Skip to main content

Draft power bill promotes privatisation, 'impedes' social, environmental safeguards

Counterview Desk

In an appeal to the chairperson, Rajiv Ranjan Singh, Parliamentary Standing Committee on Energy, and its members, 90 civil society group have sought cancellation of the draft Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2020, proposed by the Union Ministry of Power in April. I am sharing for your reference, regretting that all that it does is to “promote privatization of the power sector. 
Claiming that, if passed, it will “further widen the prevailing disparity in accessing electricity between cities and rural areas, and further between high-income areas and poorer regions”, the appeal states, the bill “promotes profit over public interest and makes no effort whatsoever to protect the rights of consumers, project impacted communities, natural resources and nature.”

Text:

We the undersigned are writing to you to express our serious concerns and draw your attention to the draft Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2020 proposed by the Union Ministry of Power issued online on its website vide letter dated April 17, 2020 (No. 42/6/2011-R&R (Vol-VIII)) requiring the wide public to comment within a period of 21 days, i.e. by May 8, 2020.
Due to widespread protests about attempting to amend a major law of the country when the entire nation was under lockdown, and almost all fundamental freedoms were unavailable, even suspended, we note this deadline to the comment was extended to June 5, 2020 vide letter of the Ministry dated April 27, 2020 vide (No. 42/6/2011-R&R [Vol-VIII]).
At the outset, we consider the advancement of this proposal to amend a major law that has a direct impact on economic, social, and ecological securities of the people of India, during the lockdown, as fundamentally opposed to basic tenets of democracy.
As per Constitutional demands, lawmaking, or amending existing laws, must only be undertaken when every element of democratic decision making in the country is fully functional and the Parliament is able to perform its competent and oversight role on behalf of the people at large.
It must also be in conformance with the principles of prior and informed consent, the principle of intergenerational equity, the principle of public trust doctrine, the principle of sustainable development, and some of the international agreements that India is a signatory to in the context of law-making and bringing in amendments.
This was not possible during lockdown when most fundamental freedoms, especially the freedom to associate and express one’s views and disagreements, enshrined in Article 19 of the Constitution of India, were unavailable to the public at large and also to elected representatives.
As a result, initiating the public commenting period on such comprehensive reform of a major law during lockdown comes across as extremely unconstitutional and therefore constitutes the direct attack on fundamental rights of citizens, and opposed to the very purpose of the main law – which is to advance the public interest.
The Bill aggressively promotes privatization of the power sector which will further widen the prevailing disparity in accessing electricity between cities and rural areas, and further between high-income areas and poorer regions.
Private Multinational AES and domestic private company BSES of Reliance Energy Ltd, both miserably failed in Odisha. Franchise experiences of many cities in India were not great due to non-performance.
Lakhs of people are forced to live without electricity. But the bill proposed to abolish the cross-subsidy that farmers and the poor benefit. And it is imposing on the states to bear the subsidy burden irrespective of the bad financial health. It is imposing DBT in which the productivity of farmers’ crops might be left upon the fate of DBT or rain-fed irrigation only.
The draft bill has strongly advocated bringing huge FDI, PPT model, etc. in the sector. However, the government unnoticed increasing tariff, the highest NPA in the sector, debt-ridden discom companies.
All these facts indicate the failure of privatization in the sector. In addition, it has also proposed to establish an ultra-judicial body named “Electricity Contract Enforcement Authority” to ensure the coercive realization of fixed charge from the DISCOMs even without consuming a single kWh of energy. Electricity will be virtually removed from the concurrent list of the constitution and overlooking the role of the state, advocate for centralization, and commercialization of the sector.
Looking at the following facts nationwide protest were held by power sector employees unions, social media, and virtual protests were also shown by civil society groups and members. Subsequently, 11 states and two UTs have also opposed this bill in power ministers’ conference on July 3, 2020.
As a result union power minister had committed to placing a modified draft of the Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2020. But even after more than 50 days, the Centre is yet to place the amended draft in the public domain.
Although we have submitted our representation of the draft bill to the ministry for reconsideration in a given time duration, there is a crucial need of deeply engaging with the people through nationwide public consultations because the implications of this amendment will affect the lives and livelihoods of people across the country.
You, being representative of the people and a member of the parliament of the standing committee on energy, can play a significant role to ensure the continuance of the right to access electricity by the people in the country. In the enclosed statement we have explained in detail how it will widen the prevailing disparity in accessing electricity and the impacts experienced by local communities from the privatization in the sector.
Draft bill will widen prevailing disparity in accessing power between cities and rural areas, between high income and poorer regions
We, civil society groups and members, collectively demand that the Parliamentary Standing committee on energy should immediately look into the draft bill from a people’s perspective instead of commercialization of the sector.
The Ministry should place a modified draft based on a needs assessment of the challenges in access to electricity by local communities across the country of the electricity (Amendment) Bill 2020 in the public domain. The committee must also ensure the modified draft is shared in various regional official languages of India and ensure there will be public consultations across the country.
Your willingness to take action now will demonstrate your support for a just and democratic process of amending the law and will be a vital step towards protecting the constitutional provisions and India’s commitment to all the international agreements.

