It was June 25, 2009. V S Achuthanandan was the Kerala Chief Minister and M Vijayakumar was minister for ports. Oommen Chandy was the Opposition leader.
Kerala Congress (Secular)'s P C George was moving an adjournment motion in the Kerala Assembly on the uncertainty surrounding the Vizhinjam project.
The news of a betrayal had come just a day before. On June 24, Lanco Kondappally Power, which won the bid to construct the port, formally told the Kerala government that it was not interested in taking up the project. Lanco had secured the Centre's security clearance and had even received the 'letter of intent' from the Centre.
Still, when no other work remained except the picking up of a pen to sign the agreement, the company backed out. No convincing reasons were given. Lanco merely said that existing court cases made the project uncertain.
With this, the second bidding process for the Vizhinjam port, too, had unexpectedly come to nothing. The winner of the first bidding process in 2006, Zoom Developers, could not secure for its consortium the Centre's security clearance as its two partners were Chinese firms.
Now, with Lanco's retreat, the Vizhinjam port looked as good as dead.
George zooms in on corruption
P C George was his usual self in the Assembly, hurling an entertaining mix of unsubstantiated charges, threats and a bit of common sense.
He hinted there was a government-level understanding to favour Lanco. He even qualified Lanco as the "(port) minister's company". Further, George said there was corruption in the rejection of the bid of Zoom Developers, which had once again entered the fray with two non-Chinese partners.
He then wanted the ports minister to call an all-party meeting. "If not, I will let the world know the many secrets I am privy to," he said.
When his turn came, ports minister M Vijayakumar gave a brief response to George's comments. Initially, Vijayakumar sounded amused. "I simply cannot understand why George made those threats." Then, turning grave, he said: "There are many things that George said today that should not have been uttered in this House."
Nedumbassery model for Vizhinjam
In between the allegations and threats, George also made a practical suggestion. "Why can't we adopt the Nedumbassery model if no one is willing to help us construct a port," he said. "We should float a public company like Karunakaran did to create the Nedumbassery airport and make the Vizhinjam port a reality," he said.
Vijayakumar rejected the Nedumbassery model. Instead, he put forward another suggestion. He wanted the project redesigned as a central project. His logic: "The Centre will gain the most from this port. A study conducted as part of the project observed that the Centre would get over Rs 1000 crore annually in foreign exchange through transshipment," he said.
New models can wait. At that critical juncture, when even the chosen bidder quit at the last minute, what the minister wanted most of all was the Opposition's cooperation to revive the Vizhinjam project. "We should not let this project be scuttled by controversies," Vijayakumar said. "Like we have done till now, we should be able to take decisions together and move forward," he said.
.jpg.transform/576x300/image.jpg)
Vijayakumar's request, Chandy's challenge
The minister seemed to pin all his hopes on Opposition leader Oommen Chandy. The CPM leader credited Chandy for setting the project in motion, not aware that nearly two decades later his party would attempt to mask Chandy's contributions. "This is not a project brought in arbitrarily by this (Achuthanandan) government. Honourable Opposition leader, it was you who initiated the project. This started during your time (during the 2001-06 UDF tenure helmed by A K Antony and Chandy). We went ahead with the project without any change," Vijayakumar said.
Chandy was more than supportive, and, statesmanlike, he steered away from controversies. "I am not a repository of secrets like P C George," Chandy said with a smile that quickly disarmed George who was about to rise up in protest. But Chandy was also sending a clear message that the UDF would not let rumours thwart the project. His response also revealed the man's restlessness to get things done even as an Opposition leader.
"I fully agree with the minister's sentiment that we should not lose this project. But I have a small amendment to make. Yes, we should not lose this project. But at the same time, we should not take the stand that it is enough for the project to be completed at any time. We cannot let this project drag on indefinitely. Had it not been in Kerala, such a project would have been taken up and completed at least 25 years ago," Chandy said.
He then threw a challenge. "If the project was to be completed only 50 years later, it doesn't require a Vijayakumar or Oommen Chandy. It will happen on its own. Question is, can we complete the project in five years?"
Five years later, the project was not even started. But Chandy did achieve something in that time. He found a bidder for Vizhinjam project: Adani Ports.
Read More: Why is it unethical for Congress to support 'freeze Vizhinjam port' demand
Lanco's suspicious withdrawal
Cut back to the Assembly on June 25, 2009. Though he kept controversies at an arm's length, Chandy did raise some troubling questions. "Right from the start, the minister and the government looked determined to give the project to Lanco. Or else you could have gone ahead on the basis of the court order," Chandy said.
(In 2004, the High Court and in early 2005, the Supreme Court had directed the government and its nodal agency Vizhinjam International Seaport Limited to consider the bid of Zoom Developers. The Achuthanandan government did not and used the findings of its technical committee to reject the Zoom bid.)
Chandy said he was stupefied by Lanco's behaviour. "Haven't all hurdles in its way been removed? Didn't the government do an evaluation and decided in its favour? All legal issues have also been sorted out. Lanco has secured security clearance, too. Even if Zoom Developers takes the legal route again, the government can easily convince the court. And even after all this, if Lanco has withdrawn, there is something suspicious," he said, and added: "But now, we are not interested in any controversy. The need of the hour is to resume work immediately," he said.
Chandy drills some sense
If Vijayakumar rejected George's Nedumbassery model, Chandy dismissed the minister's vision of Vizhinjam as a central project. "This has been discussed before. After Vallarppadam, we have told the Centre that we would take up Vizhinjam as a state project," Chandy said.
And in 2009, when viability gap fund for a port project was unheard of in India, Chandy told the House that the Vizhinjam project would get a viability gap assistance of 20 per cent from the Centre. "So, let us not think of a deviation in the project plan and create a new controversy over that," he said.
The Chandy plan was retained but it was after six years and three tenders later that the Vizhinjam project finally got a bidder. In 2014, Adani Ports was the sole bidder and a year later, in August 2015, the Adani Ports inked the deal.
