At the launch of the proposed construction of the bridge over the Ourem creek, Manohar Parrikar has again been casting aspersions on NGOs and their being against Goa’s development projects. One cannot understand this since does he expect everyone to be camp followers of his and there are many of them in Goa who will stand on the sidelines and clap for whatever Parrikar does. Should valid objections and alternative options for any project not be drawn to the attention of the government? Like the 3rd Mandovi bridge could have been completely avoided and more priority given for a 2nd Zuari bridge. At one fourth of the cost of the 3rd Mandovi bridge by installing traffic signals and re-orientation of the road in front of the Panjim bus stand and continuing with the existing two bridges, certified safe for another 10 years, could we not have managed to save a lot of money? Once the 3rd Mandovi bridge comes up you will find that it is empty most of the time of the day and it would also not solve the traffic congestion in front of the bus stand making it the latest white elephant in Goa. It will be completely unviable given the amount of money spent on it and the day will come when the Goa government will put a toll tax on its usage. Thus thanks to Parrikar, Panjim would be saddled with two expensive bridges which have no meaning – the new Patto bridge and the 3rd Mandovi Bridge. If there is any confusing way to enter and exit a capital city of any State in 21st century India, it is in Panjim. The problem with this government and Parrikar is that they rarely listen and this intransigence and stubbornness is what leads the NGOs and others to approach the courts. When the people and government have different views, is it not proper that they should sit together and resolve their difference rather than proceed with a project and get it stalled because of a court order? The judiciary is also not a fool to give these judgments and they must be having valid reasons for doing so. In fact Parrikar with his development agenda, akin to the song ‘Killing Me Softly’ is killing the Goan way of life softly but surely. Parrikar’s development agenda has been to prepare Goa for the outsiders, be it for their visiting here like tourists or getting them to come and own businesses here. This comes out of seeing Goa become like some foreign riviera destination with all its attendant trappings. In the process what has been happening is that there has been a massive influx of outsiders into Goa who have bought up land and real estate, driving up prices. This has resulted in the average Goan unable to own a home for himself in the State these days. Slowly but surely, as said earlier, the Goan way of life is being pushed inexorably aside. There was another option for Goa’s development and that was need based which would have been more sustainable while protecting Goa and its way of life. It would have continued to keep tourism as the primary earner for the State’s revenue as it is now. But it would project a USP that offers a personalised and completely different experience than other tourist destinations can offer which would also involve the local stakeholders in a major way. The way things are going, in a decade from now Goa will have the standard offerings that all other tourism destinations of the world that are situated on the coast offer. With this there will be no reason to come to Goa except for the price factor. At this point of time the local hotels and other facilities and services that are involved in the tourism sector will start price cutting. This will make the category of tourists coming to Goa see a further downgrade completely opposite of the strategy that was enunciated sometime back to move away from backpackers to hi-end tourists. This will happen because of the lack of foresight of Parrikar and our planners who would have driven the image of Goa headlong into the sands of its golden beaches. Therefore it is important that people like Parrikar should listen and carry along the people who form his primary constituency and that is the locals.
Again Parrikar, maybe because of his pre-occupation with his portfolio of Defence Minister, has not been updated or needs to add to his knowledge. This is being stated since he is under the impression that for the 3rd Mandovi bridge the NGT has said that no Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) is required, where actually they have said the EIA is required and the GSIDC has to get it done and put it up to the State authorities. While for his information mangroves grow only in estaurine areas of rivers and are rarely seen in its upper stretches and nearer its origin.
