From Our Special Correspondent
Daijiworld Media Network - Bengaluru

Bengaluru, Jul 20: Moving the no trust motion against the Congress government headed by chief minister Siddaramaiah in the Karnataka Legislative Assembly on Monday, JD(S) leader and former chief minister H D Kumaraswamy claimed that the government has lost the confidence of the people over its fraudulent implementation of the Solar Policy.

The Siddaramaiah regime’s solar policy is a big scam, alleged Kumaraswamy contending that it had resulted in abetting corruption in the administration.

There was large-scale corruption in the Karnataka Lokayukta, the lottery scam and involvement of police officer in the lottery racket, illegal sand mining and fraudulent implementation of solar policy, claimed JD(S)leader Kumaraswamy.

All these scandals have seriously dented the government’s credibility and the public confidence, he said.

Initiating the discussion on the no confidence motion against Chief Minister Siddaramaiah in the Legislative Assembly, Kumaraswamysaid the Siddaramaiah government had also lost the confidence of farmers.

The spate of suicides by farmers had proved that the agrarian sector had no faith in the chief minister, the JD(S) leader said.

Instead of providing incentives to genuine farmers under the solar policy, Energy Department headed by D K Shivakumar favoured entrepreneurs who purchased lands to obtain benefits from the policy.

The JD(S) leader said the Department had signed a 25-year agreement with firms and agreed to pay Rs 8.40 a unit of solar power, which would burden State to the extent of Rs 4,000-Rs 5,000 crore.

He said in neighbouring Andhra Pradesh, the government entered into agreement with solar power generators for a year and was paying Rs 5 per unit, which was lower by Rs 3.40.

At the same time, Kumaraswamy appreciated the chief minister for visiting the houses of four deceased farmers in the districts of Mandya and Mysuru to console their family members.

Energy minister D K Shivakumar, who intervened during the debate, pointed out that the agreement was for a period of 25 years and the firms would not be able to enhance the tariff. If the agreement was for one year, it had to be renewed every year and at each renewal the tariff was likely to go up substantially and thus the government has been very prudent and far-sighted, he explained.