 I'm also going to try and bring in one or two of the questions from the floor to try and do both of my responsibilities. Perhaps I might actually ask Tessa Jowl in light of what's happened here in response to a question from Eirone Ripadimina from the LSE. Perhaps you could reflect a little bit on the mechanisms that triggered the demand of a strong London government after all that time with no mayor. And from those mechanisms, do you think there are some lessons that might be transferable to Mumbai? Well I think that one of the great political battles and defining political battles in London of the 80s was the abolition of the Greater London Council. So London is a city that had had its own government. Its own government was wound up and it became, as I say, became one of the great cause for progressives to fight the abolition of London's government. So in a sense the existence of London government was in the recent memory of the progressive centre left and it was a major commitment following our election in 1997 to restore London government. So I mean I think that the kind of democratic argument is probably from London's point of view the most powerful but that was also linked to very strong voices from business about the benefit of the clear leadership of elected government in order to promote business confidence. I could ask our respondents to keep their remarks relatively brief. Can I ask Ashok Baal, who is the Deputy Chairman of the Mumbai Port Trust, to reflect on what we've heard this morning. Thank you very much. In fact Mr Correia in his presentation referred Mumbai City. Mr Cyrus Gazdar, he wants a city without port because he wants the dock lands to be relocated and released for cities alternative use. I would like to offer my observations on these comments. As you may be aware the Mumbai City or sorry Mumbai Port as an organized entity came into being in 1873 although this port was in existence since Portuguese times. So the port and the city form an integral part of the city's history and legacy. The port is an inseparable part of cities identity, character and history and this inclusive identity needs to be preserved and protected. The historical link of the port from the city cannot be severed. Second, there appears to be a perception in some quarters that the old port of Mumbai is declining or it has no future. This perception is far from the truth. Today this port is the fastest growing major port in the country. In fact it has recorded a very strong sustained increase in traffic for last several years. From 26 million tonnes in 2002-3 it doubled to 52 million tonnes in 67 and it is set to achieve 60 million tonnes during the current fiscal. And I'd like to emphasize that this steady increase in traffic is associated with rapid decline of its hinterland. After 96 when the port sector was thrown upon to the private sector participation many ports and terminals came up on the west coast. As a result the hinterland of Mumbai port which was at one time extended up to north India, central India and western India has rapidly shrunk and today it is limited to Mumbai city and its adjoining areas. And let me be on record to say that 95% of the cargo that is handled by Mumbai port is either originating from or destined to Mumbai region in its surrounding areas. 76% of the cargo is captive to the Mumbai port. Therefore this underscores the locational necessity of the port for this region. And any forced displacement of a major economic activity like Mumbai port will be very counterproductive and detrimental to the interest of the port. Having said that, see now we are talking about the eastern waters you know there are references about the eastern waters development. Yes Mumbai port occupies a part of the eastern waterfront and we need to understand the unique character of the eastern waterfront which is a part of the Mumbai harbour. Enclosed by the mainland on one side and the island on the other side it provides a very safe, natural, sheltered and protected harbour unique of its kind in the world and which is eminently suitable for development of port and shipping activities. See we are talking you know when you talk about this Bombay port, I'll take a minute. When you talk about the Bombay port we talk about its landed estates. Yes it's a landed estates which are not meant for the port's operational areas and need to be redeveloped and there is no opinion about that. But then it has to keep in mind a recent judgement of the Supreme Court which protects the tenants and it needs to take into account the interest of the tenants. And as far as the land estate is concerned we have a business plan in place which provides for putting land for public use. Mainly as Mr Correia was referring to, the passenger water transport between Mumbai city and the different locations across the harbour. We plan to have a cruise terminal, we want to develop marina, we have provided a project for social housing. Thank you. I just have a couple of observations and hearing the excellent panellists and I liked the presentations they made about the future of the city. Now I think it occurs to me and I'm a writer so my task is to communicate. It occurs to me that the eventual plans for what can save Mumbai are known to most people. As in the Israeli-Palestinian dispute which seems forever intractable, the eventual terms of a settlement are known to most people. We need things like a directly elected mayor and some kind of reshifting of the role of the port trust. We need more public transport to disperse some of the population across the harbour. The problem is in how to communicate this to the vast majority of the people that live in the city that don't speak our language literally or figuratively. They have no voice in what we deliberate in rooms like this but they do have the vote. This is where all our plans or visions or hallucinations come up against the reality of a population which in the slum areas votes at the rate of some 90% and a population in