On a high: Punjab MLAs visit Scotland to study distilleries

Liquor has always made heady tales in Punjab. The visit of an eight-member committee of Punjab MLAs, led by speaker NS Kahlon, to Scotland “for studying the working of distilleries” has raised a storm.

The purpose of the trip was to study how distilleries in that country have been operating without polluting the air and groundwater. The committee decided to undertake the trip after “finding out”  that a 30-km area around four major distilleries in Punjab had become highly polluted (there were huge amounts of alcohol).

The finding has embarrassed the state pollution control board, which felt “it [finding] is exaggerated and distorted”.

“The MLAs are no technical experts on such matters, nor have they taken any assistance from us,” a senior official said. There were reports that the PMO did not clear the visit of committee members. Besides, the state finance department and the Punjab Pollution Control Board (PPCB) had also expressed their reservations about the stated purpose of the visit.

Officials said the finance department and the Punjab Pollution Control Board (PPCB) did not support the basis of their trip.

The PPCB’s findings did not corroborate what the committee had concluded in its preliminary report — that an area of 30 kilometres around distilleries in Punjab was polluted.

“It was shocking to see the report. Had the report’s findings been true, there would have been a hue and cry in the state,” a senior PPCB official said.

Meanwhile, according to reports, the MLAs were taken to two distilleries in Scotland on Friday last — the Cameron Bridge grain distillery in Fife and the Glasgow distillery in Auchentoshan.

The PCC committee included cabinet minister Tikshan Sud and Amarjit Singh Sahi from the BJP, Virsa Singh Valtoha, Balbir Singh Baht and Jagdeep Nakai from the Akali Dal and Kewal Dhillon from Congress.

According to a finance department official, the committee had sought special sanction of funds for the Scotland trip, but their request was refused. Instead, the committee was told to use money lying under its travel head for the trip.

Environmentalists have also questioned the propriety of undertaking such a trip when information could have been procured by cheaper means.