Car Manufacterers Pushback Against Diesel Car Tax

Additional tax on diesel cars will further impede industry growth: M&M

Terming the calls for imposing additional tax on diesel vehicles as “retrograde”, homegrown auto major Mahindra & Mahindra today said such a move will only further impede growth of the industry which has had a difficult year in 2011.

Reacting to issues raised from various quarters over usage of subsidised diesel fuel for “luxury” and seeking imposition of additional tax to the tune of Rs 80,000 on diesel cars, the company said use of diesel fuel for luxury personal vehicles is less than 0.2 per cent.

“In my opinion to consider an additional tax on diesel vehicles is a retrograde step...” Mahindra & Mahindra President (Automotive and Farm Equipment Sectors), Mr Pawan Goenka, said.

Urging the government not to consider such a move, he said: “In the upcoming Union Budget, this is perhaps the most critical item for the automotive industry which will have a significant impact on the growth of the industry in the upcoming fiscal year.’’

Explaining why such a move would prove counter-productive, Mr Goenka said: “A tax on diesel vehicles will further impede growth of the industry which has had a difficult year in 2011.’’

Of course, the industry estimate of the percentage of diesel used by diesel cars is flawed :Press Release: CSE trashes contention that diesel use by cars is very low.  Got to keep those profits rolling in.

Profiting From Water

Let water, not profits, flow

As a finite, life-giving resource, access to water must remain a fundamental right. The state, as custodian under the public trust doctrine, should uphold the right of the citizen to clean, safe drinking water. It is such a strong, rights-based approach that should underpin official policy on water in India. Many areas in the country are water-stressed, and there are simmering inter-State disputes on sharing river waters. The National Water Policy 2012, now published in draft for public comments, should ultimately take a holistic view of the issue. The draft text makes some references to the importance of water for people and Nature, but is disproportionately focussed on treating water as an economic good. Such an approach predicated on realising the costs that go into the supply of water can only distort access and prices in the long run, affecting less affluent citizens. To suggest, for instance, that the state should exit the service-provider role and become a regulator is only a step away from abandoning the equity objective. Private sector water services have clearly failed in many countries, including those in the global North, and local governments have taken over again. In the current year, for-profit private water companies in England are raising tariffs, while the publicly-owned service in Scotland is not. Just over a decade ago, water wars in Bolivia reversed privatisation moves. Evidently, private partnership imposes the burden of extra costs.

...if there is any one factor that renders much of India's water unusable, it is industrial pollution. This issue calls for urgent action, and the policy can cover major ground if it lays greater emphasis on making the ‘polluter pays' principle work. A clean-up can make a lot more of India's water bodies and groundwater available for use by people.

 Makes perfect sense.  Also, get rid of the corporate subsidies implied in letting industries pollute untrammelled by the environmental costs.

If The Water Loses Its Salt

Or its purity, where do we go?

Environment Ministry pulled up for absence of water pollution policy

The Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) has pulled up the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) for the absence of a “specific water pollution policy”. There was no inventory of water sources or identification of pollution levels, the absence of which hampers water pollution management at all levels, it said in its report on the MoEF's performance during July 2010 to February 2011, when Mr Jairam Ramesh was heading the Ministry.

LACK OF PLANNING

Noting the lack of planning to tackle pollution of rivers, lakes and groundwater and assessment of the risks to health and environment, the CAG called for strict enforcement of the related Acts as well as higher penalties.

It said the Ministry had not carried out any study to probe the effect of dumping of industrial effluents by paper mills, pharma, chemical, distilleries and so on.

The National River Conservation Plan (NCRP) was also flayed for focusing on “sewage and crematoria as sources of pollution of rivers. Other kinds of pollution (like industrial pollution) were not considered which had equal, if not more, adverse effect on health and environment”, the report said.

Industries are being subsidised indirectly by this lack of enforcement of the pollution laws.

Polluter Pays? Hardly.

From The Hindu:

He pointed out that in the wake of the Bhopal gas disaster when many affected people and voluntary organisations approached the court of law, the government woke up to the situation and at the intervention of the courts, tried to enforce measures for the treatment of effluents before discharging them in the public places.

But under pressure from the industries, the “polluter pays” theory was given the go-by and in most of the cases the industrial units discharging pollutants were made to pay only 20 per cent of the cost with the remaining 80 per cent coming from the general tax payers, the State and Central government funds and the financial institutions.

The industrial houses did not even bother to maintain the treatment plants or expand its capacity when the load increased. The GPCB kept on issuing notices, but no one ever bothered about violation of its norms and the Board remained a silent spectator doing nothing to make the industrial houses bend.

Pollution by industry is a hidden subsidy to the polluting industries. Do they really pass on this subsidy to consumers - may be, may be not. Of course, this is not specific to India:

In the last five years alone, chemical factories, manufacturing plants and other workplaces have violated water pollution laws more than half a million times. The violations range from failing to report emissions to dumping toxins at concentrations regulators say might contribute to cancer, birth defects and other illnesses.

However, the vast majority of those polluters have escaped punishment.

[The NY Times ]research shows that an estimated one in 10 Americans have been exposed to drinking water that contains dangerous chemicals or fails to meet a federal health benchmark in other ways.

... stretched resources [at the regulators] are only part of the reason polluters escape punishment. The Times’s investigation shows that in West Virginia and other states, powerful industries have often successfully lobbied to undermine effective regulation.