Comments

  1. The 2003 version of the Electricity act was brought in to promote the corporatization of the power sector and make it market-friendly. However, due to widespread and tireless efforts of trade unions, environmental and social movements, various social and environmental safeguards were introduced into all aspects of electricity generation. The proposed amendment attacks the very foundation of these safeguards and promotes a law that is unabashedly investor and industry-friendly promotes profit over public interest and makes no effort whatsoever to protect the rights of consumers, project impacted communities, natural resources and nature.
  2. The proposed amendment organizes electricity generation, transmission and distribution in an extremely centralized manner, and neutralizes, even does away with, powers of various State and District level institutional mechanisms that currently guarantee decentralization of the electricity sector, especially with the proposal of establishing an Electricity Contract Enforcement Authority (ECEA). This ECEA also takes away powers now latent to State Electricity Regulatory Commission. Such changes are opposed to the Constitution as electricity generation is in the Concurrent list and ought to involve States fundamentally in its planning, generation and distribution.
  3. The proposed amendment promotes uniform tariff across states against the very grain of appropriate public planning of electricity. As a consequence, districts and states which suffer an immense loss due to the diversion of natural resources to power generation, and do not benefit from the generated power, will pay the same tariff as those who consume the power without suffering any loss.
  4. The proposed amendment takes away almost all of the rights to litigate against infirmities and illegalities that are now available in the State Electricity Regulatory Commissions, High Court, Consumer Courts, and Central Electricity Authority and Appellate bodies. Such powers have been delegated to ECEA which is under the direct jurisdiction of the Power Ministry and thus is not an independent or autonomous forum. That such a review mechanism is proposed for one of the most critical aspects of the governance of this country is not merely shocking, but scandalous.
  5. All this suggests that the ECEA is being brought into effect with the single purpose of protecting the interest of the licensee and to promote the licensee’s interest, and is a mechanism for promoting ease of business at the cost of public interest, and also of future generations. 
  6. It is widely known that most of the power purchase agreements under the current law have failed to advance public interest and yet the licensees enjoy due to the benefits of gaining even without delivering per contractual obligations – be it in power generation or transmission. The current proposal energizes such failure franchise agreements. This will also now worsen the situation in rural areas where no private franchisee invests on the claim they are not profitable ventures and thus can create a stark binary of lit-up cities and darken villages.
  7. The Bill aggressively promotes privatization of the power sector which will further widen the prevailing disparity in accessing electricity between cities and rural areas, and further between high-income areas and poorer regions.
  8. The Bill is intended at promoting environmentally disastrous big hydro projects as renewable, which they are not, and thus environmentally safe, which again they are not as is evident across the world.
  9. There is a clear design to take away a variety of subsidies that are necessary to reach electricity to the masses. Lakhs of people without access to electricity, their condition will only worsen as a result of this Bill which makes consumers pay higher rates, thus making electricity a luxury commodity. 
  10. Section 37 of the proposed bill read with Section 176 of the principal act enforces a standard payment security mechanism across states. Due to this, the decision making powers of the state utilities will be compromised and they will be forced to make advance payments to Independent Power Producers (IPP). Stressed State utilities will be forced to pay for this surplus power, even when it is not generated, shifting, thereby, public revenue to private profit. Distressed Discoms will collapse under such obligations.
