How many Indians support Nuclear liability bill in its present form?

Good Question, I really appreciate ur hard work Now coming back to the question Thats exactly what I have been saying (see the last para of my answer in the link provided) http://in.answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AqdKpcPGmlDi3kSFPPVgQqORHQx.;_ylv=3?qid=20100607042627AAhqJbn I'm not against the nuclear deal, I had supported in past and still support this but I'm against Nuclear Liability Bill. It needs to be considered again. With this bill I have 2 concerns 1) The civil liability has been capped - Actually the amount which u have mentioned (in the link too) is almost 30 crore more than actual. On the contract it has been mentioned as $100 million i.e going by the present rate of 1 dollar = Rs. 46.95, it becomes Rs. 469 crore say 470 crore which I think is very very less. By 2017 there will be 18 nuclear plants and if something happens in anyone then it would be a disaster. Much more than the Bhopal Gas Tragedy. In case of Bhopal Gas Tragedy 5.73 lakh people were affected and the compensation demanded was more than $3 Billion (to be exact its $3.3 billion) but only $470 million was given and if nuclear disaster happens then the number of affected people would be much more than this and for them the amount is only $100 million. Thats tooooooo...... less. So I think the cap on the limit should be removed. It should be considered by seeing the number of people affected and if they still want to cap the compensation then it should be in Billions and not in millions. 2) The Operator has to pay the price - Whoz the operator ?? Its Indian Govt. That means first due to their fault common man gets killed and those who have survived 'll have to pay for what the govt did. Thats ridiculous. The common man is a looser from both sides. Thats why I said in my first point that the compensation should be increased. Actually both the points are interrelated

I do not know how many politicians know what the deal is about. Unfortunately we tend to comment based on whom we like and whom we do not. All Left parties should have gone the way of Russia. But our masses think that by taking away from rich and middle class, the poor would become better. Another aspect is the agitational approach. All of these irespective of the party involved, are stage managed. None of the participants even know what they are agitating against. Some newspapers like Business Standard have reproduced point by point answer of the government to the objections of Left. Dr Kalam, Shri Mishra our security adviser under NDA, K Subhramaniam, Naraynan the current seurity adviser, Shri Kakodkar the head of our Atomic Agency etc have all studied the deal from various point of view and support it. No deal can be onesided. We have to give some to gain some. Unfortunately what matters to our politicians is only how to come back to power. It is the duty of intellectuals to take independent view of such important events and comment on the basis of knowledge and not on whether they like X or Y. Media, particularly the vernacular papers, can play an important role in propogating an unbiased picture. This would enable the common people to understand the pros and cons of such important events and force the political parties to act only in National Interest. Following are the key aspects of the Indo-US civil nuclear deal: * The agreement not to hinder or interfere with India's nuclear programme for military purposes. * US will help India negotiate with the IAEA for an India-specific fuel supply agreement. * Washington will support New Delhi develop strategic reserves of nuclear fuel to guard against future disruption of supply. * In case of disruption, US and India will jointly convene a group of friendly supplier countries to include nations like Russia, France and the UK to pursue such measures to restore fuel supply. * Both the countries agree to facilitate nuclear trade between themselves in the interest of respective industries and consumers. * India and the US agree to transfer nuclear material, non-nuclear material, equipment and components. * Any special fissionable material transferred under the agreement shall be low enriched uranium. * Low enriched uranium can be transfered for use as fuel in reactor experiments and in reactors for conversion or fabrication. * The ambit of the deal include research, development, design, construction, operation, maintenance and use of nuclear reactors, reactor experiments and decommissioning. * The US will have the right to seek return of nuclear fuel and technology but it will compensate for the costs incurred as a consequence of such removal. * India can develop strategic reserve of nuclear fuel to guard against any disruption of supply over the lifetime of its reactors. * Agreement provides for consultations on the circumstances, including changed security environment, before termination of the nuclear cooperation. * Provision for one-year notice period before termination of the agreement. * The US to engage Nuclear Suppliers Group to help India obtain full access to the international fuel market, including reliable, uninteruppted and continual access to fuel supplies from firms in several nations. * The US will have the right to seek return of nuclear fuel and technology. * In case of return, Washington will compensate New Delhi promptly for the "fair market value thereof" and the costs incurred as a consequence of such removal. * Both the countries to set up a Joint Committee for implementation of the civil nuclear agreement and development of further cooperation in this field. * The agreement grants prior consent to reprocess spent fuel. * Sensitive nuclear technology, nuclear facilities and major critical components can be transferred after amendment to the agreement. * India will establish a new national facility dedicated to reprocessing safeguarded nuclear material under IAEA safeguards. * Nuclear material and equipment transferred to India by the US be subject to safeguards in perpetuity.

