[Reader-list] The poverty of programmes- 211

[Taha Mehmood]

Dear All

Let there be a identity card for each ministry but would this vibrant
plethora of identity documents create a just and a fair
re-distribution of public money? Are multiple identity documents
really an amulet to keep off the big brother or a systematic process
for an open embezzlement of public money? Those in government have a
choice: either integrate floating identities into a central database
or make existing identification process efficient durable and
sustainable or turn a blind eye while making a grand gesture by
respecting departmental boundaries. Nandan Nilekani knows this
dilemma, he chooses to be a plumber. This dilemma it seems exist for
people like Jeebesh too, who view the existence of multiple identity
documents as something 'which allows for a flexibility and movement at
the level of daily life'. Of course this flexibility and movement is
independent of the public cost involved. While people like Bibek
Debroy view lack of unique identity document as a lost opportunity to
make sure public money reaches the recipient.

An excerpt from the story below-

there was euphoria about a unique national identity.

Had this been properly used, targeting and subsidizing public goods
and services would have been easier. But we now learn this isn't going
to be mandatory. Nor is it going to be unique. In the present context,
the Rural Development Ministry will have its own card, so will the
Health Ministry. And the Home Ministry won't let go of the
multi-purpose national identity card. Is it surprising that despite
anti-poverty schemes, nothing changes significantly for the poor,
unless they are mainstreamed by growth?

Please read the story for more.

Warm regards

Taha



http://www.indianexpress.com/news/the-poverty-of-programmes/507937/0

The poverty of programmes

Bibek Debroy Tags : NREGA, PDS scam, Vidhwa Pension Yojana Posted:
Thursday , Aug 27, 2009 at 1502 hrs New Delhi:

The first is about the Vidhwa Pension Yojana in UP, under which widows
get a monthly pension of Rs 300 as long as they are BPL (below the
poverty line).

UP has 1.5 million widows, so the annual expenditure is Rs 540 crore.
The delivery mechanism is apparently foolproof. A village pradhan or
city corporator identifies a widow as BPL and then forwards the name
to the block office. Then the name goes to the probation officer of
the tehsil. After approval, the beneficiary opens a bank account into
which the money is transferred directly. Since Rs 300 every month is a
large sum for the poor, women who aren't widows have declared
themselves widows.

For instance, in Azamgarh's Mahula village, 104 out of 187 widow
pensioners were found to be fake widows. The point is that these
aren't isolated cases of fraud. There has been systematic embezzlement
with official connivance.

The second story is about a pilot cash transfer scheme, pushed by the
Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution, so as to
replace PDS.

PDS doesn't work and leakage and corruption in the system has been
abundantly documented, including in variants like the TPDS (targeted
PDS) and the AAY (Annapurna Anna Yojana).

Cash transfers are superior, and these are conditional cash transfers,
since they can only be used for food. Under the Ministry's proposed
pilot, cash transfers will be used in five villages: Lakhimpur and
Hardoi in UP, Panchkula and Jhajjar in Haryana and Central Delhi. BPL
rice costs Rs 6 per kg, the open market price is Rs 10. The government
subsidy is Rs 10 per kg and the 35-kg-a-month entitlement means an
equivalent cash transfer of Rs 350 per month. This will be directly
transferred to the beneficiary's bank account. Given the experience
with UP's widows, is there any guarantee that there won't be organized
embezzlement here too? (Not that PDS is any superior!) After all,
similar reports have appeared about the NREGS.

Third, there was euphoria about a unique national identity.

Had this been properly used, targeting and subsidizing public goods
and services would have been easier. But we now learn this isn't going
to be mandatory. Nor is it going to be unique. In the present context,
the Rural Development Ministry will have its own card, so will the
Health Ministry. And the Home Ministry won't let go of the
multi-purpose national identity card. Is it surprising that despite
anti-poverty schemes, nothing changes significantly for the poor,
unless they are mainstreamed by growth?