The oracle has spoken. In a Parrikar-esque rebuke to the sceptics and cynics who have committed the folly of questioning the handing over the land of the GIDC for the annual Defexpo of the Defence Ministry; Chief Minister Parsekar has said, “Ignore the false propaganda and understand the importance of the project”.
This kind of a statement is a throwback to the grand Parrikar days, when the then Chief Minister knew it all. He had all the questions and he knew all the answers, with the bureaucracy, the MLAs and the ministers filling up the numbers. While Parsekar’s style of functioning has been far more accommodating, this statement is a bit of a sad déjà vu of the old times. But again it is understandable, since this concerns a national Defence Expo with Manohar Parrikar, Parsekar’s ex boss (and perhaps even his de-facto current one), at the helm of affairs.
Let’s cut to the chase. We need to know from the CM what the false propaganda is. The so-called propaganda is a genuine concern over GIDC land being allotted for the purpose which is not mandated under GIDC rules. Secondly there is extreme haziness with no semblance of clarity on what the modalities will be, for the allowing the ministry of Defence use of this GIDC land in Betul for three days. Unless these misgivings are clarified, the Chief Minister cannot label all opposition to it as false propaganda.
In fact, the GIDC board has not discussed the detailed plan after giving an in-principle clearance for the project. The statements are emanating from the Chief Minister’s office and not from the board or the Chairman of the Corporation, Mr Ganesh Gaonkar. The following needs to be asked and addressed:
1) Is the decision mandated according to the GIDC rules? This involves handling over the land not for any activity which generates revenues and jobs but for a temporary exhibition.
2) The Chief Minister has said that the land will be developed for the Expo and given back to the State. At the same time he had said that the structures are going to be temporary. The State needs to know what the phrase “land will be developed” means in this context. If land is “developed” then by definition it means a permanent activity. In that case, can the land be used for industrial and other activity that is mandated by the GIDC rules, during the rest of the year, outside of the three weeks when the Ministry of Defence uses it?
3) The exhibition will showcase and exhibit battle tanks, missiles and rifles. It is natural to expect infrastructure needs to be created for their transportation. Will any additional space/land be need for the purpose?
4) Roughly 60,000 visitors visit a Defexpo each year. A place like Betul is not equipped with hotels, entertainment zones, restaurants etc. If augmenting tertiary infrastructure is a part of the plan, this needs more construction and land. Have such provisions been made in the Regional Plan?
Lastly we come to the issue of what is it in there for Goa. The Defence Exhibition Organisation was created as a nodal agency in 1981 as part of the Department of Defence Production, to promote the export potential of Defence Public Sector Undertakings, DRDO and the Ordnance Factory Board. Over the years, it has helped towards enhancing the promotion of defence export. It is the nodal and co-ordination agency for the conduct of two major expositions in India, the Aero India and Defexpo India, to benefit defence manufacturers.
Therefore, let there be no confusion over who this is meant for and it is not meant for ordinary Goans or for the promotion of tourism and allied activities. Thus, Mr Parsekar’s latest gem that the Defexpo is going to be along the lines of IFFI (International Film Festival) borders on the amusing. And IFFI makes use of the Kala Academy and INOX, one which has been in existence for years and other is a permanent infrastructure built during the first IFFI. The Defexpo is in no way similar to IFFI.
Therefore questions about the Defexpo deal should not be seen as propaganda or an effort to stymie development. These are genuine questions which the people deserve answers for and the government, if transparent, should provide them.
