Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Code Context


        trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);

    }
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.'
$stackFrame = (int) 1
$trace = [
	(int) 0 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php',
		'line' => (int) 2421,
		'function' => 'deprecationWarning',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.'
		]
	],
	(int) 1 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
		'line' => (int) 73,
		'function' => 'offsetGet',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'catslug'
		]
	],
	(int) 2 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php',
		'line' => (int) 610,
		'function' => 'printArticle',
		'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 3 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 120,
		'function' => 'invokeAction',
		'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 4 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 94,
		'function' => '_invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 5 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php',
		'line' => (int) 235,
		'function' => 'dispatch',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 6 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication',
		'object' => object(App\Application) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 7 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 162,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 8 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 9 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 88,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 10 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 11 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 96,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 12 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 13 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 51,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 14 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php',
		'line' => (int) 98,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 15 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php',
		'line' => (int) 39,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	]
]
$frame = [
	'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
	'line' => (int) 73,
	'function' => 'offsetGet',
	'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
	'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {
		trustProxy => false
		[protected] params => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] cookies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _environment => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/jairam-defies-cabinet-colleagues-on-land-bill-subodh-ghildiyal-16935/print'
		[protected] base => ''
		[protected] webroot => '/'
		[protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/jairam-defies-cabinet-colleagues-on-land-bill-subodh-ghildiyal-16935/print'
		[protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _input => null
		[protected] _detectors => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _detectorCache => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {}
		[protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {}
		[protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {}
		[protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] emulatedAttributes => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] protocol => null
		[protected] requestTarget => null
		[private] deprecatedProperties => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	},
	'type' => '->',
	'args' => [
		(int) 0 => 'catslug'
	]
]
deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311
Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421
App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 73
Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98

Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Code Context


        trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);

    }
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.'
$stackFrame = (int) 1
$trace = [
	(int) 0 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php',
		'line' => (int) 2421,
		'function' => 'deprecationWarning',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.'
		]
	],
	(int) 1 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
		'line' => (int) 74,
		'function' => 'offsetGet',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'artileslug'
		]
	],
	(int) 2 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php',
		'line' => (int) 610,
		'function' => 'printArticle',
		'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 3 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 120,
		'function' => 'invokeAction',
		'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 4 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 94,
		'function' => '_invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 5 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php',
		'line' => (int) 235,
		'function' => 'dispatch',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 6 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication',
		'object' => object(App\Application) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 7 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 162,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 8 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 9 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 88,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 10 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 11 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 96,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 12 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 13 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 51,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 14 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php',
		'line' => (int) 98,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 15 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php',
		'line' => (int) 39,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	]
]
$frame = [
	'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
	'line' => (int) 74,
	'function' => 'offsetGet',
	'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
	'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {
		trustProxy => false
		[protected] params => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] cookies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _environment => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/jairam-defies-cabinet-colleagues-on-land-bill-subodh-ghildiyal-16935/print'
		[protected] base => ''
		[protected] webroot => '/'
		[protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/jairam-defies-cabinet-colleagues-on-land-bill-subodh-ghildiyal-16935/print'
		[protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _input => null
		[protected] _detectors => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _detectorCache => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {}
		[protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {}
		[protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {}
		[protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] emulatedAttributes => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] protocol => null
		[protected] requestTarget => null
		[private] deprecatedProperties => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	},
	'type' => '->',
	'args' => [
		(int) 0 => 'artileslug'
	]
]
deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311
Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421
App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 74
Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98

Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]
Code Context
            if (Configure::read('debug')) {

                trigger_error($message, E_USER_WARNING);

            } else {
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f83d82b8ae6-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f83d82b8ae6-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67f83d82b8ae6-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f83d82b8ae6-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f83d82b8ae6-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f83d82b8ae6-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f83d82b8ae6-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67f83d82b8ae6-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67f83d82b8ae6-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16807,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Jairam defies Cabinet colleagues on land bill -Subodh Ghildiyal&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Times of India&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its approval by the Cabinet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;This bill is part of the political agenda of Congress and we are a political party. These people should know we are in government, they are ministers because of Congress,&amp;quot; he told TOI, breaking his silence after five days of lobbying the Congress leadership, including Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, for the bill. He said the bill will be brought to Parliament in the winter session.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In a defiant pushback, Ramesh said on Monday, &amp;quot;Compensation, R&amp;amp;R and social impact assessment, provision like consent of 80% landowners, are like the basic structure of the Constitution. They cannot be tampered with.&amp;quot; He said the provisions, attacked by his Cabinet colleagues as increasing costs for industry, were &amp;quot;non-negotiable&amp;quot; -- an assertion which many felt reflected his confidence that the leadership would back him in his fight with colleagues.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The statement came days after senior Cabinet ministers joined hands to get the bill referred to a group of ministers, thus delaying the legislation which has been on Congress&#039;s &amp;quot;to do&amp;quot; list since Rahul Gandhi turned forcible acquisition of farm land into a campaign theme against the then Mayawati government.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Led by urban development minister Kamal Nath, highways minister C P Joshi, power minister Veerappa Moily, commerce minister Anand Sharma and coal minister Sriprakash Jaiswal expressed apprehension about the bill. Agriculture minister Sharad Pawar also endorsed the criticism.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The opposition revolved around the argument that proposed amendments to the 1894 land acquisition law contained liberal compensation norms which would jack up project cost and deal a blow to industrialization and urbanization. The PM himself proposed the bill be sent to a ministerial group for vetting.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Ramesh, however, ruled out dilution of benefits to landowners, saying, &amp;quot;I have already made concessions against my instinct keeping in view larger economic challenges -- like the bill would kick in with prospective effect and not touch past acquisitions. The livelihood losers&#039; consent has also been waived.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In fact, he virtually dubbed the opposition to the bill as reflecting a mindset hostile to farmers which could not be helpful to Congress&#039;s political interests.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Significantly, in what could escalate the policy tussle, official sources said the final draft was unlikely to exempt SEZs from the LA bill&#039;s ambit. Commerce and industry minister Anand Sharma has protested that forcing SEZs to conform to the new acquisition law would kill industrialization and manufacturing.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On Joshi&#039;s concern over impact on highways, Ramesh said, &amp;quot;Some people have not read the bill, it does not include linear projects like highways and railways.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Congress proposed a change to the 1894 law in the wake of nationwide protests against land acquisition, especially in the tribal belt, in 2007. While the draft went through several changes, it also faced roadblocks from allies like Trinamool. Now, the bill has run into resistance from ministries that call it anti-industrialization.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
While not touching compensation norms, the bill may be tweaked to address worries that it would cause delays, add layers of bureaucracy and even increase corruption. The new draft may not leave entire rehabilitation process to be clinched before acquisition but restrict it to identification of beneficiaries and basic groundwork for paying compensation.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Times of India, 4 September, 2012, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Jairam-defies-Cabinet-colleagues-on-land-bill/articleshow/16241582.cms&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;jairam-defies-cabinet-colleagues-on-land-bill-subodh-ghildiyal-16935&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 16935,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 16807,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Jairam defies Cabinet colleagues on land bill -Subodh Ghildiyal&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Land Acquisition Bill,land acquisition and rehabilitation&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-The Times of India

Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Times of India&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its approval by the Cabinet.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;This bill is part of the political agenda of Congress and we are a political party. These people should know we are in government, they are ministers because of Congress,&amp;quot; he told TOI, breaking his silence after five days of lobbying the Congress leadership, including Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, for the bill. He said the bill will be brought to Parliament in the winter session.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In a defiant pushback, Ramesh said on Monday, &amp;quot;Compensation, R&amp;amp;R and social impact assessment, provision like consent of 80% landowners, are like the basic structure of the Constitution. They cannot be tampered with.&amp;quot; He said the provisions, attacked by his Cabinet colleagues as increasing costs for industry, were &amp;quot;non-negotiable&amp;quot; -- an assertion which many felt reflected his confidence that the leadership would back him in his fight with colleagues.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The statement came days after senior Cabinet ministers joined hands to get the bill referred to a group of ministers, thus delaying the legislation which has been on Congress&#039;s &amp;quot;to do&amp;quot; list since Rahul Gandhi turned forcible acquisition of farm land into a campaign theme against the then Mayawati government.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Led by urban development minister Kamal Nath, highways minister C P Joshi, power minister Veerappa Moily, commerce minister Anand Sharma and coal minister Sriprakash Jaiswal expressed apprehension about the bill. Agriculture minister Sharad Pawar also endorsed the criticism.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The opposition revolved around the argument that proposed amendments to the 1894 land acquisition law contained liberal compensation norms which would jack up project cost and deal a blow to industrialization and urbanization. The PM himself proposed the bill be sent to a ministerial group for vetting.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Ramesh, however, ruled out dilution of benefits to landowners, saying, &amp;quot;I have already made concessions against my instinct keeping in view larger economic challenges -- like the bill would kick in with prospective effect and not touch past acquisitions. The livelihood losers&#039; consent has also been waived.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In fact, he virtually dubbed the opposition to the bill as reflecting a mindset hostile to farmers which could not be helpful to Congress&#039;s political interests.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Significantly, in what could escalate the policy tussle, official sources said the final draft was unlikely to exempt SEZs from the LA bill&#039;s ambit. Commerce and industry minister Anand Sharma has protested that forcing SEZs to conform to the new acquisition law would kill industrialization and manufacturing.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;On Joshi&#039;s concern over impact on highways, Ramesh said, &amp;quot;Some people have not read the bill, it does not include linear projects like highways and railways.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Congress proposed a change to the 1894 law in the wake of nationwide protests against land acquisition, especially in the tribal belt, in 2007. While the draft went through several changes, it also faced roadblocks from allies like Trinamool. Now, the bill has run into resistance from ministries that call it anti-industrialization.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;While not touching compensation norms, the bill may be tweaked to address worries that it would cause delays, add layers of bureaucracy and even increase corruption. The new draft may not leave entire rehabilitation process to be clinched before acquisition but restrict it to identification of beneficiaries and basic groundwork for paying compensation.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16807,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Jairam defies Cabinet colleagues on land bill -Subodh Ghildiyal&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Times of India&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its approval by the Cabinet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;This bill is part of the political agenda of Congress and we are a political party. These people should know we are in government, they are ministers because of Congress,&amp;quot; he told TOI, breaking his silence after five days of lobbying the Congress leadership, including Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, for the bill. He said the bill will be brought to Parliament in the winter session.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In a defiant pushback, Ramesh said on Monday, &amp;quot;Compensation, R&amp;amp;R and social impact assessment, provision like consent of 80% landowners, are like the basic structure of the Constitution. They cannot be tampered with.&amp;quot; He said the provisions, attacked by his Cabinet colleagues as increasing costs for industry, were &amp;quot;non-negotiable&amp;quot; -- an assertion which many felt reflected his confidence that the leadership would back him in his fight with colleagues.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The statement came days after senior Cabinet ministers joined hands to get the bill referred to a group of ministers, thus delaying the legislation which has been on Congress&#039;s &amp;quot;to do&amp;quot; list since Rahul Gandhi turned forcible acquisition of farm land into a campaign theme against the then Mayawati government.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Led by urban development minister Kamal Nath, highways minister C P Joshi, power minister Veerappa Moily, commerce minister Anand Sharma and coal minister Sriprakash Jaiswal expressed apprehension about the bill. Agriculture minister Sharad Pawar also endorsed the criticism.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The opposition revolved around the argument that proposed amendments to the 1894 land acquisition law contained liberal compensation norms which would jack up project cost and deal a blow to industrialization and urbanization. The PM himself proposed the bill be sent to a ministerial group for vetting.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Ramesh, however, ruled out dilution of benefits to landowners, saying, &amp;quot;I have already made concessions against my instinct keeping in view larger economic challenges -- like the bill would kick in with prospective effect and not touch past acquisitions. The livelihood losers&#039; consent has also been waived.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In fact, he virtually dubbed the opposition to the bill as reflecting a mindset hostile to farmers which could not be helpful to Congress&#039;s political interests.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Significantly, in what could escalate the policy tussle, official sources said the final draft was unlikely to exempt SEZs from the LA bill&#039;s ambit. Commerce and industry minister Anand Sharma has protested that forcing SEZs to conform to the new acquisition law would kill industrialization and manufacturing.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On Joshi&#039;s concern over impact on highways, Ramesh said, &amp;quot;Some people have not read the bill, it does not include linear projects like highways and railways.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Congress proposed a change to the 1894 law in the wake of nationwide protests against land acquisition, especially in the tribal belt, in 2007. While the draft went through several changes, it also faced roadblocks from allies like Trinamool. Now, the bill has run into resistance from ministries that call it anti-industrialization.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
While not touching compensation norms, the bill may be tweaked to address worries that it would cause delays, add layers of bureaucracy and even increase corruption. The new draft may not leave entire rehabilitation process to be clinched before acquisition but restrict it to identification of beneficiaries and basic groundwork for paying compensation.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Times of India, 4 September, 2012, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Jairam-defies-Cabinet-colleagues-on-land-bill/articleshow/16241582.cms&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;jairam-defies-cabinet-colleagues-on-land-bill-subodh-ghildiyal-16935&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 16935,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 16807
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Jairam defies Cabinet colleagues on land bill -Subodh Ghildiyal&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Land Acquisition Bill,land acquisition and rehabilitation&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-The Times of India

Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Times of India&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its approval by the Cabinet.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;This bill is part of the political agenda of Congress and we are a political party. These people should know we are in government, they are ministers because of Congress,&amp;quot; he told TOI, breaking his silence after five days of lobbying the Congress leadership, including Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, for the bill. He said the bill will be brought to Parliament in the winter session.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In a defiant pushback, Ramesh said on Monday, &amp;quot;Compensation, R&amp;amp;R and social impact assessment, provision like consent of 80% landowners, are like the basic structure of the Constitution. They cannot be tampered with.&amp;quot; He said the provisions, attacked by his Cabinet colleagues as increasing costs for industry, were &amp;quot;non-negotiable&amp;quot; -- an assertion which many felt reflected his confidence that the leadership would back him in his fight with colleagues.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The statement came days after senior Cabinet ministers joined hands to get the bill referred to a group of ministers, thus delaying the legislation which has been on Congress&#039;s &amp;quot;to do&amp;quot; list since Rahul Gandhi turned forcible acquisition of farm land into a campaign theme against the then Mayawati government.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Led by urban development minister Kamal Nath, highways minister C P Joshi, power minister Veerappa Moily, commerce minister Anand Sharma and coal minister Sriprakash Jaiswal expressed apprehension about the bill. Agriculture minister Sharad Pawar also endorsed the criticism.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The opposition revolved around the argument that proposed amendments to the 1894 land acquisition law contained liberal compensation norms which would jack up project cost and deal a blow to industrialization and urbanization. The PM himself proposed the bill be sent to a ministerial group for vetting.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Ramesh, however, ruled out dilution of benefits to landowners, saying, &amp;quot;I have already made concessions against my instinct keeping in view larger economic challenges -- like the bill would kick in with prospective effect and not touch past acquisitions. The livelihood losers&#039; consent has also been waived.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In fact, he virtually dubbed the opposition to the bill as reflecting a mindset hostile to farmers which could not be helpful to Congress&#039;s political interests.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Significantly, in what could escalate the policy tussle, official sources said the final draft was unlikely to exempt SEZs from the LA bill&#039;s ambit. Commerce and industry minister Anand Sharma has protested that forcing SEZs to conform to the new acquisition law would kill industrialization and manufacturing.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;On Joshi&#039;s concern over impact on highways, Ramesh said, &amp;quot;Some people have not read the bill, it does not include linear projects like highways and railways.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Congress proposed a change to the 1894 law in the wake of nationwide protests against land acquisition, especially in the tribal belt, in 2007. While the draft went through several changes, it also faced roadblocks from allies like Trinamool. Now, the bill has run into resistance from ministries that call it anti-industrialization.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;While not touching compensation norms, the bill may be tweaked to address worries that it would cause delays, add layers of bureaucracy and even increase corruption. The new draft may not leave entire rehabilitation process to be clinched before acquisition but restrict it to identification of beneficiaries and basic groundwork for paying compensation.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/jairam-defies-cabinet-colleagues-on-land-bill-subodh-ghildiyal-16935.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Jairam defies Cabinet colleagues on land bill -Subodh Ghildiyal | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-The Times of India

Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>Jairam defies Cabinet colleagues on land bill -Subodh Ghildiyal</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div align="justify">-The Times of India<br /><br />Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its approval by the Cabinet.<br /><br />&quot;This bill is part of the political agenda of Congress and we are a political party. These people should know we are in government, they are ministers because of Congress,&quot; he told TOI, breaking his silence after five days of lobbying the Congress leadership, including Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, for the bill. He said the bill will be brought to Parliament in the winter session.<br /><br />In a defiant pushback, Ramesh said on Monday, &quot;Compensation, R&amp;R and social impact assessment, provision like consent of 80% landowners, are like the basic structure of the Constitution. They cannot be tampered with.&quot; He said the provisions, attacked by his Cabinet colleagues as increasing costs for industry, were &quot;non-negotiable&quot; -- an assertion which many felt reflected his confidence that the leadership would back him in his fight with colleagues.<br /><br />The statement came days after senior Cabinet ministers joined hands to get the bill referred to a group of ministers, thus delaying the legislation which has been on Congress's &quot;to do&quot; list since Rahul Gandhi turned forcible acquisition of farm land into a campaign theme against the then Mayawati government.<br /><br />Led by urban development minister Kamal Nath, highways minister C P Joshi, power minister Veerappa Moily, commerce minister Anand Sharma and coal minister Sriprakash Jaiswal expressed apprehension about the bill. Agriculture minister Sharad Pawar also endorsed the criticism.<br /><br />The opposition revolved around the argument that proposed amendments to the 1894 land acquisition law contained liberal compensation norms which would jack up project cost and deal a blow to industrialization and urbanization. The PM himself proposed the bill be sent to a ministerial group for vetting.<br /><br />Ramesh, however, ruled out dilution of benefits to landowners, saying, &quot;I have already made concessions against my instinct keeping in view larger economic challenges -- like the bill would kick in with prospective effect and not touch past acquisitions. The livelihood losers' consent has also been waived.&quot;<br /><br />In fact, he virtually dubbed the opposition to the bill as reflecting a mindset hostile to farmers which could not be helpful to Congress's political interests.<br /><br />Significantly, in what could escalate the policy tussle, official sources said the final draft was unlikely to exempt SEZs from the LA bill's ambit. Commerce and industry minister Anand Sharma has protested that forcing SEZs to conform to the new acquisition law would kill industrialization and manufacturing.<br /><br />On Joshi's concern over impact on highways, Ramesh said, &quot;Some people have not read the bill, it does not include linear projects like highways and railways.&quot;<br /><br />Congress proposed a change to the 1894 law in the wake of nationwide protests against land acquisition, especially in the tribal belt, in 2007. While the draft went through several changes, it also faced roadblocks from allies like Trinamool. Now, the bill has run into resistance from ministries that call it anti-industrialization.<br /><br />While not touching compensation norms, the bill may be tweaked to address worries that it would cause delays, add layers of bureaucracy and even increase corruption. The new draft may not leave entire rehabilitation process to be clinched before acquisition but restrict it to identification of beneficiaries and basic groundwork for paying compensation.</div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$maxBufferLength = (int) 8192
$file = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php'
$line = (int) 853
$message = 'Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853'
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]
Code Context
            $response->getStatusCode(),

            ($reasonPhrase ? ' ' . $reasonPhrase : '')

        ));
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f83d82b8ae6-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f83d82b8ae6-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67f83d82b8ae6-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f83d82b8ae6-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f83d82b8ae6-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f83d82b8ae6-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f83d82b8ae6-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67f83d82b8ae6-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67f83d82b8ae6-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16807,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Jairam defies Cabinet colleagues on land bill -Subodh Ghildiyal&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Times of India&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its approval by the Cabinet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;This bill is part of the political agenda of Congress and we are a political party. These people should know we are in government, they are ministers because of Congress,&amp;quot; he told TOI, breaking his silence after five days of lobbying the Congress leadership, including Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, for the bill. He said the bill will be brought to Parliament in the winter session.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In a defiant pushback, Ramesh said on Monday, &amp;quot;Compensation, R&amp;amp;R and social impact assessment, provision like consent of 80% landowners, are like the basic structure of the Constitution. They cannot be tampered with.&amp;quot; He said the provisions, attacked by his Cabinet colleagues as increasing costs for industry, were &amp;quot;non-negotiable&amp;quot; -- an assertion which many felt reflected his confidence that the leadership would back him in his fight with colleagues.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The statement came days after senior Cabinet ministers joined hands to get the bill referred to a group of ministers, thus delaying the legislation which has been on Congress&#039;s &amp;quot;to do&amp;quot; list since Rahul Gandhi turned forcible acquisition of farm land into a campaign theme against the then Mayawati government.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Led by urban development minister Kamal Nath, highways minister C P Joshi, power minister Veerappa Moily, commerce minister Anand Sharma and coal minister Sriprakash Jaiswal expressed apprehension about the bill. Agriculture minister Sharad Pawar also endorsed the criticism.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The opposition revolved around the argument that proposed amendments to the 1894 land acquisition law contained liberal compensation norms which would jack up project cost and deal a blow to industrialization and urbanization. The PM himself proposed the bill be sent to a ministerial group for vetting.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Ramesh, however, ruled out dilution of benefits to landowners, saying, &amp;quot;I have already made concessions against my instinct keeping in view larger economic challenges -- like the bill would kick in with prospective effect and not touch past acquisitions. The livelihood losers&#039; consent has also been waived.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In fact, he virtually dubbed the opposition to the bill as reflecting a mindset hostile to farmers which could not be helpful to Congress&#039;s political interests.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Significantly, in what could escalate the policy tussle, official sources said the final draft was unlikely to exempt SEZs from the LA bill&#039;s ambit. Commerce and industry minister Anand Sharma has protested that forcing SEZs to conform to the new acquisition law would kill industrialization and manufacturing.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On Joshi&#039;s concern over impact on highways, Ramesh said, &amp;quot;Some people have not read the bill, it does not include linear projects like highways and railways.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Congress proposed a change to the 1894 law in the wake of nationwide protests against land acquisition, especially in the tribal belt, in 2007. While the draft went through several changes, it also faced roadblocks from allies like Trinamool. Now, the bill has run into resistance from ministries that call it anti-industrialization.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
While not touching compensation norms, the bill may be tweaked to address worries that it would cause delays, add layers of bureaucracy and even increase corruption. The new draft may not leave entire rehabilitation process to be clinched before acquisition but restrict it to identification of beneficiaries and basic groundwork for paying compensation.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Times of India, 4 September, 2012, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Jairam-defies-Cabinet-colleagues-on-land-bill/articleshow/16241582.cms&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;jairam-defies-cabinet-colleagues-on-land-bill-subodh-ghildiyal-16935&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 16935,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 16807,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Jairam defies Cabinet colleagues on land bill -Subodh Ghildiyal&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Land Acquisition Bill,land acquisition and rehabilitation&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-The Times of India

Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Times of India&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its approval by the Cabinet.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;This bill is part of the political agenda of Congress and we are a political party. These people should know we are in government, they are ministers because of Congress,&amp;quot; he told TOI, breaking his silence after five days of lobbying the Congress leadership, including Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, for the bill. He said the bill will be brought to Parliament in the winter session.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In a defiant pushback, Ramesh said on Monday, &amp;quot;Compensation, R&amp;amp;R and social impact assessment, provision like consent of 80% landowners, are like the basic structure of the Constitution. They cannot be tampered with.&amp;quot; He said the provisions, attacked by his Cabinet colleagues as increasing costs for industry, were &amp;quot;non-negotiable&amp;quot; -- an assertion which many felt reflected his confidence that the leadership would back him in his fight with colleagues.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The statement came days after senior Cabinet ministers joined hands to get the bill referred to a group of ministers, thus delaying the legislation which has been on Congress&#039;s &amp;quot;to do&amp;quot; list since Rahul Gandhi turned forcible acquisition of farm land into a campaign theme against the then Mayawati government.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Led by urban development minister Kamal Nath, highways minister C P Joshi, power minister Veerappa Moily, commerce minister Anand Sharma and coal minister Sriprakash Jaiswal expressed apprehension about the bill. Agriculture minister Sharad Pawar also endorsed the criticism.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The opposition revolved around the argument that proposed amendments to the 1894 land acquisition law contained liberal compensation norms which would jack up project cost and deal a blow to industrialization and urbanization. The PM himself proposed the bill be sent to a ministerial group for vetting.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Ramesh, however, ruled out dilution of benefits to landowners, saying, &amp;quot;I have already made concessions against my instinct keeping in view larger economic challenges -- like the bill would kick in with prospective effect and not touch past acquisitions. The livelihood losers&#039; consent has also been waived.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In fact, he virtually dubbed the opposition to the bill as reflecting a mindset hostile to farmers which could not be helpful to Congress&#039;s political interests.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Significantly, in what could escalate the policy tussle, official sources said the final draft was unlikely to exempt SEZs from the LA bill&#039;s ambit. Commerce and industry minister Anand Sharma has protested that forcing SEZs to conform to the new acquisition law would kill industrialization and manufacturing.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;On Joshi&#039;s concern over impact on highways, Ramesh said, &amp;quot;Some people have not read the bill, it does not include linear projects like highways and railways.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Congress proposed a change to the 1894 law in the wake of nationwide protests against land acquisition, especially in the tribal belt, in 2007. While the draft went through several changes, it also faced roadblocks from allies like Trinamool. Now, the bill has run into resistance from ministries that call it anti-industrialization.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;While not touching compensation norms, the bill may be tweaked to address worries that it would cause delays, add layers of bureaucracy and even increase corruption. The new draft may not leave entire rehabilitation process to be clinched before acquisition but restrict it to identification of beneficiaries and basic groundwork for paying compensation.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16807,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Jairam defies Cabinet colleagues on land bill -Subodh Ghildiyal&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Times of India&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its approval by the Cabinet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;This bill is part of the political agenda of Congress and we are a political party. These people should know we are in government, they are ministers because of Congress,&amp;quot; he told TOI, breaking his silence after five days of lobbying the Congress leadership, including Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, for the bill. He said the bill will be brought to Parliament in the winter session.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In a defiant pushback, Ramesh said on Monday, &amp;quot;Compensation, R&amp;amp;R and social impact assessment, provision like consent of 80% landowners, are like the basic structure of the Constitution. They cannot be tampered with.&amp;quot; He said the provisions, attacked by his Cabinet colleagues as increasing costs for industry, were &amp;quot;non-negotiable&amp;quot; -- an assertion which many felt reflected his confidence that the leadership would back him in his fight with colleagues.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The statement came days after senior Cabinet ministers joined hands to get the bill referred to a group of ministers, thus delaying the legislation which has been on Congress&#039;s &amp;quot;to do&amp;quot; list since Rahul Gandhi turned forcible acquisition of farm land into a campaign theme against the then Mayawati government.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Led by urban development minister Kamal Nath, highways minister C P Joshi, power minister Veerappa Moily, commerce minister Anand Sharma and coal minister Sriprakash Jaiswal expressed apprehension about the bill. Agriculture minister Sharad Pawar also endorsed the criticism.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The opposition revolved around the argument that proposed amendments to the 1894 land acquisition law contained liberal compensation norms which would jack up project cost and deal a blow to industrialization and urbanization. The PM himself proposed the bill be sent to a ministerial group for vetting.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Ramesh, however, ruled out dilution of benefits to landowners, saying, &amp;quot;I have already made concessions against my instinct keeping in view larger economic challenges -- like the bill would kick in with prospective effect and not touch past acquisitions. The livelihood losers&#039; consent has also been waived.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In fact, he virtually dubbed the opposition to the bill as reflecting a mindset hostile to farmers which could not be helpful to Congress&#039;s political interests.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Significantly, in what could escalate the policy tussle, official sources said the final draft was unlikely to exempt SEZs from the LA bill&#039;s ambit. Commerce and industry minister Anand Sharma has protested that forcing SEZs to conform to the new acquisition law would kill industrialization and manufacturing.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On Joshi&#039;s concern over impact on highways, Ramesh said, &amp;quot;Some people have not read the bill, it does not include linear projects like highways and railways.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Congress proposed a change to the 1894 law in the wake of nationwide protests against land acquisition, especially in the tribal belt, in 2007. While the draft went through several changes, it also faced roadblocks from allies like Trinamool. Now, the bill has run into resistance from ministries that call it anti-industrialization.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
While not touching compensation norms, the bill may be tweaked to address worries that it would cause delays, add layers of bureaucracy and even increase corruption. The new draft may not leave entire rehabilitation process to be clinched before acquisition but restrict it to identification of beneficiaries and basic groundwork for paying compensation.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Times of India, 4 September, 2012, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Jairam-defies-Cabinet-colleagues-on-land-bill/articleshow/16241582.cms&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;jairam-defies-cabinet-colleagues-on-land-bill-subodh-ghildiyal-16935&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 16935,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 16807
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Jairam defies Cabinet colleagues on land bill -Subodh Ghildiyal&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Land Acquisition Bill,land acquisition and rehabilitation&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-The Times of India

Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Times of India&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its approval by the Cabinet.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;This bill is part of the political agenda of Congress and we are a political party. These people should know we are in government, they are ministers because of Congress,&amp;quot; he told TOI, breaking his silence after five days of lobbying the Congress leadership, including Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, for the bill. He said the bill will be brought to Parliament in the winter session.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In a defiant pushback, Ramesh said on Monday, &amp;quot;Compensation, R&amp;amp;R and social impact assessment, provision like consent of 80% landowners, are like the basic structure of the Constitution. They cannot be tampered with.&amp;quot; He said the provisions, attacked by his Cabinet colleagues as increasing costs for industry, were &amp;quot;non-negotiable&amp;quot; -- an assertion which many felt reflected his confidence that the leadership would back him in his fight with colleagues.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The statement came days after senior Cabinet ministers joined hands to get the bill referred to a group of ministers, thus delaying the legislation which has been on Congress&#039;s &amp;quot;to do&amp;quot; list since Rahul Gandhi turned forcible acquisition of farm land into a campaign theme against the then Mayawati government.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Led by urban development minister Kamal Nath, highways minister C P Joshi, power minister Veerappa Moily, commerce minister Anand Sharma and coal minister Sriprakash Jaiswal expressed apprehension about the bill. Agriculture minister Sharad Pawar also endorsed the criticism.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The opposition revolved around the argument that proposed amendments to the 1894 land acquisition law contained liberal compensation norms which would jack up project cost and deal a blow to industrialization and urbanization. The PM himself proposed the bill be sent to a ministerial group for vetting.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Ramesh, however, ruled out dilution of benefits to landowners, saying, &amp;quot;I have already made concessions against my instinct keeping in view larger economic challenges -- like the bill would kick in with prospective effect and not touch past acquisitions. The livelihood losers&#039; consent has also been waived.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In fact, he virtually dubbed the opposition to the bill as reflecting a mindset hostile to farmers which could not be helpful to Congress&#039;s political interests.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Significantly, in what could escalate the policy tussle, official sources said the final draft was unlikely to exempt SEZs from the LA bill&#039;s ambit. Commerce and industry minister Anand Sharma has protested that forcing SEZs to conform to the new acquisition law would kill industrialization and manufacturing.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;On Joshi&#039;s concern over impact on highways, Ramesh said, &amp;quot;Some people have not read the bill, it does not include linear projects like highways and railways.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Congress proposed a change to the 1894 law in the wake of nationwide protests against land acquisition, especially in the tribal belt, in 2007. While the draft went through several changes, it also faced roadblocks from allies like Trinamool. Now, the bill has run into resistance from ministries that call it anti-industrialization.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;While not touching compensation norms, the bill may be tweaked to address worries that it would cause delays, add layers of bureaucracy and even increase corruption. The new draft may not leave entire rehabilitation process to be clinched before acquisition but restrict it to identification of beneficiaries and basic groundwork for paying compensation.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/jairam-defies-cabinet-colleagues-on-land-bill-subodh-ghildiyal-16935.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Jairam defies Cabinet colleagues on land bill -Subodh Ghildiyal | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-The Times of India

Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>Jairam defies Cabinet colleagues on land bill -Subodh Ghildiyal</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div align="justify">-The Times of India<br /><br />Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its approval by the Cabinet.<br /><br />&quot;This bill is part of the political agenda of Congress and we are a political party. These people should know we are in government, they are ministers because of Congress,&quot; he told TOI, breaking his silence after five days of lobbying the Congress leadership, including Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, for the bill. He said the bill will be brought to Parliament in the winter session.<br /><br />In a defiant pushback, Ramesh said on Monday, &quot;Compensation, R&amp;R and social impact assessment, provision like consent of 80% landowners, are like the basic structure of the Constitution. They cannot be tampered with.&quot; He said the provisions, attacked by his Cabinet colleagues as increasing costs for industry, were &quot;non-negotiable&quot; -- an assertion which many felt reflected his confidence that the leadership would back him in his fight with colleagues.<br /><br />The statement came days after senior Cabinet ministers joined hands to get the bill referred to a group of ministers, thus delaying the legislation which has been on Congress's &quot;to do&quot; list since Rahul Gandhi turned forcible acquisition of farm land into a campaign theme against the then Mayawati government.<br /><br />Led by urban development minister Kamal Nath, highways minister C P Joshi, power minister Veerappa Moily, commerce minister Anand Sharma and coal minister Sriprakash Jaiswal expressed apprehension about the bill. Agriculture minister Sharad Pawar also endorsed the criticism.<br /><br />The opposition revolved around the argument that proposed amendments to the 1894 land acquisition law contained liberal compensation norms which would jack up project cost and deal a blow to industrialization and urbanization. The PM himself proposed the bill be sent to a ministerial group for vetting.<br /><br />Ramesh, however, ruled out dilution of benefits to landowners, saying, &quot;I have already made concessions against my instinct keeping in view larger economic challenges -- like the bill would kick in with prospective effect and not touch past acquisitions. The livelihood losers' consent has also been waived.&quot;<br /><br />In fact, he virtually dubbed the opposition to the bill as reflecting a mindset hostile to farmers which could not be helpful to Congress's political interests.<br /><br />Significantly, in what could escalate the policy tussle, official sources said the final draft was unlikely to exempt SEZs from the LA bill's ambit. Commerce and industry minister Anand Sharma has protested that forcing SEZs to conform to the new acquisition law would kill industrialization and manufacturing.<br /><br />On Joshi's concern over impact on highways, Ramesh said, &quot;Some people have not read the bill, it does not include linear projects like highways and railways.&quot;<br /><br />Congress proposed a change to the 1894 law in the wake of nationwide protests against land acquisition, especially in the tribal belt, in 2007. While the draft went through several changes, it also faced roadblocks from allies like Trinamool. Now, the bill has run into resistance from ministries that call it anti-industrialization.<br /><br />While not touching compensation norms, the bill may be tweaked to address worries that it would cause delays, add layers of bureaucracy and even increase corruption. The new draft may not leave entire rehabilitation process to be clinched before acquisition but restrict it to identification of beneficiaries and basic groundwork for paying compensation.</div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$reasonPhrase = 'OK'
header - [internal], line ??
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitStatusLine() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 54
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]
Code Context
                    $value

