai has completely been started by first the residents of Versova in 1998, Girish in Mahim, Nicky and the Gorai residents and then by me and it is to date being sustained by the work put in by almost the same individuals even now. Only a few new individuals, have been added over the years, amazingly in such a big city with so many people with so much spare time to have coffee table discussions about how the city is going to the dogs and what should be done etc. and money to squander on so many inessentials in the name of doing their bit for the environment.
Even the new people do not possess sufficient skill sets to engage in protecting their mangrove areas and have their own disappointments to share with BEAG. All new efforts are being supported by us with the BEAG conspicuous with its absence.
Satellite mapping has become such a big issue in October after the HC hearing. In the late nineties a committee was formed consisting of MMRDA, BNHS and IIT Bombay to look into everything that is being re-discussed now. Who is guilty of delaying the original plan? And why are questions not being raised? And why are people who are raising questions being called 'disgruntled and eccentric'.
Had organisations like BEAG decided to be collaborative and supportive then the mangroves of Mumbai would have been completely saved long back. But BEAG has made the whole thing so confused and cloak and dagger that we have only lost mangroves. And that’s true for almost every issue they have been involved with as is clear in any conversation coming up in any section of the society.
Part III
Implications and what happened in the LBS trees issue
Instead of engaging in developing the skills of the ordinary citizen to engage himself or herself in environmental issues, instead of encouraging dialogue amongst various stakeholders in the city and country, instead if engaging in transparency and capacity building during a crucial phase of the environmental movement in the decade after the Rio Summit in 1992 BEAG did almost everything which weakened the environmental community and our capability to deal with our environmental issues.
And what’s the harm or what’s wrong when Sumaira questions their presence on so many committees in MMRDA. Or for that matter a report on the PILS they file and their budgets and annual reports etc.? Are we talking democracy here? Isn’t this symptomatic of the complete lack of questioning in the country and the attempt to discourage everybody who asks inconvenient questions? It fights the causes in public interest and then chooses to not interact with the same public.
Coming to the LBS Marg trees issue. A local resident Mrs. Satya Saran first brought the issue to my notice on 16th October 2005. Having travelled extensively through that road in 2000 and being in love with the trees, there was no way I would not get involved in protecting them. I immediately sent out a mail on all the important yahoo groups and my email list. By 19th October a good portion of the city was aware about the issue. By 19th October I and Mrinal Mhaiskar had taken a detailed survey of the road accumulating 80 photographs of the trees and the traffic and other conditions of the road. Bina Balakrishnan a Transportation Consultant whom I know well was concerned with the issue and offered here help for the transport planning part. She also got in touch with Debi about the matter. I had mentioned to her about the numerous phone calls to MMRDA officials and efforts in vain to contact T Chadrashekhar. She in a conversation conveyed the same to Debi who told her that he could arrange for a meeting or conversation on the matter with T Chandrashekhar and I should call him if I feel the need for the same.
I found it extremely improper that a public official should be available for conversation through channels only and not when desired by whosoever decides to contact him over an important issue. To my furious mind it seemed only logical that the epitome of intransparency in the NGO world should be able to be able to arrange for a meeting with the epitome of intransparency in the bureaucratic world. I did not take the offer. There was no ego issue at all. I had had ten conversations with MMRDA officials till them pleading with to halt the tree cutting for some time and suggesting a meeting between us so that a joint survey could be taken. They sat proudly in their ivory castles. T Chandrashekhar had more time to meet World Bank officials than to meet people from his own country on whose supposed behalf he was carrying out the development. It was almost as if you employ somebody to work for you and then after establishing himself in the job and taking the salary and the goodies that somebody chooses to do as he pleases caring two hoots for you.
And then Mr. Debi Goenka suggests he can arrange a meeting and more interestingly asks me to call for it. It seems the ego issue was more on his side. Why can’t he call me and suggest the same directly? Forget me if he has issues. Why can’t he get involved on his own and save the trees instead?
As regards the PIL there was no discussion with BEAG. And why should there be? Had there been an atmosphere of cordiality with BEAG they would have been my first stop for doing the PIL but when you don’t have even that then the question doesn’t arise. Debi called me (more like messaged me to call him) and informed that they were planning to go for a PIL and what was the status. I was next to the court then and an hour from filing the case and informed him of the same suggesting another PIL would now be unnecessary. Anybody can go to the courts for a public issue. BEAG has just made it seem that they are the only one’s who can do it. Of course our great culture whose greatness evades me expects blind worship and respect for elders and people who give you birth (somewhere I am a product of BEAG whom I venerated through the 90’s) even if they are doing more harm to you and I did not do that when I chose to go to the courts directly.
That’s about it to the LBS issue. We went with our course and frankly speaking its not difficult for people to intervene in such issues. It’s only because people have not developed these skills and I would also say are lazy that an MESN or a BEAG has to come in the picture. Of course the other trend I think is of professional NGOs handling issues. Just like when you want to move your furniture or paint your building or clean your street you call an agency, simlarly when you want to save trees, or fight against encroachments or beautify your area ou call upon a professionally run agency which has built up considerable expertise and in this case goes by the NGO tag - atleast till now.
The environmental and social issues of Mumbai are imminently solvable. We have the ability to achieve a better Mumbai but that will certainly not happen in the current atmosphere of hostility and suspicion and infighting and turf battles and inflated egos within the civil society itself. Just the government or commercial forces are unnecessarily being made to be seen as the sole reason for many of our problems. What we need is intergrity and committment and an approach which involves greater communication and is inclusive of other stakeholders.
I must also clarify that I am not a difficult kind of a person who keeps getting in trouble. I am irreverent and anti-establishment but only when required and certainly not for the sake of it. I do like to keep a questioning and analytical approach and love to develop my opinion through my own independent, no strings attached means and refuse to blind worship. All this certainly doesn’t mean good for people who like to operate in an intransparent unaccountable manner.
It is very important to keep the past in context when I choose to build considerable bridges of cooperation with the BEAG and was completely disappointed with their secrecy bound suspect ways.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)