July 2013 – 65 years after her Independence, India finally enacted an ordinance (decree promulgated by the President upon advice from his council of ministers) to provide food as a matter of right to all her citizen. This is in tandem with the rights based approach that the present Government has been trying to enforce. Consequently, Food Security Bill (FSB) can be spoken in the same breath as MNREGA – aka right to employment and RTE – right to education to all children below the age of 14. Needless to say, we have market economists estimating the amount of money gone in the drain in a bid to make India hunger free in next 3 years. We have figures from a conservative 1.2 lakh crore to a much ambitious 6 lakh crore being touted as the “real cost” of this ambitious project. Then we have every person who has an opinion asking “can we afford this” with the fiscal deficit and all. Then we also have politicians terming this as “feel good” before the general elections to the Parliament of India scheduled in May 2014.
Each of these stories have a certain merit and we may want to delve into that in a bit, but can we deny that the FSB was need of the hour in a country like India where the top three reasons for mortality is hunger, lack of health care and malnutrition (not necessary in that order). As we are discussing the pro / cons of this bill we have so many women undergoing miscarriage / so many kids malnourished beyond repair / so many people dying on streets due to hunger. Access to nourishment should have been obvious choice to all citizens but we are starting with access to grains – yet most of us feel that these are doles and it won’t help anyone. Most of the intellectuals throw “teach a man to fish” argument to make their point. I am using this space to make a case for the FSB and why even the 6 lakh crore would be money well invested / spent – based on your bent of mind.
First, we have to address the costs argument. India has one of the largest public distribution system (PDS) and it has been in place for around 5 decades now. We often hear that there is rampant pilferage and re-routing of the food meant for distribution to local brewery or retail market and having just second and third quality grains made available in fair price shops for the consumption. Make no mistake; the main reason for having these fair price shops in the first place was to make nutrition available to the masses who could not afford retail purchase. When we re-route grains meant for fair price shops, we are actually staling from the poorest of the poor and providing them second / third quality grains – in a bid to make them realize that they are living on charity. In each of the 29 states on India, there is massive corruption in the PDS and crores of rupees meant to nourish the masses are siphoned away by few individuals both within the administration and outside and the end consumer is left high and dry. It would be a fit case to abandon PDS long ago, but for various considerations the PDS system continues. Maybe there are too many livelihoods dependent on pilferage and siphoning. It has become a mafia of its own and successive state governments either actively participates in the plunder or at best look the other way while this is happening. Yet, we have never heard any politician say a word against the PDS or dismantling this creaking system – mainly because in some form or shape its touching lives of millions and we could always improve to plug the leaks. I must say that in the past 10 years, around 10 -12 states were using the PDS exceedingly well and implementing the schemes in letter and spirit. So there is a light at the end of this 5 decade long tunnel. I am arguing a case that it should be mandatory to cost the bills and show revenue streams to cover the costs – we are presently opaque in this regard. However, the costs should not be an argument to scuttle bills that touch millions of lives for basic necessity like food.
The FSB will use the existing PDS system to provide a fixed amount of grains at a fixed price per person / month. This would be a right – meaning administration will have to beg / borrow or steal but cannot refuse grains to people demanding it. It would, in a way, force the administration to keep a tab on the pilferage and siphoning. You can no longer hide behind the argument that we have grains shortage or bad storage. It’s a right and if you don’t have grains, you will have to reimburse costs for the purchase. Unless the Government wants to plunder, it will be forced to keep a check on the facilities. Not only grains, FSB ensures lactating mothers and children under 14 cooked meals as form of nourishment. This would mean bundling existing schemes – which are run separately and delivering it to the benefit of common man. It would not be fool proof but it could be improved upon gradually and we need close monitoring and regular audits.
Let me take up the argument of FSB being a vote catcher or fiscally poor bill. Sure, any bill that ensures food or jobs or healthcare or homes would be a vote catcher and this would be the case anywhere in the world. The question would be, would we make a positive impact or just get votes? On that, my considered opinion would be to err on the side on benefitting the masses. It is not a dole; it’s a right and should be considered as one. No longer would we depend on the charity of fair price shop owners. About being fiscally unsound, any expense made by Government is called fiscally unsound so long as it would not get a return on investment. But again, Governments are not limited company running behind profits- they are societal trust meant to redistribute wealth earned in form of taxes to benefit the masses - the good of the majority. In any given year Government forgoes revenues worth upward of 4 lakh crore in form of many various incentives – be it free electricity, free land , tax holidays etc. given to corporate India and yet every day we hear new scams that involves these very same people who are trying to get out of turn benefits from same Government. Meaning, there is no end to corporate greed and yet we don’t seem to talk about it a lot. We count it as a necessary evil and offset it to the employment / revenues generated by these corporates. These are also sunk costs to the Government and have a per-capita impact on economy. Our economists enjoy counting every cent spent on the poorest and give a go by to the million showered on the richest. If we can sustain revenues forgone to corporates, we can always sustain the costs of FSB which is a basic need, especially when we have poor performance on nutrition indices. So long as we have even one person dying on the road due to hunger, we need a FSB that provides them a right to life – basic right ensured in our constitution.