  11. As per Sections 39 and 42 of the proposed bill read with S 181 of the principal Act, the proposal is to remove the right of SERCs to frame regulations and withdraws the role of SERC in specifying surcharges and associated modalities. Due to this, the State will again risk financial losses as they will not be able to negotiate or frame any regulation regarding tariffs. As far as Power purchase agreements are concerned between the state and power generating companies, the central interference in the process would be harmful to the State, and against the federal character of governance. The Act will thus take away all available rights of the state to define its own future. In summary, it will take away the power of states in the management of generation, transmission, and distribution of electricity
  12. Section 39 of the proposed bill read with Section 181 of the principal act removes the key role of SERC regarding contracts and PPA, while the rest of it is related to tariff disputes and other consumer grievances. Consequently, it will deepen the financial crisis of state DISCOMs.
  13. Further, the bill proposes that the cost of failure in payment of tariff shifts to the DISCOMs which in turn will pass it on to consumers. The power producer is secured.
  14. Section 3 of the proposed bill read with Section 2 (15) (a) of the principal act proposes cross border trade of electricity obviating the due role of CERC which is required to issue regulations.
  15. Section 18 of the proposed bill read with S65 of the principal act proposes that those who cannot pay would be reimbursed through direct cash transfer (DBT) to the bank accounts of the consumers. It would be far simpler if people who cannot pay, are not required to pay at all.
  16. Section 18 of the proposed bill r/w Section 65 of the principal act mandates subsidy released in advance by the respective state governments through a mechanism similar or otherwise to directly to consumers and removes any directions of future assurance or deferment of subsidy to be considered in the tariff setting. It is eliminating the cross-subsidies, and it is assumed that somehow this burden will shift to the pockets of the states’ which already do not have sufficient funds. Such centralizing of power over the power is also shifting the cost to the states.
  17. Section 18 of the proposed bill r/w Section 65 of the principal act addresses issues of subsidies and cross-subsidies which are under the purview of SERC. It is now proposed to transfer this power to the central authority and with a directive to impose a uniform tariff for all discoms of the country. There is no clarity on the issue of state-specific subsidies and another mechanism in the bill. Therefore, it seems that the bill is not brought because the government is keen to protect people's interests, but the primary focus of this bill is to protect the Independent Power Producer.
  18. Section 19 of the proposed bill r/w section number 77 of the principal Act to remove the requirement of consultation with Chief Justice for the appointment of a legal member or chairman. This results in the entire power sector escaping judicial scrutiny and become the preserve of executive decision making.
  19. Proposed changes in Section number 126, 135, and 164 of the principal Act are all oriented towards adopting the failed so-called Private-Public-Partnership model, which is a euphemism for privatizing profits and shifting the burden of losses on to the public. This approach will result in the privatization of DISCOMS in the name of promoting franchises in the distribution sector.
  20. Section 37 of the proposed bill r/w subsection (2) of 176 of the principal act proposes to add the word hydro as renewable. It mandates the minimum percentage of purchase of electricity from renewable and hydro sources of energy under section 3A. In effect, it dangerously promotes hydro as renewable, which it is not, and seeks to promote it as environmentally friendly, which certainly it is not.
  21. Section 4 of the proposed bill read with Section 3 of the principal act brings a separate National Renewable Energy Policy. While promoting renewable energy is welcome, it should not be a plank to allow monopolization of land without conforming to the provisions of the land acquisition act in promoting large solar park development, resulting in widespread displacement and dislocation of communities and capture of common lands.
---
Click here for signatories

Comments

TRENDING

Whither Govt of India strategy to reduce import dependence on crude oil, natural gas?

