PANJIM: The Mopa Vimantall Piditt Xetkari Samiti (MVPXS), on Sunday questioned the government decision to appoint an undisclosed consultant for the proposed Mopa airport, without first doing the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA).
Addressing a press conference on Sunday afternoon, the secretary of the MVPXS, Mr Sandeep Kambli, questioned the government over land acquisition for the proposed airport and said, “How can land acquisition be done without the EIA being done first and without obtaining other required clearances?”
He said further that the new Bangalore airport which was mooted like a Public-Private Partnership (PPP), model is a Special Economic Zone (SEZ), and that if the Mopa airport is constructed this too will be a SEZ.
He said that the land speculation around the proposed airport is alarming. He informed that nearly ` 1500 crore worth of land has changed hands with 266 sale deeds registered. “We are sure that building an airport is not the main issue right now, but surely, the land is and hence land grabbing is going on in full swing in the name of the airport project.”
Speaking further, he said that the international guidelines for airports suggest that distance between two airports should not be less than 150 km, but Dabolim is approx 40 km away from Mopa and the new airport at Chipi in Sindhudurg, is about 130 km from Dabolim, which is just about 80 kilometers from Mopa. He questioned how permissions were granted under these circumstances.
Mr Kambli said that experts in the field have given advice that one airport is sufficient for a tiny state like Goa, but the government is still going ahead with acquisition of land at Mopa, which clearly proves that the government does not care for the advice and opinions of experts.
Maybe the government does care for the advice and opinion of experts. May be the land acquisition is not for an airport. Are the members of the MVPXS sure that the acquisition is for an airport and not for distribution among the chosen few?. In the latter case the advice of experts need not be followed.
ReplyDelete