The move to have more Planning and Development Authorities to share power and not necessarily make Goa a better planned land is more than a thought. But even while this is at the stage of early planning and not a final conclusion, it is extremely important that the need to have a greater debate and discussion has to be articulated strongly.
What is worrying in this move to create two additional Planning and Development Authorities which will subsume rural areas, has been met with very little debate or the felt need to seek greater clarity? Can we then assume that most Goans are clear on what the creation of more planning areas will mean? It is also important to note that no one in government in key decision making positions has denied that this is being thought of, with some political stakeholders confirming that the decision has been taken to have a north Coastal PDA and a Greater Panjim PDA. These are not trivial decisions and the questions surrounding these decisions have to be dealt with as a duty and a responsibility. That is because Goans need answers to these questions, the same Goans who will stand in the “Goan” line in GMC, because they are sons and daughters of this land. Therefore the state owes clarity of decision making them in the same manner that they owe them, efficient and free health treatment.
There is also substance in the argument that unless the contours of the decision to bifurcate PDAs are clear, how can we critique it, as opposed to criticising it. To even critique it one needs clarity of what the thought behind the decision is. It may well be the single biggest path breaking move the government has ever made to resurrect land planning, but for us to believe that, the simplest way is to answer some of the basics, to begin with. And to help do that here are a few questions:
1) Can the government give us a preamble and a statement of purpose for taking a decision to bifurcate PDAs?
2) Since the decision will involve bringing in villages whose village level plans were drawn up on the still notified Regional Plan 2021, how will these villages be better off under an Outline Development Plan rather than a Regional Plan?
3) Will all the areas earmarked as protected areas and No development Zones in the village plans be protected under the Outline Development Plan?
4) Will all lands marked for agriculture and we lay emphasis on the word “all” be protected from conversion at any cost?
5) If the answers to either of the questions 3 and 4 is “No”, will the government justify, why lands will not be protected and converted and yet this will be beneficial for Goa?
6) Does the government feel that it has a very strong case and justification that all planning should be under PDAs and not through the Regional Plan process? If so, is the government then saying that the formula of the Council for Social Justice and Peace that Goa should follow the one state, one plan principle be adopted? But instead of covering the whole state under the Regional Plan, made with people’s participation, all of Goa should have ODPs which may or may not be drawn with people’s participation.
Just as the people of Goa have every right to ask questions, the TCP department and its Minister has every right to be given an opportunity to explain because it can be assumed that a decision of this nature will not be contemplated without having gone through each of the questions raised above.
These questions are being asked simply because decisions of this nature should be taken for the good of the state and not to give power to influential politicians without positions.
All Goa wants, and those in power should equally desire, is a dialogue. Because this is ultimately about our land.
