By Naba Bhattacharjee
The draft of the State Mining Policy which has been in the public domain for over a year is yet to be given a final shape. The Deputy Chief Minister of Meghalaya i/c Mining has recently stated that adoption of the policy is being delayed due to lack of response from miners in the form of inputs and suggestions for consideration. There are many grey areas which need to be sorted before finalizing the draft, like clarity on mining “within or outside forest areas” being foremost. Further, consensus on every section of the policy is most unlikely since absolute authority and freedom enjoyed by individual miners and mine owners on nature and mode of mining shall be curbed together with provision for protection of the eco-system. Scientific mining and environment protection measures including mine safety infrastructure entail additional expenditure, which most miners shall resist.
However, the delay maybe a blessing in disguise for the common man residing in mining areas. A bill that promises direct benefit to people from the minerals underneath their land is ready to be tabled in Parliament this monsoon session which requires mining companies to shell out a portion of their profit for people displaced or affected by their operations. The bill would replace the existing Mines and Minerals Development and Regulation (MMDR) Act of 1957. The profit-sharing provision in the MMDR Bill of 2011 requires mining including coal companies to share their net profit-26 per cent, every year with the affected communities. Companies that mine major minerals like limestone and iron ore will have to give the affected people an amount equal to the royalty that they pay to the state government annually.
For those mining minor minerals like sandstone and marble, the states will decide the profit-sharing percentage in consultation with the proposed National Mining Regulatory Authority. It is essential for mining companies to pay 26 per cent of their annual profit or 100 per cent of the royalty, whichever is higher, to communities. This would not apply to the nationalized coal sector, which would pay 26 per cent of the profit. In Meghalaya the situation is complex and the mining policy can only address the issue to factor in the salient features of MMDR Bill. The same may not be applicable to coal mines particularly, which escaped nationalization and individual mine owners have absolute rights over the coal extracted from their individual mines including pricing etc except for paying a small royalty to the government. This is the first time the concept of natural resource rent is being established in the country. In this age of green accounting the wealth of the nation in terms of its value to equity and sustainability.
Green growth is fundamentally about inclusive growth. The proposed Meghalaya Mining Policy can factor in the essence of the bill and make it mandatory for coal miners and in case of other minerals like limestone, the manufacturer / company utilizing the minerals as raw materials to produce an end product to pay a fixed amount to the community inhabiting the mining areas. This will ensure sustainable development of the people and environment both of which are suffering due to mining including those displaced or affected by such operations. The approach of the policy has to be sustainable development of people and not sustainable development of mining. The fund so generated can be utilized to set up a Special Purpose Vehicle(SPV) as in case of compensation realized for diversion of forest land for non-forestry purpose. The priority sectors of intervention has to focus on amelioration of ground water and treating highly contaminated water run-off from mines due to high sulphur content in coal mining areas of the state in general & Jaintia Hills in particular. Treatment of abandoned mines and adverse affect on agricultural land is another sector which requires immediate attention to avoid a looming environment catastrophe. Apart from greenhouse gas emissions the fact of the matter is that in Meghalaya, mining has led to large-scale degradation of the environment.
Mining cannot be stopped or wished away however hard one tries. Then there are various economic considerations and utilization of minerals for production of end product like cement for example.The best out of a worst situation is to strike a realistic balance between industrial growths, mining and accrual of maximum possible benefit to the State and its people with priority on protection of environment. To-day the benefits are reaped by a handful, whether from mining minerals or exploiting industrial/transport subsidy. In order to broad base the benefits after attaining equilibrium is to make an effective district and state level units both for collection and utilization of the funds for the people generated from miners/mining companies with priority and need based strategies and interventions. The common men should get their share from the natural resource like minerals.
The mining policy must give preference to tribal cooperatives for mining small deposits. A detailed mining plan needs to be submitted even by individual miners highlighting the scientific approach, environment protection measures, infrastructure to treat contaminated water emerging from mines, afforestation initiatives particularly over abandoned mines. In addition, it is important to evaluate the gross available stock of minerals and regulate the annual exploitation commensurate to protection and conservation measures. To ensure transparency in the system, the policy has to ensure mining companies to put all data related to grant, extension, termination and plan of operations in the public domain. That mining companies do not follow eco friendly practices is quite evident because six to nine hectares of land is destroyed for every one million tonnes of mineral produced. Mineworkers’ safety also seems to be a low-priority subject for the industry since there are 30-non-fatal but disabling accidents per tonne of mineral produced, and one death per 2.5 tonnes. The situation in Meghalaya could be worse. A realistic appraisal is necessary and findings of the study have to form a base for undertaking suitable reforms measure.
(The author is an environmentalist)