Today’s article is from “The diplomat” website
and talks about the Indian government’s recent Food Security Bill that
guarantees subsidised food to almost two-thirds of the country:
Despite not being happy with the present format of the draft ordinance pitched by the government on Tuesday, Mander told The Diplomat that the measure will “make the state morally and legally accountable to ensure that no one is hungry and malnourished in the country. For the first time the bill has a provision for a universal maternity program that gives Rs 1000 ($100) per month to a pregnant mother for six months to take care of her nutrition.”
But the critics of the program say that it is a burden on economy and it is an open invitation to corruption as the past experiences suggest that intended beneficiaries never get benefitted by the project in the same way as it is designed.
By Sanjay Kumar
July 5, 2013
When an elected government in the fifth year of its
term takes any action, no matter how noble it is, it smacks of a handout to
voters in the run up to the election. No wonder many have attributed a
political motive to the introduction on Wednesday of the much touted food
security bill, which has been on the agenda of the United Progressive Alliance
(UPA) for the last few years.
The government promulgated an ordinance on the bill
that many believe could be a game changer for next year’s elections. An
ordinance is issued by the cabinet when the parliament is not in session. The
executive order must be passed by parliament within six months of its issuance.
With the monsoon session of parliament expected to
be called in a month’s time, the introduction of the proposed landmark
legislation clearly seems to be an attempt to score political brownie points in
several crucial states.
The food security bill is a very ambitious program
meant to provide subsidized food to almost two-thirds of the nation. The project aims to spend $4
billion or more annually and distribute cheap grains to around 70 percent of
India's 1.2 billion people.
According to a BBC report, proposes to provide a
kilo of rice for three rupees, a kilo of wheat for two rupees and millet for
one rupee per kilogram. The food subsidies will cover 75 percent of Indians
living in rural areas and 50 percent of the urban population. The whole program
will cost the government 1.3 trillion rupees, or $23.9 billion.
Food security is part of the government’s larger
entitlement program, Right to Food, a constitutional right on par with
the right to freedom of speech and right to equality. The main aim is not only
to target hunger but also to address the issue of malnutrition in the country.
The Wall Street Journal
remarks on the ambition of the program, being introduced in a
country that is home to around one-third of the world's extreme poor, according
to the World Bank. Further, half of children below five suffer from
malnutrition in India, while a third of women are underweight, according to the
Indian government's National Family Health Survey.”
Development economist Jean Dreze is quoted as saying, “In terms of
nutrition indicators, India is very far behind. The food security bill is an
opportunity to address these gaps, and to create political momentum for further
action.”
A view shared by Harsh Mander, a member of the National
Advisory Council (NAC), an advisory body headed by the Congress
President Sonia Gandhi at the forefront of formulating the bill.
Despite not being happy with the present format of the draft ordinance pitched by the government on Tuesday, Mander told The Diplomat that the measure will “make the state morally and legally accountable to ensure that no one is hungry and malnourished in the country. For the first time the bill has a provision for a universal maternity program that gives Rs 1000 ($100) per month to a pregnant mother for six months to take care of her nutrition.”
But the critics of the program say that it is a burden on economy and it is an open invitation to corruption as the past experiences suggest that intended beneficiaries never get benefitted by the project in the same way as it is designed.
“We know from experience that food distribution
program is an extension and magnification of a license to corruption,” New
Delhi-based economist Dr. Surjit Bhalla told The Diplomat.
An outspoken critic of the UPA government’s
economic policies, Bhalla opines that “the major problem is that the money
spent does not reach the poor. Instead, three-fourths of the money meant for
those living in poverty goes to the middle class and upper class.”
Bhalla added, “If you are really serious about
addressing the issue of malnutrition then you should focus on water and
sanitation projects.”
Mander takes another view, saying, “The fear of
corruption should not come in the way of peoples’ welfare. Yes, it would have
been prudent for the government to have an independent enforcement mechanism,
which was originally envisaged in the food security bill.”
He added, “Every second child in India is
malnourished. The bill is a great investment on future of India.”
Meanwhile, speculation in Delhi is mounting that
the government is advancing the food security bill in a bid to generate
electoral support. Questions are also being raised about the timing of the
program, with the opposition asking why the
government chose to issue an ordinance when introducing the measure.
Further, some political analysts believe that by
introducing the ordinance the Congress wants to wrest political initiative from
the opposition, which has been haranguing the government over corruption
charges amid an economic slowdown.
In response, the Congress-led government claims
that the bill is one of its major poll promises, which it does not want to take
the risk of waiting any longer.
Reports suggest that it will be difficult for any
political party to oppose the bill in parliament when it is introduced in the
monsoon session.
Image credit: Flickr (spiritualize)
No comments:
Post a Comment