Revolutionizing Awareness

helping humanity, make choices, more so through awareness, than ignorance

Posts Tagged ‘executive’

Papers surface alleging land grab by Deve Gowda family

Posted by Admin on November 26, 2010

The Vidhana Soudha, the seat of Karnataka's le...

Vidhana Soudha(Bengaluru),Karnataka

H.D Deve Gowda(Former Prime Minister of India)

H.D Deve Gowda(Former Prime Minister of India)

http://in.yfittopostblog.com/2010/11/24/papers-surface-alleging-land-grab-by-deve-gowda-family/

HD Kumaraswamy, the JD(S) leader who has been exposing scandal after scandal involving chief minister B S Yeddyurappa, is now in the dock for helping his brother Balakrishne Gowda grab prime land in Bangalore.

Documents surfaced in Bangalore on Wednesday showing the gifting of prime land to Kupendra Reddy, who in turn sold part of the property to former prime minister HD Deve Gowda’s son Balakrishne Gowda.

The Bangalore edition of Deccan Chronicle reports:

In 2007, then chief minister H.D. Kumaraswamy who has been crying foul over BSY’s largesse to his kith and kin, granted an absolute sale deed to an extent of 28 acres of prime land belonging to KIADB on the bustling Sarjapur Outer Ring Road for a mere Rs 14 crore. Its market value today — Rs 850 crore.

Less than two months later, HDK’s brother and other members of the former chief minister’s family received a portion of this very property at a throw away price. Today, Accenture operates out of this office space.

According to documents available with Deccan Chronicle, the prime beneficiary in this deal is H.D. Balakrishne Gowda (HDK’s brother) who has got 25,000 sqft of built up office space for a mere Rs 3.08 crore at less than Rs 1,200 per sqft whereas the value at that time was Rs 4,000 per sqft of built up structure.

Deccan Herald had reported the deal back in 2007:

H D Kumaraswamy may now have to eat his words. A set of documents available with Deccan Herald reveals that his family members, indeed, have  connections with the city-based realtor D Kupendra Reddy, whose house was raided by the I-T department on Tuesday…

A day after the I-T raids, Mr Kumaraswamy had fumed at media reports that Mr Reddy was close to him and stoutly denied any connection with the realtor. The documents also reveal that the entire commercial space sold to Kavitha (Kumaraswamy’s sister-in-law) and her family members was originally owned by State-owned Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board.

Three years on, when the case surfaced again this Wednesday, Kumaraswamy told TV9 that Reddy had got the land from the industrial area development board when S M Krishna was chief minister. He claimed he had no knowledge of the deal involving his brother Balakrishne Gowda.

Earlier in the day, Kumaraswamy said the BJP had acted immorally by letting scandal-tainted Yeddyurappa stay on as chief minister. He said he would take out a yatra in Karnataka to draw the people’s attention to Yeddyurappa’s “misdeeds.” Panchayat elections are due in the state in a month.

 

Posted in India Forgotten | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Papers surface alleging land grab by Deve Gowda family

Why Obama Should Put BP Under Temporary Receivership

Posted by Admin on June 2, 2010

by: Robert Reich  |  Robert Reich’s Blog

It’s time for the federal government to put BP under temporary receivership, which gives the government authority to take over BP’s operations in the Gulf of Mexico until the gusher is stopped. This is the only way the public know what’s going on, be confident enough resources are being put to stopping the gusher, ensure BP’s strategy is correct, know the government has enough clout to force BP to use a different one if necessary, and be sure the President is ultimately in charge.

If the government can take over giant global insurer AIG and the auto giant General Motors and replace their CEOs, in order to keep them financially solvent, it should be able to put BP’s north American operations into temporary receivership in order to stop one of the worst environmental disasters in U.S. history.

The Obama administration keeps saying BP is in charge because BP has the equipment and expertise necessary to do what’s necessary. But under temporary receivership, BP would continue to have the equipment and expertise. The only difference: the firm would unambiguously be working in the public’s interest. As it is now, BP continues to be responsible primarily to its shareholders, not to the American public. As a result, the public continues to worry that a private for-profit corporation is responsible for stopping a public tragedy.

Five reasons for taking such action:

1. We are not getting the truth from BP. BP has continuously and dramatically understated size of gusher. In the last few days, BP chief Tony Hayward has tried to refute reports from scientists that vast amounts of oil from the spill are spreading underwater. Hayward says BP’s sampling shows “no evidence” oil is massing and spreading underwater across the Gulf. Yet scientists from the University of South Florida, University of Georgia, University of Southern Mississippi and other institutions say they’ve detected vast amounts of underwater oil, including an area roughly 50 miles from the spill site and as deep as 400 feet. Government must be clearly in charge of getting all the facts, not waiting for what BP decides to disclose and when.

2. We have no way to be sure BP is devoting enough resources to stopping the gusher. BP is now saying it has no immediate way to stop up the well until August, when a new “relief” well will reach the gushing well bore, enabling its engineers to install cement plugs. August? If government were in direct control of BP’s north American assets, it would be able to devote whatever of those assets are necessary to stopping up the well right away.

3. BP’s new strategy for stopping the gusher is highly risky. It wants to sever the leaking pipe cleanly from atop the failed blowout preventer, and then install a new cap so the escaping oil can be pumped up to a ship on the surface. But scientists say that could result in an even bigger volume of oil – as much as 20 percent more — gushing from the well. At least under government receivership, public officials would be directly accountable for weighing the advantages and disadvantages of such a strategy. As of now, company officials are doing the weighing. Which brings us to the fourth argument for temporary receivership.

4. Right now, the U.S. government has no authority to force BP to adopt a different strategy. Saturday, Energy Secretary Steven Chu and his team of scientists essentially halted BP’s attempt to cap the spewing well with a process known as “top kill,” which injected drilling mud and other materials to try to counter the upward pressure of the oil. Apparently the Administration team was worried that the technique would worsen the leak. But under what authority did the Administration act? It has none. Asked Sunday whether U.S. officials told BP to stop the top-kill attempt, Carol Browner, the White House environmental advisor, said, “We told them of our very, very grave concerns” about the danger. Expressing grave concerns is not enough. The President needs legal authority to order BP to protect the United States.

5. The President is not legally in charge. As long as BP is not under the direct control of the government he has no direct line of authority, and responsibility is totally confused. For example, listen for the “we” and “they” pronouns that were used by Carol Browner in response to a question on NBC’s “Meet the Press” Sunday (emphasis added): “We’re now going to move into a situation where they’re going to attempt to control the oil that’s coming out, move it to a vessel, take it onshore ….We always knew that the relief well was the permanent way to close this .… Now we move to the third option, which is to contain it. If [the new cap on the relief well is] a snug fit, then there could be very, very little oil. If they’re not able to get as snug a fit, then there could be more. We’re going to hope for the best and prepare for the worst.” When you get pronoun confusion like this, you can bet on confusion — both inside the Administration and among the public. There is no good reason why “they” are in charge of an operation of which “we” are hoping for the best and preparing for the worst.

The President should temporarily take over BP’s Gulf operations. We have a national emergency on our hands. No president would allow a nuclear reactor owned by a private for-profit company to melt down in the United States while remaining under the direct control of that company. The meltdown in the Gulf is the environmental equivalent.

All republished content that appears on Truthout has been obtained by permission or license.

Support Truthout’s work with a $10/month tax-deductible donation today!

Posted in Truthout Articles | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Why Obama Should Put BP Under Temporary Receivership