By NS Venkataraman*  India presently imports around 80% of it’s crude oil requirement and around 50% of its natural gas requirements . As the domestic production of crude oil and natural gas are virtually stagnant and the domestic demand is increasing at around 7% per annum, India’s steadily increasing dependence on import of the vital energy source is a matter of high energy security concern. This is particularly so, since the price of crude oil and natural gas are considerably fluctuating / increasing in the global market due to geo political factors, which are beyond the control of India. India has promised to achieve zero emission by the year 2070, which mean that the level of emission has to start declining at slow and steady rate from now onwards. It is now well recognized that global emission is caused largely due to use of coal as fuel and natural gas as fuel and feedstock. While burning of coal as fuel cause emission of global warming carbon dioxide gas and sulphur

Muslim intellectuals met Bhagwat, extra-constitutional authority 'like Sanjay Gandhi'

By Shamsul Islam*  In a significant development a delegation of five Muslim intellectuals namely former chief election commissioner SY Quraishi; former senior bureaucrat Najeeb Jung; former AMU vice-chancellor and Lt Gen (retd) Zameer U Shah; politician-cum-journalist Shahid Siddiqui (presently with RLD); and businessman Saeed Shervani [Samajvadi Party] met RSS Supremo Mohan Bhagwat at RSS Delhi headquarters. The meeting was kept secret for reasons known to the participants and was held in August. According to the Muslim intellectuals the meeting held in “a very cordial” atmosphere continued for 75 minutes whereas time allotted was 30 minutes! In a post-meeting justification of the parleys Quraishi stated that their main concern was “the insecurity being increasingly felt by the Muslim community in the wake of recurring incidents of lynching of innocents, calls by Hindutva hotheads for genocide and the marginalisation of the community in almost every sphere”. This delegation consistin

'Massive concern for people': Modi seeking to turn India into global manufacturing hub

By Shankar Sharma*  The news item quoting Narendra Modi at the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) meet, "Want to turn India into a manufacturing hub: PM Modi at SCO Summit" should be of massive concern to our people. One can only continue to be shocked by such policies, which can be termed as ill-conceived to say the least. Without objectively considering the environmental and social impacts on our communities in the medium to long term, such policies will also result in massive economic impacts because a lack of environmental and social perspective cannot be economically attractive either. In order to become the global manufacturing hub, India will have to meet an enormous demand for energy of various kinds, and in order to meet this much energy demand the economy has to manufacture enormous number of appliances/ gadgets/ machineries (to generate and distribute commercial forms of energy such as coal, nuclear, gas, hydro, and renewable energy (RE) sources such as so

Pesticide companies' lobbying 'seriously impairing' basics of governance, regulation

Dr Narasimha Reddy Donthi*  The Indian agricultural sector is grappling with low incomes, shortage of natural resources, increasing pest incidence and low public investments in research and extension. Pest attacks are increasing. Previously unknown pests are attacking crops. Farmers, indebted as they are due to various market mechanisms, are finding it hard to protect their crop investments. Thus, farmers are pushed into the conundrum of pesticide usage by pesticide markets and companies. Pesticide usage in India is increasingly becoming a regulatory problem. Regulation has not been effective in the face of such challenges. Scientific expertise on pesticides is often subsumed in the policy tradeoffs that, in the ultimate scenario, encourage production and marketing of Highly Hazardous Pesticides (HHPs). Expert Committee reports, which are recommending withdrawal of certain HHPs, are not being acted upon. Lobbying by pesticide companies has seriously impaired the basics of governance an

Kerala health bill public hearing? Here the minister 'ensured' cameras were turned off

By Our Representative  On Friday, September 30, 2022, about 100 members of the general public gathered at the conference room of the collectorate at Ernakulam, Kerala, to express their apprehensions about the Kerala Public Health Bill, 2021, which the state assembly referred to a 15-member select committee chaired by state health and family welfare minister, Veena George. Minister Veena George asserted at the outset that this was a sitting of the select committee, and all cameras would need to be turned off. Advocate PA Pouran, general secretary of the People’s Union for Civil Liberties in Kerala, stood up in protest, arguing that the meeting was a public hearing and should ideally be televised to reach vast numbers of people. Other members of the audience protested too, but the minister insisted that the gathering was part of a sitting of the select committee.  “Why then did you invite all of us?” protested George Mathew, who had arrived from Aluva and earlier served as a member of t