At the outset,I wish to comment that you appear to have reduced the debate to a juvenile game or contest by suggesting that you will award the 10 points to the best answer etc.etc.People participate in this forum not to earn points (which aspect is only incidental)but to share their views and also benefit from the experience and expertise of others.The thrill of the discussion heating up,coupled with further comments offered through edits etc.add to the interest of the participants. Further the analogy of the old McDonalds case cited doesn't seem appropriate here.While one would have to accept the verdict of the court,to me it also appears that the patron was grossly negligent in that when she bought the coffee she knew it would be piping hot.Added to that ,to put the cup between her knees and pull the lid forcefully smacks of gross negligence on her part for which no punitive damages should have been awarded.Of course now,all coffee cups bear the legend that the contents are hot.How many read that?Yet they buy knowing that the contents are hot because it is implied when one orders coffee unless one specifies that one wants cold coffee.Strange are the laws ,stranger still their interpretation because these vary from judge to judge. Another of the analogies cited viz.the Bhopal tragedy.I am sure you would have read the press report where it is claimed that Anderson,the head honcho of the Union Carbide was aided by officials in the government to flee the country and escape consequences.Added to that has anyone analyzed as to what could be the reason for awarding compensation only to the extent awarded and no more?One could go on ,on this strain indefinitely . But suffice it to say that while people's views on the Nuclear Liability bill may,to some extent,influence the government line or that of the opposition,ultimately,In the absence of a referendum,it is our elected reps whose views will prevail.And here is where I have my reservations,particularly with members like Shibu Soren(A self-confessed bribe taker) whose votes can be bought by either side.Do you (I certainly don't) have any idea of the number of members like Shibu whose vote would depend not on the issue under debate but upon the consideration available?Incidentally,are you aware that the SC had ruled that Shibu and other bribe taking MPs could not be prosecuted under the country's prevailing laws because of some loop holes(which loop holes do not appear to have been plugged till date to my knowledge)? Have a Wonderful Day.I do appreciate your question which is both topical and timely.I only object to the rules prescribed and the condition for award of 10 points.I may yet enter the debate through edit(s).If I have caused you any offense, please accept my apologies.Thanks.Raj. Edit:-Thank you Mr. "Poondi B".I enjoyed your response to Mr."Shy" 's poser too.I much value your senior citizenly comments.Have a Good Day,Sir. Raj. Mr."Shy",I am fully in agreement with your observation and sentiments about American courts.But it has to be conceded that even in the USA,where incidentally I live,judges have different views.But in the matter of the Bhopal tragedy,I not only decry the fact that there is no standard but as far as I am concerned the whole thing is a travesty. Incidentally,the medium of this forum is too limited to be able to do justice to a serious debate/discussion on a matter/ subject as grave as the one propounded by you.

Dear The Logician, I agree with you first in this regard. When Man Mohan Singh, was first introduced in political life by Narasimha Rao, in 1991 as Finance Minister, after his performance I used to wonder how Narasimha Rao was good enough to identify a right person for a right portfolio even from outside politics. There is a couplet by Saint Thiruvalluvar 2040 years back itself in Thirukkural as below: பொருட்பால் தெரிந்துவினையாடல் 517. இதனை இதனால் இவன்முடிக்கும் என்றாய்ந்து அதனை அவன்கண் விடல். 517 'This man, this work shall thus work out,' let thoughtful king command; Then leave the matter wholly in his servant's hand. Meaning: After having considered, "this man can accomplish this, by these means", let (the king) leave with him the discharge of that duty. http://pm.tamil.net/pub/pm0153/trkrlpop.html Again when Man Mohan Singh was proposed for PM post, I was really thinking it was a better choice. When it came to nuclear deal, in my opinion he miserably failed. It was only Left Parties with whose support the entire Govt was functioning for several years of lost term. But they rightly & vehemently opposed the nuclear deal. Since it was already four year passed, ruling party was capable of purchasing many including the speaker to defect from his own party ideologies to pass the bill. One thing I want to refer here about Left Parties, they are for the people of India and they shown it by protesting the move of investing PF funds in Share Market by the then FM. It appeared lucrative when the sensex reached 24000 points and many have felt what is wrong in investing PF funds in shares. But it was the Left Parties who saw that it did not happen. Within few months, from 24000 points share market crashed and the sensex came down as low as 6000 points. Had the PF funds would have been invested in shares, all employees of many sectors would have suffered a major loss. Almost every family one will be subscribing in PF by some means. That amounts to say Left Parties have saved hard earned savings of every family by their timely pin pointing the govt. I don’t think majorities of beneficiaries of this know this fact. Still they do their duties. Now reward is their loosing election in Kolkatta Municipal Corporation recently! PUBLIC INTEREST IS LOST!