PROF. P.J. KURIEN : I request you, Sir, to please allow him to speak for two minutes.

MR. CHAIRMAN: You are requesting, but it will not be proper. You know very well that I have declared Shri Bwismuthiary as the last speaker. When I said that he was the last speaker, at that time, he was not present. When the hon. Member finished his speech, at that time, he was not available here. So, I asked the Minister to speak.

SHRI P.R. KUMARAMANGALAM: I do not want to take much time, Mr. Chairman, Sir. Only a simple point was raised that why only tariffs, why is there no regulation dealing with generators, cost of generation of power etc. I would draw the attention of the hon. Member to Clause 22 (c) and (d) of the Bill. It is very specific. ... (Interruptions)

SHRI DATTA MEGHE : Sir, in protest, I want to walk-out.

MR. CHAIRMAN: It is your right.

20.08 hrs

(At this stage, Shri Datta Meghe left the House.)

SHRI P.R. KUMARAMANGALAM: Sir, Clause 22 (c) says :

"to regulate power purchase and procurement process of the transmission utilities and distribution utilities including the price at which the power shall be procured from the generating companies ..."

Some others had an issue of whether the State Commission ... (Interruptions)

PROF. P.J. KURIEN : The hon. Home Minister is here. I would like to submit one thing.

SHRI P.R. KUMARAMANGALAM: You do not even request me to yield.

MR. CHAIRMAN: You are not permitted because the Minister is not yielding. Mr. Minister, you can continue with your reply.

PROF. P.J. KURIEN : Do you not want our cooperation? It is very bad.

SHRI P.R. KUMARAMANGALAM: You do not deem it fit even to request me to yield.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister need not reply to anybody else. The Minister is expected to reply to the discussion on the Bill alone.

PROF. P.J. KURIEN : Sir, the Minister is yielding. I am only submitting this much that the Government needs the cooperation of the Opposition also. In a democracy, cooperation is important between the Treasury Benches and the Opposition. We have assured you that we will cooperate in passing all the Bills. One of our hon. Members, whose plane was late, came straightaway from the airport to the House. He only pleaded for two minutes' time. I am sorry to say that the Treasury Benches are not accommodating even such a request from the Opposition. This is not the way the Government should function. I am telling you that this is not the way.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The Opposition leader should not speak in this way. At the time of concluding the discussion, the concerned Member was not available in the House.

PROF. P.J. KURIEN : That is why, we made a request to you.

THE MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS (SHRI L.K. ADVANI): There will be a second reading. At that time, he can say a few words. He is replying only to the first reading.

SHRI P. R. KUMARAMANGALAM: I think, through you, I should clarify that very carefully I was on my feet. (Interruptions) You can call him right now.

If I may point out, the situation that many people have thought that this Bill does not deal with anything other than tariff, is a misapprehension. In fact, Clause 22 (c) and (d), both clearly indicate that they deal with not only the cost of generation issue, not only the cost of traansmission, but also losses of transmission and also efficiency of SEBs. The idea is that this matter can be considered comprehensively and consumer interests are specifically provided for in Clause 26. Today you do not have a forum where a consumer can go and appeal and be heard in the matter of cost.

With regard to the other issues whether it is interfering in the State jurisdiction, I would like to point out that, in fact, this is the first Bill which has come in the arena of electricity which has been a concurrent subject, where the State has been given an option. I think the hon. senior Member on the other side, who is not there, mentioned 'may' being interpreted as 'shall'. It is because being a lawyer, being aware that such interpretation is possible, I added the words "if it deems fit" so that the State Governments may remain genuine 'may' and the option remains the genuine option. Today under this Bill, as it stands now with my amendments, the State Government has the option to implement or not to implement it. This is an enabling provision for the State Governments. If they wish, there are other State Governments like the Orissa Government, the Government of Andhra Pradesh and the Government of Haryana to come out with their own legislations. We have accorded our total assent to those Bills to show that we are not trying to intervene in what is considered to be part of the concurrent jurisdiction which they hold. Here, with regard to the provision providing for undue preference, I think my friend should point out, if I may submit, to Shri Vaiko -- he has also left -- very clearly that the amendment which I have brought forward reads as follows: -

"The State Commission while determining the tariff under this Act shall not show undue preference to any particular consumer of electricity, but may differentiate'

It is very clear.

"but may differentiate, according to the consumers either load factor"

That is, if you are a very high consumer or a very low consumer of power.

"Total consumption of energy during any specified period or the time at which the supply is required or the geographical position of any area,"

That is, tribal, for example.

"the nature of supply"

The type of supply, whether it is high tension, low tension.

"and the purpose for which the supply is required."

For example, if it is for farming, if it is for poor single hut dwellers for which we have a system of subsidies, the differentiation can be given.

These words"under preference", are in fact not words which are formed for the first time for the Electricity Act. It is very clearly enshrined in Section 49 (4) of the Electricity Supply Act, 1948. It is lifted verbatim from there. What has been added is in fact "but may differentiate". Those first two lines are lifted verbatim from Section 49 (4). It is not a new enactment which I have brought in.. (Interruptions) In the original Section 49 (4), it says that in fixing the tariff and terms and conditions of supply of electricity, it shall not show undue preference to any person.

