[Reader-list] Reg: Right to Food - Set 1 - Re-entry

[Rakesh Iyer]

Article 2:

Link: http://www.telegraphindia.com/1090708/jsp/opinion/story_11209738.jsp

Article:

Food, glorious food!
The proposed National Food Security Act promises to deliver the poor from
hunger. But the legislation will be effective only if the public
distribution system is toned up, argues *Shabina Akhtar

*

Selima Bibi, a resident of a shanty in central Calcutta, ignores her
five-year-old son when he cries for food. She is going to boil some rice in
a while but there’s precious little else that she can give him to eat. The
malnourished boy, with a swollen belly and rickety legs, slinks off
whimpering, perhaps to forage for food somewhere else.

Selima Bibi and her family are among millions of people in India who do not
get enough to eat. In fact, if the latest survey by the ministry of rural
development is to be believed, about 50 per cent of India’s population
suffers from malnutrition. However, that may change soon.

The United Progressive Alliance government has promised to come up with the
National Food Security Act (NFSA). This will provide a statutory framework
to ensure food security for all. The proposed law is to be drafted by the
ministry of food and public distribution in consultation with several
non-governmental organisations and the Supreme Court Commissioners (SCC), a
body formed by the apex court in 2001 to address the problem of hunger.

The NFSA will entitle every family below the poverty line (BPL) in rural and
urban areas to 25 kg of rice or wheat a month at a subsidised rate of Rs 3
per kg. Targeted identification cards will be issued to people who fall
below the poverty line. The delivery monitoring unit in the Prime Minister’s
Office will be overseeing the project.

Yet despite the laudable objectives of the law, many feel that it would
actually be a step back from what the government is providing now. “Given
that India has a very high percentage of people suffering from hunger and
malnutrition, we do require such a law. However, 2.5 crore BPL cardholders
are already getting food grains at the rate of Rs 2 per kg. Besides, each
BPL household is entitled to 35 kg of rice or wheat a month. If the
government plans to reduce entitlements in the name of food security and ask
the beneficiaries to pay a rupee extra per kg, then what kind of food
security is this,” asks Member of Parliament and CPI(M) politbureau member
Brinda Karat.

Karat has a point. Under existing schemes like the Antyodaya Anna Yojana
(AAY) each BPL household is entitled to 35 kg of food grains a month at the
rate of Rs 2 per kg. Then why bring in such a law at all?

Says Biraj Patnaik, principal advisor, SCC, “Both the Supreme Court and the
high courts have repeatedly interpreted the right to food and shelter as a
fundamental right. But unless a right is clearly explicated and broken down
into solid entitlement, it fails to deliver. Schemes such as the AAY are
there, but they can be done away with any time. Once the National Food
Security Act comes into force, however, it would require an amendment to be
passed in Parliament to make any changes to its entitlements.”

Patnaik feels that schemes such as the AAY will probably be merged with the
new law eventually. However, he also says that the government may have to
raise the entitlement to 35 kg of rice a month per BPL household in the
draft bill, in keeping with what poor families are already getting under the
Antyodaya Anna Yojana scheme.

Another critical issue is the assessment of those who will benefit from it.
The Planning Commission report of 2002 made 65 million people beneficiaries
of the AAY schemes. Yet the state governments have already issued BPL cards
to over a 100 million households. But if one goes by the recent survey by
the ministry of rural development, as many as 50 per cent of the Indian
population is likely to benefit from the law.

N.C. Saxena, a former secretary of the Planning Commission, who conducted
the survey at the behest of the ministry of rural development, says, “The
analysis shows that the percentage of rural population unable to satisfy the
minimum calorie requirements is far greater than the present 28.3 per cent
of the total population. I have recommended that the percentage of people
entitled to BPL status should be increased to at least 50 per cent.”

Others say that the law will be futile if it does not tone up the public
distribution system (PDS). Devinder Sharma, chairman of the Forum for
Biotechnology and Food Security, a collective of scientists, economists,
farmers and policymakers, says that what plagues the proper implementation
of existing schemes is the not-so-transparent PDS. “The Act should try and
reform the public distribution system. It is one of the most corrupt systems
in the country,” he says.

Saxena agrees. “Many policies have failed because of the deficiencies in the
public distribution system. The government procures 40 million tonnes of
food grains from farmers. And this amount needs a market so it needs to be
given to the poor at a subsidised rate. So the PDS needs massive reform.”

Experts also suggest that the law ought to look at the idea of direct cash
transfer, that is, providing cash in lieu of the amount of food grains a
family is entitled to. “As I have mentioned in my paper, one needs to
experiment with the idea of direct cash transfer in places where there is a
good banking facility. You can then see what people prefer — PDS or direct
cash transfer.”

Right now, there is every indication that the government means business when
it comes to the NFSA. It has expressed its desire to work closely with
activists in order to come up with a draft bill that is satisfactory to all.
“Apart from securing entitlements, the legislation should also have
provisions for vulnerable groups. We have come up with a draft that will be
submitted to the ministry after our July 11 meeting in Delhi,” reveals
Trilochan Pandey, secretariat, Right to Food Campaign, New Delhi.

Activists who have been campaigning hard to ensure food security for India’s
toiling masses feel that the law is long overdue. “The government should
have brought in such a law earlier. But it’s better late than never. Now the
policymakers should think of policies that will ensure the judicious
implementation of the law,” says Sharma.