HURDLES GALORE FOR SETHU SAMUDRAM PROJECT

Analysis of Alternatives

Five alternative routes for the construction of Sethusamudram ship canal were considered. Based on the evaluation of impacts of the project during construction and operation phases, the alignment (4) suggested by the Steering Committee near the Moonru Iruppu Chatram has been identified as the best alternative (Refer: Fig.5.16) which will cause the least damage to the biota and the environment.

This report is not the first of its kind. For 140 years many such reports were gathering dust. N.Nandhivarman General Secretary Dravida Peravai in a Memorandum personally handed over to Union Defense Minister George Fernandes at Delhi on 22.02.2001 and published in World page of Dinamani Tamil daily dated 23rd February 2001. In verbatim it is reproduced here:

Presenting last year's Union budget (2000-2001) The Honorable Union Minister of Finance was kind enough to announce in the floor of Parliament as: "Hon'ble members are aware that the Sethu Samudram Ship Canal project has the potential of providing a shorter route between the East and West Coast Ports. I am glad to inform that Government had approved the undertaking of a detailed feasibility study and environmental impact assessment of the project at a total cost of Rs 4.8 crore. I have made necessary provision for this in the budget."

"Though it is in the manifesto of the National Democratic alliance and almost all leaders of Tamil Nadu have demanded this project, nothing emerges out of these promises, I am sorry to point out. The Union Finance Minister's budgetary announcement was hailed as a great achievement because after having been conceived 140 years back, there appeared to be light at the end of the tunnel. But in spite of the recent promise made by the Prime Minister, I am sorry to say, it is going to be a chase of the mirage. I, as one of the Trustees to the Tuticorin Port Trust, the nodal agency to implement this project had been raising this issue in the board meetings. Quoting from the minutes of the Tuticorin Port Trust, it becomes evident that the nodal agency had no information or plans, while once again election platforms will hear promises galore from personalities. About 20 expert committees have conducted detailed studies and came to the conclusion that the scheme is technically feasible and economically viable.

Report of Commander A.D.Taylor of the Indian Marine, 1860 (Cost Rs 50 lakhs)

Report of the British Parliamentary Committee, 1862

Sir John Stuart, Chief assistant to the Surveyor General of Ceylonese Government 1871

Harbour Engineer George Robertson Report 1872

Proposal by the South Indian Ship Canal Port and Coaling Station Ltd 1884

Proposal by the South Indian Railway Railway Company 1902

Report of the Harbour Engineer Sir Robert Brislow to Government of India 1921

Port Development scheme by Government of Madras 1947

Dr.Sir.A.Ramasamy Mudaliar Committee 1955

Dr.Nagendra Singh Committee 1963

C.V.Venkateswaran Committee 1965 (Rs 37 crore)

C.V.Venkateswaran Committee (cost up gradation) 1971 (Rs 53 crore)

Government of India Technical Committee confirms feasibility of the scheme but shelves it due to cost factor 1980 (Rs 110 crore)

Ministry of Shipping and Transport (Port Wing) Committee 1981

H.R.Lakshminarayanan Committee 1983 (Rs 282 crore)

Tamil Nadu Assembly passes unanimous resolution 

seeking implementation of Sethu project 1986

Report of Pallavan Consultancy Services Ltd 1996 (Rs 685 to Rs 1200 crores depending on the draft)

Now that it becomes clear that all these expert committees have found the project feasible, the one constituted in the allocation made by the Union Minister would have also have endorsed the same view.

Way back in 1860 when the Suez Canal was on the drawing board the British Maritime pioneers had discovered that a shipping canal off Rameshwaram coast will save approximately 36 hours of sailing time between Madras and Tuticorin and reduce the distance by 434 nautical miles i.e. about 803 kms. The latest in the series of studies is by the Tamil Nadu Government owned Pallavan Consultancy Services, which says in its Report on March 1996 that "the project can be completed at an estimated capital cost (1996 price) of Rs 685 crore, Rs 760 crore, and Rs 1200 crore for a canal of 30 feet, 31 feet, and 35 feet draft respectively. The payback period is 17 years, and thereafter the benefit from the canal project would be Rs 47 crore in the first year and Rs 100 to Rs 120 crore in the subsequent years. According to the 1996 ratings earnings of foreign exchange is estimated at Rs 35 crore besides a reduction in fuel import by Rs 200 crore. The approved Sethu Canal alignment envisages the creation of a 180 km long and 200 meters wide canal to connect the Gulf of Mannar with the Palk Straits off Rameshwaram in Tamil Nadu. But major dredging needs only to be done only for about 15 kms on Mannar side and 12 kms on the Palk Bay side since a natural shipping canal already exists there.

In view of the economic benefits that will generate prosperity to Southern Tamil Nadu, we urge the Union Government to give the go ahead or speed up negotiations to hand over the project too private sector under B.O.T.basis. Nanguneri Free Trade Zone inaugurated recently is in the near vicinity. Unless infrastructure projects of gigantic nature like Sethu Canal project are taken up it will not achieve the required prosperity in our times.

We only urge what the NDA Manifesto promises, what the Prime Minister promised to the people of Tamil Nadu in a Marumalarchi DMK rally at Chennai, what has been incorporated in the previous years budget, what had been announced by the Union Defense Minister in Rameshwaram and Tuticorin on 6.1.1999 and in which as translator of his speech, I have little memory left to recall that promise, to be fulfilled before the Assembly elections ahead, as after having waited for 141 years for this project, the people of Tamil Nadu must get it.". Thus Dravida Peravai urged the Union Government.

Close on the heels of submission of this memorandum, the Union Budget was presented for the year 2001-2002. Dinamani, Tamil daily in its front page published the salient features of the budget. In the same front page it pointed out that no funds were allocated for the Sethu Samudram project. The funds allocated for the year 2000-2001were not utilized since a comprehensive feasibility study for which those funds were earmarked was not undertaken during that financial year. Dinamani recalled Nandhivarman's meeting with Union Defence Minister previous week in this connection and said as feared, in budget no funds were allocated for Sethu samudram project. It also stated MDMK General Secretary Vaiko expressed disappointment over these lacunae. Subsequently Junior Vikatan published a story in its issue of 14 th March 2001.Then there were protests from all quarters.