How Gandhian values have become 'casualty' in India under majoritarian BJP rule

By Sandeep Pandey*  A Muslim youth was beaten recently when he tried to witness the famous garba performance during the Hindu religious nine days festival of Navratri in Gujarat. There was a time when Muslims could easily participate in Garbha events in an atmosphere of cordiality. Bilkis Bano was gang raped in 2002 Gujarat communal violence, her 3 years old daughter, the child in womb and a total of 14 family members were killed. 11 accused were awarded life term. However, recently a District level committee has decided to release all the culprits. A ruling Bhartiya Janata Party leader has described some of these criminals as virtuous Brahmins, the highest among the Hindu hierarchical caste system. In a communally polarized Gujarat today most Muslims feel offended by the decision of the government and BJP supporters either justify the release of rapists and murderers or just ignore the ignominious decision. Mahatma Gandhi came from the Guj

Golwalkar's views on tricolour, martyrs, minorities, caste as per RSS archives

By Shamsul Islam*  First time in the history of independent India, the in-charge minister of the Cultural Ministry in the current Modi government, Prahlad Singh Patel, has glorified MS Golwalkar, second supremo of the RSS and the most prominent ideologue of the RSS till date, on his birth anniversary, February 19. In a tweet he wrote : “Remembering a great thinker, scholar, and remarkable leader #MSGolwalkar on his birth anniversary. His thoughts will remain a source of inspiration & continue to guide generations.”

'True decolonisation move': Demand to name new Parliament building after Ambedkar

By Kancha Ilaiah Shepherd*  In recent weeks, there has been a demand for the new Parliament building being constructed on the revamped Central Vista in New Delhi to be named after the architect of the Constitution and anti-caste leader BR Ambedkar. On September 14, the Telangana Assembly passed a resolution urging the Centre to name the new Parliament building after Ambedkar. The Bharatiya Janata Party was absent during the debate about the resolution. The next day, the Telangana Rashtra Samithi-led government declared that the new secretariat in the centre of Hyderabad would be named after Ambedkar. Chief Minister K Chandrasekhar Rao added that he would write to Prime Minister Narendra Modi requesting him to name the new Parliament building in Delhi “Ambedkar Parliament”. The demand is finding resonance among civil society groups too and has led to social media discussions as well as public mobilisation.  But two questions arise: Should a Parliament that makes laws for a nation over a

Buddhist shrines were 'massively destroyed' by Brahmanical rulers: Historian DN Jha

Nalanda mahavihara By Our Representative Prominent historian DN Jha, an expert in India's ancient and medieval past, in his new book , "Against the Grain: Notes on Identity, Intolerance and History", in a sharp critique of "Hindutva ideologues", who look at the ancient period of Indian history as "a golden age marked by social harmony, devoid of any religious violence", has said, "Demolition and desecration of rival religious establishments, and the appropriation of their idols, was not uncommon in India before the advent of Islam".

Paradox? Heavy military deployment has had 'tangible success' in enhancing J&K security

By Katarzyna Rybarczyk*  An ethnically diverse Himalayan region of Kashmir has been a subject of a territorial dispute between India and Pakistan since the partition in 1947. Despite both countries claiming full control over the region’s entirety, Kashmir is divided between them, into an Indian-administered part and a Pakistan-administered part. For the last three decades, Indian-controlled Kashmir has been characterised by unrest due to a separatist insurgency opposing the Indian rule. Although India’s fragile relationship with Kashmir is not a new issue, tensions intensified when in 2019 India revoked Article 370, depriving the region of its special status and a certain degree of autonomy attributed to it. Article 370 allowed Kashmir to have its own constitution and to make decisions regarding property ownership and permanent residency. As a result, Indians from other parts of the country were not able to purchase property and settle in Kashmir. Scrapping Kashmir’s special status me