So long……
PS: Author is not against corporate India and does not imply that all of them are corrupt. Instances are used to make a case for food security bill.
Each of these stories have a certain merit and we may want to delve into that in a bit, but can we deny that the FSB was need of the hour in a country like India where the top three reasons for mortality is hunger, lack of health care and malnutrition (not necessary in that order). As we are discussing the pro / cons of this bill we have so many women undergoing miscarriage / so many kids malnourished beyond repair / so many people dying on streets due to hunger. Access to nourishment should have been obvious choice to all citizens but we are starting with access to grains – yet most of us feel that these are doles and it won’t help anyone. Most of the intellectuals throw “teach a man to fish” argument to make their point. I am using this space to make a case for the FSB and why even the 6 lakh crore would be money well invested / spent – based on your bent of mind.
First, we have to address the costs argument. India has one of the largest public distribution system (PDS) and it has been in place for around 5 decades now. We often hear that there is rampant pilferage and re-routing of the food meant for distribution to local brewery or retail market and having just second and third quality grains made available in fair price shops for the consumption. Make no mistake; the main reason for having these fair price shops in the first place was to make nutrition available to the masses who could not afford retail purchase. When we re-route grains meant for fair price shops, we are actually staling from the poorest of the poor and providing them second / third quality grains – in a bid to make them realize that they are living on charity. In each of the 29 states on India, there is massive corruption in the PDS and crores of rupees meant to nourish the masses are siphoned away by few individuals both within the administration and outside and the end consumer is left high and dry. It would be a fit case to abandon PDS long ago, but for various considerations the PDS system continues. Maybe there are too many livelihoods dependent on pilferage and siphoning. It has become a mafia of its own and successive state governments either actively participates in the plunder or at best look the other way while this is happening. Yet, we have never heard any politician say a word against the PDS or dismantling this creaking system – mainly because in some form or shape its touching lives of millions and we could always improve to plug the leaks. I must say that in the past 10 years, around 10 -12 states were using the PDS exceedingly well and implementing the schemes in letter and spirit. So there is a light at the end of this 5 decade long tunnel. I am arguing a case that it should be mandatory to cost the bills and show revenue streams to cover the costs – we are presently opaque in this regard. However, the costs should not be an argument to scuttle bills that touch millions of lives for basic necessity like food.
The FSB will use the existing PDS system to provide a fixed amount of grains at a fixed price per person / month. This would be a right – meaning administration will have to beg / borrow or steal but cannot refuse grains to people demanding it. It would, in a way, force the administration to keep a tab on the pilferage and siphoning. You can no longer hide behind the argument that we have grains shortage or bad storage. It’s a right and if you don’t have grains, you will have to reimburse costs for the purchase. Unless the Government wants to plunder, it will be forced to keep a check on the facilities. Not only grains, FSB ensures lactating mothers and children under 14 cooked meals as form of nourishment. This would mean bundling existing schemes – which are run separately and delivering it to the benefit of common man. It would not be fool proof but it could be improved upon gradually and we need close monitoring and regular audits.
Let me take up the argument of FSB being a vote catcher or fiscally poor bill. Sure, any bill that ensures food or jobs or healthcare or homes would be a vote catcher and this would be the case anywhere in the world. The question would be, would we make a positive impact or just get votes? On that, my considered opinion would be to err on the side on benefitting the masses. It is not a dole; it’s a right and should be considered as one. No longer would we depend on the charity of fair price shop owners. About being fiscally unsound, any expense made by Government is called fiscally unsound so long as it would not get a return on investment. But again, Governments are not limited company running behind profits- they are societal trust meant to redistribute wealth earned in form of taxes to benefit the masses - the good of the majority. In any given year Government forgoes revenues worth upward of 4 lakh crore in form of many various incentives – be it free electricity, free land , tax holidays etc. given to corporate India and yet every day we hear new scams that involves these very same people who are trying to get out of turn benefits from same Government. Meaning, there is no end to corporate greed and yet we don’t seem to talk about it a lot. We count it as a necessary evil and offset it to the employment / revenues generated by these corporates. These are also sunk costs to the Government and have a per-capita impact on economy. Our economists enjoy counting every cent spent on the poorest and give a go by to the million showered on the richest. If we can sustain revenues forgone to corporates, we can always sustain the costs of FSB which is a basic need, especially when we have poor performance on nutrition indices. So long as we have even one person dying on the road due to hunger, we need a FSB that provides them a right to life – basic right ensured in our constitution.
So long……
PS: Author is not against corporate India and does not imply that all of them are corrupt. Instances are used to make a case for food security bill.
No comments:
Post a Comment