SHRI VARKALA RADHAKRISHNAN : That is used in another context. That is why, I moved the amendment.

SHRI P. R. KUMARAMANGALAM: It is used in the context of tariff. Section 49 says : -

"Provision for sale of electricity by Board to persons other than licencees."

That is, consumers. It is in Section 49 (4), these words are used. I am specific about it. These are not the words which I have invented. These are not words which have been borne out of my mind. These are the words which are there in sub-section (4) of Section 49 of the Electricity Supply Act of 1948.

I do believe that sub-clause (3), which has been introduced by me, is very clear in allowing differentiation in so far as the purpose for which the supply is to be required - agriculture.

I want to make it clear that the purpose of this Act is not at all in any way to say that agriculture should not be given subsidised tariff or free power should not be given even to the single-hut dwellers or the poor people or the tribal people. But the only thing it says is that when you do that, after the cross-subsidisation that you have done between electric power on the one hand and maybe total free power on agriculture, if there is a balance left and it is required that a subsidy must be given by the State Government to ensure that the Electricity Board does not go into financial ruin so that there is generation, then there is a future. If there is no power in the State, what free power are you going to supply? What is the use of trying to fool ourselves? You are not going to achieve anything. So, all I request is that keeping this in mind, you should cooperate.

Our objectives are clear. We are very clear that where subsidy has to be given, that subsidy, after cross-subsidisation, must be made available by the State Governments. That is there in the original Act. But the unimplementability of the original Act was due to the fact that enforceability was not there. When a State Government did not make good the loss of the SEB, three per cent return on investment, there was no way in which it was implementable. Today, it is implementable under this Act by a regulator. It is only to ensure that there is some stability in the power arena so that there is a future for this nation. We are very conscious.

As I said openly, only 30 per cent of the households in India have power. Seventy per cent of the houses in India do not have power. Do you not think it is our responsibility to ensure that every citizen gets at least one bulb in his house? We have a Kutir Jyoti. We subsidise from the Central Government at the rate of Rs.1000/- per connection in respect of a hut. Why do we do that? It is because we believe that the poor need to be supported. We believe the people in the tribal areas, the farmers, if I may say so, those who are not the haves, they need the support. We are not against it. But you can only support within what you have got. If you go beyond what you have got, ultimately, in the long run, you create a situation which has happened today. Today, we have got about 15 per cent straight shortage in power. In terms of peaking power, they say, it is 12 per cent. We are in such a situation.

2018 hrs. (Mr. Speaker in the Chair)

My friend Shri Baalu was talking of 45 cycles being the frequency on the grid in Ramagundam Thermal Station. Let me tell one small technical detail. Add 48 cylces to the Southern Grid...(Interruptions)

think you agree with me.

SHRI P.R. KUMARAMANGALAM: You are correct. That is all. Of course, it is not 50. When you are minus 500 in Tamil Nadu, minus 800 in Andhra Pradesh, minus 600 in Karnataka, minus 250 in Kerala, you are, on an average, minus in the whole Southern region. There is no way in which you are going to get 50 cycles until you have enough generation of power. You know it and I know it. That is the reality. But how long are we going to allow this reality to kill us? My pleading is this. It is not a question of voting. It is for you to understand that this Bill is an enabling Bill. This Bill is brought forward only from the point of view of enabling those States which want to reform their sectors to ensure that they have greater generation capacity, those States which are honest enough to say that they will provide subsidy to those people. We believe that is their first priority. Whether they be the farmers or the single-hutments, it is something which is a policy decision. Any subsidy is a policy decision of the Government of the day - whether it is the Government of the State or the Government at the Centre.

I can tell you one thing. From our side, we are moving to give subsidised loan to the SEBs, through the Rural Electrification Corpoation (REC). It is meant to every single rural area. Today, there is a situation where many SEBs are not able to take the loan.

They have not even got the ability to receive a loan. I do not have to mention the names of the States. The situation is quite bad. I think, I have taken enough time. Therefore, without going too much into it, I would only reply to one point raised by Shri Shiv Shankar. I think, he needed to realise that I had raised the same point which he had raised. But then there was one argument which was important. There is a possibility of a judge voluntarily resigning and being less than 65 years of age. They said, "why are you closing out that option?" I said, "all right, it is not fair for me to close out any option. But a judge is not compulsory. The judge is optional both at the State level and at the Central level. It is an option provided in consultation with the Chief Justice at that particular level."

With this, I would request that the hon. Members do take my Bill into consideration and permit me to move this Bill for being passed. I would request my hon. friend Shri Basu Deb Acharia who is going to reply on the Statutory Resolution to realise that I am not trying to force anything. That is an option. If there is any State Government which thinks that this law is not fit enough for them, it can come up with its own law in the manner in which we have given the total consent for assent. I think, he can be convinced that we are not interested in curtailing the rights of the States. We are enabling the States.

With your permission, I would request the House to pass this Bill.

(ends)

SHRI VAIKO : Can you kindly consider the amendment moved by Shri V. Radhakrishnan?