                ), $first);

                $first = false;
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f83d82b8ae6-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f83d82b8ae6-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67f83d82b8ae6-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f83d82b8ae6-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f83d82b8ae6-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f83d82b8ae6-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f83d82b8ae6-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67f83d82b8ae6-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67f83d82b8ae6-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16807,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Jairam defies Cabinet colleagues on land bill -Subodh Ghildiyal&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Times of India&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its approval by the Cabinet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;This bill is part of the political agenda of Congress and we are a political party. These people should know we are in government, they are ministers because of Congress,&amp;quot; he told TOI, breaking his silence after five days of lobbying the Congress leadership, including Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, for the bill. He said the bill will be brought to Parliament in the winter session.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In a defiant pushback, Ramesh said on Monday, &amp;quot;Compensation, R&amp;amp;R and social impact assessment, provision like consent of 80% landowners, are like the basic structure of the Constitution. They cannot be tampered with.&amp;quot; He said the provisions, attacked by his Cabinet colleagues as increasing costs for industry, were &amp;quot;non-negotiable&amp;quot; -- an assertion which many felt reflected his confidence that the leadership would back him in his fight with colleagues.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The statement came days after senior Cabinet ministers joined hands to get the bill referred to a group of ministers, thus delaying the legislation which has been on Congress&#039;s &amp;quot;to do&amp;quot; list since Rahul Gandhi turned forcible acquisition of farm land into a campaign theme against the then Mayawati government.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Led by urban development minister Kamal Nath, highways minister C P Joshi, power minister Veerappa Moily, commerce minister Anand Sharma and coal minister Sriprakash Jaiswal expressed apprehension about the bill. Agriculture minister Sharad Pawar also endorsed the criticism.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The opposition revolved around the argument that proposed amendments to the 1894 land acquisition law contained liberal compensation norms which would jack up project cost and deal a blow to industrialization and urbanization. The PM himself proposed the bill be sent to a ministerial group for vetting.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Ramesh, however, ruled out dilution of benefits to landowners, saying, &amp;quot;I have already made concessions against my instinct keeping in view larger economic challenges -- like the bill would kick in with prospective effect and not touch past acquisitions. The livelihood losers&#039; consent has also been waived.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In fact, he virtually dubbed the opposition to the bill as reflecting a mindset hostile to farmers which could not be helpful to Congress&#039;s political interests.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Significantly, in what could escalate the policy tussle, official sources said the final draft was unlikely to exempt SEZs from the LA bill&#039;s ambit. Commerce and industry minister Anand Sharma has protested that forcing SEZs to conform to the new acquisition law would kill industrialization and manufacturing.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On Joshi&#039;s concern over impact on highways, Ramesh said, &amp;quot;Some people have not read the bill, it does not include linear projects like highways and railways.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Congress proposed a change to the 1894 law in the wake of nationwide protests against land acquisition, especially in the tribal belt, in 2007. While the draft went through several changes, it also faced roadblocks from allies like Trinamool. Now, the bill has run into resistance from ministries that call it anti-industrialization.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
While not touching compensation norms, the bill may be tweaked to address worries that it would cause delays, add layers of bureaucracy and even increase corruption. The new draft may not leave entire rehabilitation process to be clinched before acquisition but restrict it to identification of beneficiaries and basic groundwork for paying compensation.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Times of India, 4 September, 2012, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Jairam-defies-Cabinet-colleagues-on-land-bill/articleshow/16241582.cms&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;jairam-defies-cabinet-colleagues-on-land-bill-subodh-ghildiyal-16935&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 16935,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 16807,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Jairam defies Cabinet colleagues on land bill -Subodh Ghildiyal&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Land Acquisition Bill,land acquisition and rehabilitation&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-The Times of India

Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Times of India&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its approval by the Cabinet.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;This bill is part of the political agenda of Congress and we are a political party. These people should know we are in government, they are ministers because of Congress,&amp;quot; he told TOI, breaking his silence after five days of lobbying the Congress leadership, including Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, for the bill. He said the bill will be brought to Parliament in the winter session.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In a defiant pushback, Ramesh said on Monday, &amp;quot;Compensation, R&amp;amp;R and social impact assessment, provision like consent of 80% landowners, are like the basic structure of the Constitution. They cannot be tampered with.&amp;quot; He said the provisions, attacked by his Cabinet colleagues as increasing costs for industry, were &amp;quot;non-negotiable&amp;quot; -- an assertion which many felt reflected his confidence that the leadership would back him in his fight with colleagues.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The statement came days after senior Cabinet ministers joined hands to get the bill referred to a group of ministers, thus delaying the legislation which has been on Congress&#039;s &amp;quot;to do&amp;quot; list since Rahul Gandhi turned forcible acquisition of farm land into a campaign theme against the then Mayawati government.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Led by urban development minister Kamal Nath, highways minister C P Joshi, power minister Veerappa Moily, commerce minister Anand Sharma and coal minister Sriprakash Jaiswal expressed apprehension about the bill. Agriculture minister Sharad Pawar also endorsed the criticism.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The opposition revolved around the argument that proposed amendments to the 1894 land acquisition law contained liberal compensation norms which would jack up project cost and deal a blow to industrialization and urbanization. The PM himself proposed the bill be sent to a ministerial group for vetting.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Ramesh, however, ruled out dilution of benefits to landowners, saying, &amp;quot;I have already made concessions against my instinct keeping in view larger economic challenges -- like the bill would kick in with prospective effect and not touch past acquisitions. The livelihood losers&#039; consent has also been waived.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In fact, he virtually dubbed the opposition to the bill as reflecting a mindset hostile to farmers which could not be helpful to Congress&#039;s political interests.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Significantly, in what could escalate the policy tussle, official sources said the final draft was unlikely to exempt SEZs from the LA bill&#039;s ambit. Commerce and industry minister Anand Sharma has protested that forcing SEZs to conform to the new acquisition law would kill industrialization and manufacturing.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;On Joshi&#039;s concern over impact on highways, Ramesh said, &amp;quot;Some people have not read the bill, it does not include linear projects like highways and railways.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Congress proposed a change to the 1894 law in the wake of nationwide protests against land acquisition, especially in the tribal belt, in 2007. While the draft went through several changes, it also faced roadblocks from allies like Trinamool. Now, the bill has run into resistance from ministries that call it anti-industrialization.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;While not touching compensation norms, the bill may be tweaked to address worries that it would cause delays, add layers of bureaucracy and even increase corruption. The new draft may not leave entire rehabilitation process to be clinched before acquisition but restrict it to identification of beneficiaries and basic groundwork for paying compensation.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16807,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Jairam defies Cabinet colleagues on land bill -Subodh Ghildiyal&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Times of India&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its approval by the Cabinet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;This bill is part of the political agenda of Congress and we are a political party. These people should know we are in government, they are ministers because of Congress,&amp;quot; he told TOI, breaking his silence after five days of lobbying the Congress leadership, including Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, for the bill. He said the bill will be brought to Parliament in the winter session.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In a defiant pushback, Ramesh said on Monday, &amp;quot;Compensation, R&amp;amp;R and social impact assessment, provision like consent of 80% landowners, are like the basic structure of the Constitution. They cannot be tampered with.&amp;quot; He said the provisions, attacked by his Cabinet colleagues as increasing costs for industry, were &amp;quot;non-negotiable&amp;quot; -- an assertion which many felt reflected his confidence that the leadership would back him in his fight with colleagues.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The statement came days after senior Cabinet ministers joined hands to get the bill referred to a group of ministers, thus delaying the legislation which has been on Congress&#039;s &amp;quot;to do&amp;quot; list since Rahul Gandhi turned forcible acquisition of farm land into a campaign theme against the then Mayawati government.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Led by urban development minister Kamal Nath, highways minister C P Joshi, power minister Veerappa Moily, commerce minister Anand Sharma and coal minister Sriprakash Jaiswal expressed apprehension about the bill. Agriculture minister Sharad Pawar also endorsed the criticism.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The opposition revolved around the argument that proposed amendments to the 1894 land acquisition law contained liberal compensation norms which would jack up project cost and deal a blow to industrialization and urbanization. The PM himself proposed the bill be sent to a ministerial group for vetting.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Ramesh, however, ruled out dilution of benefits to landowners, saying, &amp;quot;I have already made concessions against my instinct keeping in view larger economic challenges -- like the bill would kick in with prospective effect and not touch past acquisitions. The livelihood losers&#039; consent has also been waived.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In fact, he virtually dubbed the opposition to the bill as reflecting a mindset hostile to farmers which could not be helpful to Congress&#039;s political interests.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Significantly, in what could escalate the policy tussle, official sources said the final draft was unlikely to exempt SEZs from the LA bill&#039;s ambit. Commerce and industry minister Anand Sharma has protested that forcing SEZs to conform to the new acquisition law would kill industrialization and manufacturing.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On Joshi&#039;s concern over impact on highways, Ramesh said, &amp;quot;Some people have not read the bill, it does not include linear projects like highways and railways.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Congress proposed a change to the 1894 law in the wake of nationwide protests against land acquisition, especially in the tribal belt, in 2007. While the draft went through several changes, it also faced roadblocks from allies like Trinamool. Now, the bill has run into resistance from ministries that call it anti-industrialization.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
While not touching compensation norms, the bill may be tweaked to address worries that it would cause delays, add layers of bureaucracy and even increase corruption. The new draft may not leave entire rehabilitation process to be clinched before acquisition but restrict it to identification of beneficiaries and basic groundwork for paying compensation.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Times of India, 4 September, 2012, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Jairam-defies-Cabinet-colleagues-on-land-bill/articleshow/16241582.cms&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;jairam-defies-cabinet-colleagues-on-land-bill-subodh-ghildiyal-16935&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 16935,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 16807
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Jairam defies Cabinet colleagues on land bill -Subodh Ghildiyal&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Land Acquisition Bill,land acquisition and rehabilitation&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-The Times of India

Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Times of India&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its approval by the Cabinet.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;This bill is part of the political agenda of Congress and we are a political party. These people should know we are in government, they are ministers because of Congress,&amp;quot; he told TOI, breaking his silence after five days of lobbying the Congress leadership, including Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, for the bill. He said the bill will be brought to Parliament in the winter session.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In a defiant pushback, Ramesh said on Monday, &amp;quot;Compensation, R&amp;amp;R and social impact assessment, provision like consent of 80% landowners, are like the basic structure of the Constitution. They cannot be tampered with.&amp;quot; He said the provisions, attacked by his Cabinet colleagues as increasing costs for industry, were &amp;quot;non-negotiable&amp;quot; -- an assertion which many felt reflected his confidence that the leadership would back him in his fight with colleagues.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The statement came days after senior Cabinet ministers joined hands to get the bill referred to a group of ministers, thus delaying the legislation which has been on Congress&#039;s &amp;quot;to do&amp;quot; list since Rahul Gandhi turned forcible acquisition of farm land into a campaign theme against the then Mayawati government.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Led by urban development minister Kamal Nath, highways minister C P Joshi, power minister Veerappa Moily, commerce minister Anand Sharma and coal minister Sriprakash Jaiswal expressed apprehension about the bill. Agriculture minister Sharad Pawar also endorsed the criticism.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The opposition revolved around the argument that proposed amendments to the 1894 land acquisition law contained liberal compensation norms which would jack up project cost and deal a blow to industrialization and urbanization. The PM himself proposed the bill be sent to a ministerial group for vetting.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Ramesh, however, ruled out dilution of benefits to landowners, saying, &amp;quot;I have already made concessions against my instinct keeping in view larger economic challenges -- like the bill would kick in with prospective effect and not touch past acquisitions. The livelihood losers&#039; consent has also been waived.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In fact, he virtually dubbed the opposition to the bill as reflecting a mindset hostile to farmers which could not be helpful to Congress&#039;s political interests.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Significantly, in what could escalate the policy tussle, official sources said the final draft was unlikely to exempt SEZs from the LA bill&#039;s ambit. Commerce and industry minister Anand Sharma has protested that forcing SEZs to conform to the new acquisition law would kill industrialization and manufacturing.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;On Joshi&#039;s concern over impact on highways, Ramesh said, &amp;quot;Some people have not read the bill, it does not include linear projects like highways and railways.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Congress proposed a change to the 1894 law in the wake of nationwide protests against land acquisition, especially in the tribal belt, in 2007. While the draft went through several changes, it also faced roadblocks from allies like Trinamool. Now, the bill has run into resistance from ministries that call it anti-industrialization.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;While not touching compensation norms, the bill may be tweaked to address worries that it would cause delays, add layers of bureaucracy and even increase corruption. The new draft may not leave entire rehabilitation process to be clinched before acquisition but restrict it to identification of beneficiaries and basic groundwork for paying compensation.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/jairam-defies-cabinet-colleagues-on-land-bill-subodh-ghildiyal-16935.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Jairam defies Cabinet colleagues on land bill -Subodh Ghildiyal | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-The Times of India

Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>Jairam defies Cabinet colleagues on land bill -Subodh Ghildiyal</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div align="justify">-The Times of India<br /><br />Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its approval by the Cabinet.<br /><br />&quot;This bill is part of the political agenda of Congress and we are a political party. These people should know we are in government, they are ministers because of Congress,&quot; he told TOI, breaking his silence after five days of lobbying the Congress leadership, including Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, for the bill. He said the bill will be brought to Parliament in the winter session.<br /><br />In a defiant pushback, Ramesh said on Monday, &quot;Compensation, R&amp;R and social impact assessment, provision like consent of 80% landowners, are like the basic structure of the Constitution. They cannot be tampered with.&quot; He said the provisions, attacked by his Cabinet colleagues as increasing costs for industry, were &quot;non-negotiable&quot; -- an assertion which many felt reflected his confidence that the leadership would back him in his fight with colleagues.<br /><br />The statement came days after senior Cabinet ministers joined hands to get the bill referred to a group of ministers, thus delaying the legislation which has been on Congress's &quot;to do&quot; list since Rahul Gandhi turned forcible acquisition of farm land into a campaign theme against the then Mayawati government.<br /><br />Led by urban development minister Kamal Nath, highways minister C P Joshi, power minister Veerappa Moily, commerce minister Anand Sharma and coal minister Sriprakash Jaiswal expressed apprehension about the bill. Agriculture minister Sharad Pawar also endorsed the criticism.<br /><br />The opposition revolved around the argument that proposed amendments to the 1894 land acquisition law contained liberal compensation norms which would jack up project cost and deal a blow to industrialization and urbanization. The PM himself proposed the bill be sent to a ministerial group for vetting.<br /><br />Ramesh, however, ruled out dilution of benefits to landowners, saying, &quot;I have already made concessions against my instinct keeping in view larger economic challenges -- like the bill would kick in with prospective effect and not touch past acquisitions. The livelihood losers' consent has also been waived.&quot;<br /><br />In fact, he virtually dubbed the opposition to the bill as reflecting a mindset hostile to farmers which could not be helpful to Congress's political interests.<br /><br />Significantly, in what could escalate the policy tussle, official sources said the final draft was unlikely to exempt SEZs from the LA bill's ambit. Commerce and industry minister Anand Sharma has protested that forcing SEZs to conform to the new acquisition law would kill industrialization and manufacturing.<br /><br />On Joshi's concern over impact on highways, Ramesh said, &quot;Some people have not read the bill, it does not include linear projects like highways and railways.&quot;<br /><br />Congress proposed a change to the 1894 law in the wake of nationwide protests against land acquisition, especially in the tribal belt, in 2007. While the draft went through several changes, it also faced roadblocks from allies like Trinamool. Now, the bill has run into resistance from ministries that call it anti-industrialization.<br /><br />While not touching compensation norms, the bill may be tweaked to address worries that it would cause delays, add layers of bureaucracy and even increase corruption. The new draft may not leave entire rehabilitation process to be clinched before acquisition but restrict it to identification of beneficiaries and basic groundwork for paying compensation.</div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$cookies = []
$values = [
	(int) 0 => 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'
]
$name = 'Content-Type'
$first = true
$value = 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'
header - [internal], line ??
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitHeaders() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 55
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

<head>

    <link rel="canonical" href="<?php echo Configure::read('SITE_URL'); ?><?php echo $urlPrefix;?><?php echo $article_current->category->slug; ?>/<?php echo $article_current->seo_url; ?>.html"/>

