In recent years, the Environment and Forests Ministry in India has taken its role in assessing environmentally damaging projects more seriously. But, the UPA Government has booted out two consequent Ministers in the last five years, supposedly, for hampering growth. It is high time that instead of posturing with ministerial reshuffles, the regime gets cracking on the real problems that face our environment.

The year 2013 is ending with alarm bells ringing for the environment. For the second time in the last five years, the UPA regime changed the Environment and Forests Minister, possibly buckling under pressure from the industrial lobby. Ironically, this time it is Union Minister for Petroleum and Natural Gas Veerappa Moily who has been offered the additional ‘role’ of handling the Environment portfolio. In certain quarters, the exit of his predecessor, Ms Jayanthi Natarajan, is being viewed as a punishment to her for taking a hard stand on green clearances for big infrastructure projects.

Before her, Mr Jairam Ramesh was also similarly shunted out of the Environment Ministry. The latter is often credited with having single-handedly put green issues on top of the Government’s agenda. No sooner than he had done that, he was booted out. It was probably for becoming increasingly assertive, being portrayed in the corporate media as an archenemy of pro-development industrialists and for creating obstacles in giving clearances to dam and mining projects. If the Government had hoped Ms Natarajan would be less of a green activist, it was mistaken. For example, she is said to have openly defied Cabinet colleagues including Union Minister for Agriculture Sharad Pawar on the issue of genetically-modified crops.

On the other hand, immediately after taking charge of the Environment and Forests Ministry, on December 21, Mr Moily said, “There is space for everyone… environment, wildlife and mankind. It is only our mental block which sometime thinks that there is friction and I think that friction will have to end up with fusion”.

That same day that he took over Mr Moily eased environmental clearance norms for select industries, brick-kilns and river sand mines. He took a decision to exempt many industrial and mining projects from either providing environmental impact assessment reports or holding public hearings when they are approved by the State Governments.

Under the new rules, river sand mining between five and 25 hectares will not require any EIA or public hearing. Usually miners get a large amount of small sized mining rights in a cluster. In such cases if mines are less than one kilometre apart and collectively add up to more than 25 hectare then it would require an EIA and public hearing.

Digging norms for large brick kilns have also been eased with the new notification now letting off such miners from going through impact assessments and public hearing. In June, this year, the Ministry permitted digging for brick kilns up to only five hectares to be exempt from these requirements.

Also, thermal power plants smaller than five megawatt would only be required to provide a pre-feasibility report along with the application form. Those between five megawatt and 500 MW would require clearance through the EIA route from the State Governments.

Mr Moily also promised a review of a controversial report on Western Ghats which had earned Ms Natarajan the wrath of political parties and religious groups from Kerala. The Environment Ministry had notified the report on Western Ghats prepared by K Kasturirangan-led panel which has recommended prohibition on development activities in 60,000 sq km ecologically sensitive area spread over six states including Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Goa, Maharashtra and Gujarat. The 10-member panel report distinguished between cultural and natural landscapes. It also recommended a complete ban on mining, quarrying, and sand mining in highly-sensitive areas

India’s 1600-km-long Western Ghats hills, which has got into the list of UNESCO’s world heritage sites, was recognised as one of the world’s eight “hottest hotspots” of biological diversity.

In the biggest blow on the face of the environmentalists, Mr Moily is expected to give a green signal to GM food crops, overturning the position of both his predecessors. Mr Moily’s support will pave the way for the Government to submit an affidavit in the Supreme Court acquiescing to field trials of GM food crops on a conditional basis. The apex court is hearing a Public Interest Litigation on the issue and the Prime Minister’s Office as well as the Agriculture Ministry have pushed hard to submit such an affidavit, but were unable to do so because of resistance from Ms Natarajan.

Mr Ramesh did not ban field trials but made it mandatory for State Governments to give their consent for such trials. But, no GM field trials have been held in the country since 2009, after Mr Ramesh put a moratorium on it. The Supreme Court subsequently asked the Union Government to submit its position on the issue. The PMO had asked the Cabinet Secretary to work out a consensus position, one that would permit field trials to be carried out. But it was thwarted as Ms Natarajan opposed the consensus position. It is said that Ms Natarajan’s opposition to GM field trials is one of the reasons for her departure from the Union Cabinet.

Mr Moily is also expected to abandon Ms Natarajan’s position on the use of the cooling gas, hydro fluorocarbon, which is used in air-conditioners and refrigerators. This will bring him in sync with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s position. Mr Singh had consented to reducing the use of HFCs at the G20 meet in St Petersburg in September. He later reiterated it in a joint statement with US President Barack Obama. However, at the United Nations Climate Change Conference held in Warsaw last month, Ms Natarajan refused to allow any discussion on the reduction of HFCs, drawing displeasure from the US.

Sections of the UPA Government and industry maintain that delays in environment and forest clearances have hampered growth. Mr Moily has said he will speed up the process: “I am one who is accustomed to disposing off files by evening. Not even a single file will be taken home and not even a single file will be pending unless it requires another look”.

But if indeed the delay in clearing projects were on account of genuine environmental concerns, then the argument that Ms Natarajan was needlessly holding up development projects is a smokescreen that blurs the complex problem of sustainability that confronts both industry and society at large. The Environment and Forests Ministry tries to strike a tough balance between industrial development and environmental conservation. How do you explain the clamour for clearances, when current capacities of coal and power lie unutilised? Why is there a rush to invest in new projects, when the shortfall for investment in electricity transmission (India loses nearly 40 per cent electricity to inefficient transmission) is Rs.4,00,000 crore?

The Environment and Forests Ministry has often been referred to as a puppet Ministry that merely rubber-stamps industrial and infrastructure projects with green clearances. But in recent years, it has taken its role in assessing environmentally damaging projects more seriously. Therefore, ousting an incumbent Minister to achieve short-term project clearance targets is myopic and detrimental.

Charting a new game plan, Mr Moily said, “Everything has its space. Petroleum has its space… every Ministry has a space… Ultimately, we have to go by the rules of the game which have been laid out by any Ministry. We shouldn’t cross it. There should not be any fear or favour while discharging the duties.”

It is high time that the Government gets cracking on the real problems that face our environment rather than posturing with ministerial reshuffles. Although economic growth is an imperative, India cannot wash its hands off the need for good environmental governance. More than anything else there are financial implications to playing around with nature. For example, according to the World Bank, environmental degradation costs India $80 billion or 5.7 per cent of its economy per year.

Yet, environment issues, which touch and impact every aspect of our lives, have failed to stir the conscience, enter mainstream concern and inspire action. This shrill cacophony of “silly environment regulations and sundry animals” blocking growth, is not the apathy of the Government, but of the people. It’s time to reflect! New Year is also a time for new beginnings, and I sign off with hope that this New year will usher in an era of environment consciousness.