SHRI P.R. KUMARAMANGALAM: I think, you were not there when I replied to this point. I can say that there are undue words and under preferences...(Interruptions)

MR. SPEAKER: Shri Vaiko, he has already replied to this point when you were not present in the House.

---

SHRI BASU DEB ACHARIA (BANKURA): Mr. Speaker, Sir, I think, he has made a good suggestion. All the Members from the Opposition have also suggested that this Bill should not be passed hurriedly. The Government, the Cabinet decided to convene the Parliament on the 25th of April. The Ordinance was promulgated the next day, that is, on the 26th April, the day after the Cabinet decided to summon the Parliament.

This Bill was introduced on the 14th of August, 1997 and at that stage also we were supporting the Government from outside. We had expressed our apprehension at that time also and because of our opposition, the Bill was referred to the Standing Committee at that time. The BJP was in the Opposition. They also wanted that the Bill be referred to the Standing Committee for an indepth study and scrutiny. The Standing Committee deliberated on the Bill and took two decisions. One was to take the views of the State Government and the second was to circulate the Bill for eliciting public opinion as it concerned millions and millions of poor people of our country.

We need electricity. It is indeed a fact that electricity now reaches 30 per cent of our population. What had been our experience during this panchayat elections?

All the villages are well connected with roads. People want only electricity now. Each village has now been provided with a school. But there are still villages where there is no electricity. The only demand from the rural people is `Give us electricity. Give us life'.

Because of all this, we want that this Bill be referred to the Standing Committee. Even when the Bill was introduced, there was a difference of opinion. Even some of the ally parties were against some of the provisions of the Bill. Even Sardar Surjeet Singh Barnala also expressed his reservations against some of the provisions of the Bill. The AIADMK and some other parties had also expressed difference of opinion. Shri Vaiko had expressed his views on one of the provisions of the Bill. The amendment has been moved by the hon. Minister today when there is an opposition even from the ally parties. Heavens will not fall if they can wait for another 15 days. The Standing Committee on Energy has already been constituted and they can take up this Bill. There is no hurry. They can deliberate, discuss and take the opinion of the State Governments also.

There have been two Conferences of the Chief Ministers before this Bill was drafted. May I know from the hon. Minister whether this was the only recommendation of the Chief Ministers' Conference on Minimum Programme for Poor. The problem is that most of the SEBs are in a bad shape. Is it because that power is being supplied to the farmers at a cheaper rate? If that be so, why is there power crisis in Delhi where power is not being supplied to the farmers at a subsidised rate? So, this is not the only reason.

Mr. Speaker, Sir, while moving the Bill, he had referred to the power situation in my State. It is not a fact that the demand is not there and because of that, there is surplus power in the State of West Bengal. This was not the situation a decade ago. Ten years ago, there was power crisis in West Bengal also. There is one thermal power station in my town known as Santhal Power Station whose plant load factor is 22 per cent.

In that particular power plant what is the plant load factor today? It is now 56 per cent, even more. The same is the case with Bandel and Kilaghat and other power stations. Now the plant load factor of all the plants of SEBs is even more than the national average. All this could be done without any reform in SEBs.

MR. SPEAKER: Shri Acharia, please conclude.

SHRI BASU DEB ACHARIA : While moving the Resolution I was not allowed to speak. So, I should be given at least double the time. The Minister spoke for 45 minutes. He read out 15 pages in order to convince us. Even after speaking for 45 minutes he could not convince us.

Shri V. Radhakrishnan has moved a very simple amendment that undue preference should not be given to anybody. Shri Vaiko has supported that amendment. Dr. T. Subbarami Reddy has also supported it. What is the intention, what is the motive stated in the Statement of Objects and Reasons? It is stated:

" It is made mandatory for State Commissions to fix tariff in a manner that none of the consumers or class of consumers shall be charged less than fifty per cent of the average cost of supply. It enables the State Governments to exercise the option of providing subsidies to weaker sections on condition that the State Governments through a subsidy compensate the SEBs."

I would like to know whether any provision can be made mandatory for the State Government? He has, however, moved an amendment. But he has not changed the State of Objects and Reasons. It is written there that it will be mandatory for the State Government. It infringes upon the rights of the State. Many people have raised objections to it. So I am raising the objection. I have this apprehension. I have to express my apprehension. He has not removed our apprehension.

SHRI V. DHANANJAYA KUMAR : Under what rule is he allowed to speak so long?

MR. SPEAKER: He is the mover of the Statutory Resolution. He should not be obstructed. Let him complete his speech.

SHRI BASU DEB ACHARIA : If West Bengal State Electricity Board can improve its performance, if it can improve all its power plants without any regulatory commission, then what is the need and what is the urgency for these measures?

I request the hon. Minister at least to listen to our suggestion to refer the Bill to the Standing Committee. The Report of the Standing Committee will be with us by the first week of the next phase of this Session. At least this suggestion should be accepted. Otherwise, what is the use of setting up of the Standing Committees? The earlier Standing Committee could not finalise its Report. So, at this stage, I request the hon. Minister to refer this Bill to the Standing Committee. Thank you.