    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>

$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp'
$dataForView = [
	'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		'id' => (int) 16807,
		'title' => 'Jairam defies Cabinet colleagues on land bill -Subodh Ghildiyal',
		'subheading' => '',
		'description' => '<div align="justify">
-The Times of India<br />
<br />
Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its approval by the Cabinet.<br />
<br />
&quot;This bill is part of the political agenda of Congress and we are a political party. These people should know we are in government, they are ministers because of Congress,&quot; he told TOI, breaking his silence after five days of lobbying the Congress leadership, including Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, for the bill. He said the bill will be brought to Parliament in the winter session.<br />
<br />
In a defiant pushback, Ramesh said on Monday, &quot;Compensation, R&amp;R and social impact assessment, provision like consent of 80% landowners, are like the basic structure of the Constitution. They cannot be tampered with.&quot; He said the provisions, attacked by his Cabinet colleagues as increasing costs for industry, were &quot;non-negotiable&quot; -- an assertion which many felt reflected his confidence that the leadership would back him in his fight with colleagues.<br />
<br />
The statement came days after senior Cabinet ministers joined hands to get the bill referred to a group of ministers, thus delaying the legislation which has been on Congress's &quot;to do&quot; list since Rahul Gandhi turned forcible acquisition of farm land into a campaign theme against the then Mayawati government.<br />
<br />
Led by urban development minister Kamal Nath, highways minister C P Joshi, power minister Veerappa Moily, commerce minister Anand Sharma and coal minister Sriprakash Jaiswal expressed apprehension about the bill. Agriculture minister Sharad Pawar also endorsed the criticism.<br />
<br />
The opposition revolved around the argument that proposed amendments to the 1894 land acquisition law contained liberal compensation norms which would jack up project cost and deal a blow to industrialization and urbanization. The PM himself proposed the bill be sent to a ministerial group for vetting.<br />
<br />
Ramesh, however, ruled out dilution of benefits to landowners, saying, &quot;I have already made concessions against my instinct keeping in view larger economic challenges -- like the bill would kick in with prospective effect and not touch past acquisitions. The livelihood losers' consent has also been waived.&quot;<br />
<br />
In fact, he virtually dubbed the opposition to the bill as reflecting a mindset hostile to farmers which could not be helpful to Congress's political interests.<br />
<br />
Significantly, in what could escalate the policy tussle, official sources said the final draft was unlikely to exempt SEZs from the LA bill's ambit. Commerce and industry minister Anand Sharma has protested that forcing SEZs to conform to the new acquisition law would kill industrialization and manufacturing.<br />
<br />
On Joshi's concern over impact on highways, Ramesh said, &quot;Some people have not read the bill, it does not include linear projects like highways and railways.&quot;<br />
<br />
Congress proposed a change to the 1894 law in the wake of nationwide protests against land acquisition, especially in the tribal belt, in 2007. While the draft went through several changes, it also faced roadblocks from allies like Trinamool. Now, the bill has run into resistance from ministries that call it anti-industrialization.<br />
<br />
While not touching compensation norms, the bill may be tweaked to address worries that it would cause delays, add layers of bureaucracy and even increase corruption. The new draft may not leave entire rehabilitation process to be clinched before acquisition but restrict it to identification of beneficiaries and basic groundwork for paying compensation.
</div>',
		'credit_writer' => 'The Times of India, 4 September, 2012, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Jairam-defies-Cabinet-colleagues-on-land-bill/articleshow/16241582.cms',
		'article_img' => '',
		'article_img_thumb' => '',
		'status' => (int) 1,
		'show_on_home' => (int) 1,
		'lang' => 'EN',
		'category_id' => (int) 16,
		'tag_keyword' => '',
		'seo_url' => 'jairam-defies-cabinet-colleagues-on-land-bill-subodh-ghildiyal-16935',
		'meta_title' => null,
		'meta_keywords' => null,
		'meta_description' => null,
		'noindex' => (int) 0,
		'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		'most_visit_section_id' => null,
		'article_big_img' => null,
		'liveid' => (int) 16935,
		'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		'edate' => '',
		'tags' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		'[new]' => false,
		'[accessible]' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		'[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[hasErrors]' => false,
		'[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[repository]' => 'Articles'
	
	},
	'articleid' => (int) 16807,
	'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Jairam defies Cabinet colleagues on land bill -Subodh Ghildiyal',
	'metaKeywords' => 'Land Acquisition Bill,land acquisition and rehabilitation',
	'metaDesc' => '
-The Times of India

Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its...',
	'disp' => '<div align="justify">-The Times of India<br /><br />Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its approval by the Cabinet.<br /><br />&quot;This bill is part of the political agenda of Congress and we are a political party. These people should know we are in government, they are ministers because of Congress,&quot; he told TOI, breaking his silence after five days of lobbying the Congress leadership, including Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, for the bill. He said the bill will be brought to Parliament in the winter session.<br /><br />In a defiant pushback, Ramesh said on Monday, &quot;Compensation, R&amp;R and social impact assessment, provision like consent of 80% landowners, are like the basic structure of the Constitution. They cannot be tampered with.&quot; He said the provisions, attacked by his Cabinet colleagues as increasing costs for industry, were &quot;non-negotiable&quot; -- an assertion which many felt reflected his confidence that the leadership would back him in his fight with colleagues.<br /><br />The statement came days after senior Cabinet ministers joined hands to get the bill referred to a group of ministers, thus delaying the legislation which has been on Congress's &quot;to do&quot; list since Rahul Gandhi turned forcible acquisition of farm land into a campaign theme against the then Mayawati government.<br /><br />Led by urban development minister Kamal Nath, highways minister C P Joshi, power minister Veerappa Moily, commerce minister Anand Sharma and coal minister Sriprakash Jaiswal expressed apprehension about the bill. Agriculture minister Sharad Pawar also endorsed the criticism.<br /><br />The opposition revolved around the argument that proposed amendments to the 1894 land acquisition law contained liberal compensation norms which would jack up project cost and deal a blow to industrialization and urbanization. The PM himself proposed the bill be sent to a ministerial group for vetting.<br /><br />Ramesh, however, ruled out dilution of benefits to landowners, saying, &quot;I have already made concessions against my instinct keeping in view larger economic challenges -- like the bill would kick in with prospective effect and not touch past acquisitions. The livelihood losers' consent has also been waived.&quot;<br /><br />In fact, he virtually dubbed the opposition to the bill as reflecting a mindset hostile to farmers which could not be helpful to Congress's political interests.<br /><br />Significantly, in what could escalate the policy tussle, official sources said the final draft was unlikely to exempt SEZs from the LA bill's ambit. Commerce and industry minister Anand Sharma has protested that forcing SEZs to conform to the new acquisition law would kill industrialization and manufacturing.<br /><br />On Joshi's concern over impact on highways, Ramesh said, &quot;Some people have not read the bill, it does not include linear projects like highways and railways.&quot;<br /><br />Congress proposed a change to the 1894 law in the wake of nationwide protests against land acquisition, especially in the tribal belt, in 2007. While the draft went through several changes, it also faced roadblocks from allies like Trinamool. Now, the bill has run into resistance from ministries that call it anti-industrialization.<br /><br />While not touching compensation norms, the bill may be tweaked to address worries that it would cause delays, add layers of bureaucracy and even increase corruption. The new draft may not leave entire rehabilitation process to be clinched before acquisition but restrict it to identification of beneficiaries and basic groundwork for paying compensation.</div>',
	'lang' => 'English',
	'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/',
	'site_title' => 'im4change',
	'adminprix' => 'admin'
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	'id' => (int) 16807,
	'title' => 'Jairam defies Cabinet colleagues on land bill -Subodh Ghildiyal',
	'subheading' => '',
	'description' => '<div align="justify">
-The Times of India<br />
<br />
Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its approval by the Cabinet.<br />
<br />
&quot;This bill is part of the political agenda of Congress and we are a political party. These people should know we are in government, they are ministers because of Congress,&quot; he told TOI, breaking his silence after five days of lobbying the Congress leadership, including Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, for the bill. He said the bill will be brought to Parliament in the winter session.<br />
<br />
In a defiant pushback, Ramesh said on Monday, &quot;Compensation, R&amp;R and social impact assessment, provision like consent of 80% landowners, are like the basic structure of the Constitution. They cannot be tampered with.&quot; He said the provisions, attacked by his Cabinet colleagues as increasing costs for industry, were &quot;non-negotiable&quot; -- an assertion which many felt reflected his confidence that the leadership would back him in his fight with colleagues.<br />
<br />
The statement came days after senior Cabinet ministers joined hands to get the bill referred to a group of ministers, thus delaying the legislation which has been on Congress's &quot;to do&quot; list since Rahul Gandhi turned forcible acquisition of farm land into a campaign theme against the then Mayawati government.<br />
<br />
Led by urban development minister Kamal Nath, highways minister C P Joshi, power minister Veerappa Moily, commerce minister Anand Sharma and coal minister Sriprakash Jaiswal expressed apprehension about the bill. Agriculture minister Sharad Pawar also endorsed the criticism.<br />
<br />
The opposition revolved around the argument that proposed amendments to the 1894 land acquisition law contained liberal compensation norms which would jack up project cost and deal a blow to industrialization and urbanization. The PM himself proposed the bill be sent to a ministerial group for vetting.<br />
<br />
Ramesh, however, ruled out dilution of benefits to landowners, saying, &quot;I have already made concessions against my instinct keeping in view larger economic challenges -- like the bill would kick in with prospective effect and not touch past acquisitions. The livelihood losers' consent has also been waived.&quot;<br />
<br />
In fact, he virtually dubbed the opposition to the bill as reflecting a mindset hostile to farmers which could not be helpful to Congress's political interests.<br />
<br />
Significantly, in what could escalate the policy tussle, official sources said the final draft was unlikely to exempt SEZs from the LA bill's ambit. Commerce and industry minister Anand Sharma has protested that forcing SEZs to conform to the new acquisition law would kill industrialization and manufacturing.<br />
<br />
On Joshi's concern over impact on highways, Ramesh said, &quot;Some people have not read the bill, it does not include linear projects like highways and railways.&quot;<br />
<br />
Congress proposed a change to the 1894 law in the wake of nationwide protests against land acquisition, especially in the tribal belt, in 2007. While the draft went through several changes, it also faced roadblocks from allies like Trinamool. Now, the bill has run into resistance from ministries that call it anti-industrialization.<br />
<br />
While not touching compensation norms, the bill may be tweaked to address worries that it would cause delays, add layers of bureaucracy and even increase corruption. The new draft may not leave entire rehabilitation process to be clinched before acquisition but restrict it to identification of beneficiaries and basic groundwork for paying compensation.
</div>',
	'credit_writer' => 'The Times of India, 4 September, 2012, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Jairam-defies-Cabinet-colleagues-on-land-bill/articleshow/16241582.cms',
	'article_img' => '',
	'article_img_thumb' => '',
	'status' => (int) 1,
	'show_on_home' => (int) 1,
	'lang' => 'EN',
	'category_id' => (int) 16,
	'tag_keyword' => '',
	'seo_url' => 'jairam-defies-cabinet-colleagues-on-land-bill-subodh-ghildiyal-16935',
	'meta_title' => null,
	'meta_keywords' => null,
	'meta_description' => null,
	'noindex' => (int) 0,
	'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	'most_visit_section_id' => null,
	'article_big_img' => null,
	'liveid' => (int) 16935,
	'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	'edate' => '',
	'tags' => [
		(int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	'[new]' => false,
	'[accessible]' => [
		'*' => true,
		'id' => false
	],
	'[dirty]' => [],
	'[original]' => [],
	'[virtual]' => [],
	'[hasErrors]' => false,
	'[errors]' => [],
	'[invalid]' => [],
	'[repository]' => 'Articles'