precents like this in South Bombay which stays aloof from politics on the ground. We don't vote and by and large we don't participate in the political process. The difference between the world's two great democracies in India and the US is that in India the poor vote. In order for any kind of improvement to be made viable we need to communicate our plans to the majority of the people of the city and I don't see that being done. The second observation I'd like to make is that unless we fix the problems of the villages we're not going to fix the problems of the cities. Rahul Mehrotra once said to me, we have a problem as planners in cities like Mumbai. The nicer we make this city, the more roads, the more buildings we build, the more public transport, the more the number of people that will want to come and live here. So unless agriculture is made viable again in the countryside, unless you can keep them down on the farm, I don't see long term sustained solutions to the problems of cities like Mumbai. Thank you. Narendra Nair, director of Bombay First. Thank you. For me personally it's a great satisfaction to participate in this conference here today, organized by Urban Age, to dealing with the city of Mumbai. Sanjay referred to a vision which was prepared four years ago and I, at Bombay First, was particularly heavy in a way to be associated with preparation of that vision. It was actually four years ago when we said that the city was decaying, everybody realized a vision had to be prepared and a document which was prepared which I think Andy showed on his slide earlier on this. So what have we achieved in the last three or four years? I think one thing matters great satisfaction that is a great awareness now with NGOs, with the people, the citizens that something needs to be done with the city media. If you open a newspaper every morning there is a reference to what is happening in the city, city needs to be done. A public-private partnership has been created for the first time to deal with the governance of the city. There is a citizen action group constituted by the government of Maharashtra where 30 citizens of the city sit with the government and the empowered committee will sit with the government to see how the city's various initiatives could be monitored. We have launched a largest, I think, an urban renewal program. There is going to be investment of something like 50 to 60 billion dollars taking place in the city here in next decade. That I think is a very, very important step. What are the constraints? I think the minister referred to that there has to be courage and there has to be boldness and that I think is what we require. Our city development will not take place without the political leaders supporting it and they have to have courage and boldness that I think is very, very important that we need. A vision, a lot of people talk about vision. Vision is very important. We need to have a vision and we do have a vision for the city which Sanjay pointed out showed us what the vision is. If all those things happen in the next ten years, this will be a real world class, can be a world class global city. What are the constraints that we have got here? We have a land use. It's a port, it's a port city, it's an island city, it's a land use. We talk about the port land, I will not get into a debate on that. But I think there could be a win-win situation for the port and the city. A lot of countries, a lot of cities around the world, a lot of other countries, the ports were there and they have given part of the land to the city. London is an example in itself. So it doesn't mean that the port is good. Then the transport has been referred to several people. Now just to, we have neglected our transport. We are carrying on 21st century on the 19th century transport structure that was built out there. Migration is a very big problem. You have two to three hundred thousand people coming into the city living in slums. So there needs to be tackled. We need to find a way how we can stop that, how we can deal with that. One of the things the government policies, policies adopted a few years ago, if you let to be known around the world, around the country, that if you come to Bombay, you will live in a far, you will replace, you will get a free housing. So that doesn't, that's not going to help out. The other biggest issue here is the planning. There has been no proper planning in the city for the development. So we need to have a proper planning authority, proper planning, a holistic plan like the London plan. Which is a great note to end on, I think. Thank you, Mr Nair. I'm sorry to interrupt. One last point I'd like to say is because we're looking at investment of 60 billion dollars. We need to have a proper implementation mechanism in place. If that is not, our record of implementation has not been very good. The last word was to have been with Sheila Patel but unfortunately she can't be with us. So Sunda Burra has stepped in at a very short notice to have the last and I'm sure very brief word. Thank you. Thank you. I just want to say one thing that I think the direction Mumbai will take will depend crucially upon whether we believe in participatory democracy or not. Because I think, you know, what people have been referring to, how do you involve the poor, how do you listen to the voices of the poor? Recently, for example, the government for reasons unclear has said that slum redevelopment projects do not need the consent of the people. Particularly certain types of large government owned, where government managed projects. So to us this seems sort of profoundly undemocratic. How can you decide what is good for the people without consulting them? So I think public debate, transparency, a kind of discourse model of democracy will involve the poor to us, our organisation which works with the urban poor. We feel that this is really a key element. Thank you. Thank you for such. Thank you for a ringing conclusion to this morning's conversation.