}
$articleid = (int) 16807
$metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Jairam defies Cabinet colleagues on land bill -Subodh Ghildiyal'
$metaKeywords = 'Land Acquisition Bill,land acquisition and rehabilitation'
$metaDesc = '
-The Times of India

Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its...'
$disp = '<div align="justify">-The Times of India<br /><br />Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its approval by the Cabinet.<br /><br />&quot;This bill is part of the political agenda of Congress and we are a political party. These people should know we are in government, they are ministers because of Congress,&quot; he told TOI, breaking his silence after five days of lobbying the Congress leadership, including Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, for the bill. He said the bill will be brought to Parliament in the winter session.<br /><br />In a defiant pushback, Ramesh said on Monday, &quot;Compensation, R&amp;R and social impact assessment, provision like consent of 80% landowners, are like the basic structure of the Constitution. They cannot be tampered with.&quot; He said the provisions, attacked by his Cabinet colleagues as increasing costs for industry, were &quot;non-negotiable&quot; -- an assertion which many felt reflected his confidence that the leadership would back him in his fight with colleagues.<br /><br />The statement came days after senior Cabinet ministers joined hands to get the bill referred to a group of ministers, thus delaying the legislation which has been on Congress's &quot;to do&quot; list since Rahul Gandhi turned forcible acquisition of farm land into a campaign theme against the then Mayawati government.<br /><br />Led by urban development minister Kamal Nath, highways minister C P Joshi, power minister Veerappa Moily, commerce minister Anand Sharma and coal minister Sriprakash Jaiswal expressed apprehension about the bill. Agriculture minister Sharad Pawar also endorsed the criticism.<br /><br />The opposition revolved around the argument that proposed amendments to the 1894 land acquisition law contained liberal compensation norms which would jack up project cost and deal a blow to industrialization and urbanization. The PM himself proposed the bill be sent to a ministerial group for vetting.<br /><br />Ramesh, however, ruled out dilution of benefits to landowners, saying, &quot;I have already made concessions against my instinct keeping in view larger economic challenges -- like the bill would kick in with prospective effect and not touch past acquisitions. The livelihood losers' consent has also been waived.&quot;<br /><br />In fact, he virtually dubbed the opposition to the bill as reflecting a mindset hostile to farmers which could not be helpful to Congress's political interests.<br /><br />Significantly, in what could escalate the policy tussle, official sources said the final draft was unlikely to exempt SEZs from the LA bill's ambit. Commerce and industry minister Anand Sharma has protested that forcing SEZs to conform to the new acquisition law would kill industrialization and manufacturing.<br /><br />On Joshi's concern over impact on highways, Ramesh said, &quot;Some people have not read the bill, it does not include linear projects like highways and railways.&quot;<br /><br />Congress proposed a change to the 1894 law in the wake of nationwide protests against land acquisition, especially in the tribal belt, in 2007. While the draft went through several changes, it also faced roadblocks from allies like Trinamool. Now, the bill has run into resistance from ministries that call it anti-industrialization.<br /><br />While not touching compensation norms, the bill may be tweaked to address worries that it would cause delays, add layers of bureaucracy and even increase corruption. The new draft may not leave entire rehabilitation process to be clinched before acquisition but restrict it to identification of beneficiaries and basic groundwork for paying compensation.</div>'
$lang = 'English'
$SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/'
$site_title = 'im4change'
$adminprix = 'admin'

include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51

Jairam defies Cabinet colleagues on land bill -Subodh Ghildiyal

-The Times of India Rural development minister Jairam Ramesh said he would not dilute the compensation package and rehabilitation norms in the draft land acquisition bill, throwing a challenge at ministerial colleagues who last week dubbed it anti-industry to block its approval by the Cabinet. "This bill is part of the political agenda of Congress and we are a political party. These people should know we are in government, they are ministers because of Congress," he told TOI, breaking his silence after five days of lobbying the Congress leadership, including Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, for the bill. He said the bill will be brought to Parliament in the winter session. In a defiant pushback, Ramesh said on Monday, "Compensation, R&R and social impact assessment, provision like consent of 80% landowners, are like the basic structure of the Constitution. They cannot be tampered with." He said the provisions, attacked by his Cabinet colleagues as increasing costs for industry, were "non-negotiable" -- an assertion which many felt reflected his confidence that the leadership would back him in his fight with colleagues. The statement came days after senior Cabinet ministers joined hands to get the bill referred to a group of ministers, thus delaying the legislation which has been on Congress's "to do" list since Rahul Gandhi turned forcible acquisition of farm land into a campaign theme against the then Mayawati government. Led by urban development minister Kamal Nath, highways minister C P Joshi, power minister Veerappa Moily, commerce minister Anand Sharma and coal minister Sriprakash Jaiswal expressed apprehension about the bill. Agriculture minister Sharad Pawar also endorsed the criticism. The opposition revolved around the argument that proposed amendments to the 1894 land acquisition law contained liberal compensation norms which would jack up project cost and deal a blow to industrialization and urbanization. The PM himself proposed the bill be sent to a ministerial group for vetting. Ramesh, however, ruled out dilution of benefits to landowners, saying, "I have already made concessions against my instinct keeping in view larger economic challenges -- like the bill would kick in with prospective effect and not touch past acquisitions. The livelihood losers' consent has also been waived." In fact, he virtually dubbed the opposition to the bill as reflecting a mindset hostile to farmers which could not be helpful to Congress's political interests. Significantly, in what could escalate the policy tussle, official sources said the final draft was unlikely to exempt SEZs from the LA bill's ambit. Commerce and industry minister Anand Sharma has protested that forcing SEZs to conform to the new acquisition law would kill industrialization and manufacturing. On Joshi's concern over impact on highways, Ramesh said, "Some people have not read the bill, it does not include linear projects like highways and railways." Congress proposed a change to the 1894 law in the wake of nationwide protests against land acquisition, especially in the tribal belt, in 2007. While the draft went through several changes, it also faced roadblocks from allies like Trinamool. Now, the bill has run into resistance from ministries that call it anti-industrialization. While not touching compensation norms, the bill may be tweaked to address worries that it would cause delays, add layers of bureaucracy and even increase corruption. The new draft may not leave entire rehabilitation process to be clinched before acquisition but restrict it to identification of beneficiaries and basic groundwork for paying compensation.