Prime Minister Manmohan Singh hands out first unique identity numbers

Ten adivasis from the tribal hamlet of Tembhli today became the first to receive the Unique Identity Numbers from Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Congress chief Sonia Gandhi, who said this would help the poor get the benefits of welfare projects.

Singh and Gandhi distributed the first ten 'Adhaar' cards of Unique Identification Authority of India to ten residents of the tribal hamlet at a function attended by Maharashtra Governor K Shankaranarayanan, Chief Minister Ashok Chavan, Planning Commission Deputy Chairman Montek Singh Alhuwalia and UIDAI chief Nandan Nilekani.

Addressing the function, the prime minister said the issuing of unique identity cards is a beginning of a big effort for the welfare of the common man.

"The poor did not have any identity proof. Due to this shortcoming, they could not open bank accounts or get ration cards. They could not avail the benefits of government welfare programmes because of this and many times, these benefits were pocketed by others," Singh said.

He said those who are economically and socially backward will be the biggest beneficiaries of this programme.

"We will give every opportunity to live a dignified life to our poor, scheduled castes and scheduled tribes people," he said.

Singh also said the rolling out of the unique numbers displayed a symbol of a new and modern India. "We are moving fast in the field of technology. Nowhere in the world, technology has been used in such a big way. I hope every citizen will get this number very soon," he said.

Gandhi also echoed similar views saying the unique identification numbers will help plug the loopholes in the Public Distribution System (PDS). "The problem of fake ration cards will be over now," she said.

"I consider it a historic and effect step for providing benefits of welfare schemes to those who are poor and marginalised," Gandhi said.

The foundation of the policy and schemes of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh led UPA government is to to empower those who are "poor and deprived", she said.

She said the UPA government brought several legislations including Right to Information, Mahatma Gandhi NREGA for the empowerment of people and its aim "is to bring Food Security Act also".

Forest Rights Act is a law to give right to tribals and forest dwellers on the land which they were cultivating for generations. This is such a legislation which is giving them freedom from atrocities committed on them for years.

Gandhi, however, noted that to change face of villages and panchayats, its is not adequate to bring legislations only.

"The biggest challenge facing us is that they (laws) are implemented and their benefit should directly reach to those who are entitled," she added

We'll respect court decision on free grain for poor: Pawar

August 31, 2010:The Union government will respect the Supreme Court's decision on free distribution of grain to the poor, Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar said in the Lok Sabha on Tuesday.

“This government respects the decisions of all courts and will also pay attention to the members' suggestions,” he said, responding to the issue raised by Leader of the Opposition Sushma Swaraj. “Whatever needs to be done will be done.”

The matter was raised in the afternoon after the Supreme Court clarified that it ordered free distribution of grain to the poor in its August 12 directive, instead of allowing it to rot in godowns, and it was not a suggestion as being made out by Mr. Pawar.

Mr. Pawar said he heard about the Court's observations from the media and made attempts to get a copy of its order. “It would be improper on my part to make any comment without reading the official order of the Supreme Court, as it could even amount to misleading the House.”

There was a brief adjournment, as members demanded a reply from the Minister, who was not in the House, but came in subsequently. Ms. Swaraj took up the issue after a calling attention moved by Harsimrat Kaur (Akali Dal) on rejection of 40 lakh tonnes of PAU-201 rice variety by the Food Safety Standards Authority of India (FSSA).

The calling attention saw a heated debate and an adjournment in the pre-lunch session, with the Akali Dal members twice trooping into the well of the House, dissatisfied with Health and Family Welfare Minister Ghulam Nabi Azad's reply that the report of an expert committee was likely to be submitted by the second week of September. The FSSA rejected it, citing provisions of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.

Food security: The Supreme Court steps in

, Aug 31, 2010,Last fortnight, the Supreme Court finally stepped in to suggest policy changes relating to food security, primarily because India’s legislators chose to abdicate their responsibility.

It recognised the fact that funds were being squandered.It wanted to redress a situation reeking of utter disregard for citizens (who eventually end up paying for the negligence of the elected representatives).

That explains why the Supreme Court asked the government why it has not formulated rules that subsidised grain be provided only to those families which are identified as ‘below the poverty line’ (BPL) by the government’s own unique identity (UID) programme.

The court also asked the legislators to come up with a policy that excluded those living above the poverty line (APL) from getting grain at subsidised prices.

By linking the UID with the public distribution system, the court hopes that the government will create a policy that ensures that the subsidised grain actually reaches the targeted poor.

Currently there are several studies which show that much of the grain actually gets diverted by some unscrupulous traders, in connivance with government officials, and make illegitimate profits by selling this subsidised grain in the open markets.

The court’s intervention was sorely needed.This is because India is likely to face a food shortage of a massive magnitude in less than three years’ time.And unless steps are taken to grow more food, and ensure that food-destruction does not take place, India could be ripe for food riots. But more of that later.

In fact, just a couple of days earlier (on 28 July, 2010), the Supreme Court also directed the government to ensure that grain should never be allowed to rot but should instead be distributed among the hungry. It also directed its commissioner to submit a report on the rotting of foodgrain in six states.

Already there is talk about the destruction being wanton, in order to erase evidence which would show that substandard grain was procured at very high prices.Whether such reports are true or not is certainly a matter for further investigation.

It may be recalled that the NDA government in 2002, in order to prevent such destruction of value in agriculture, announced its decision to set up modern (top-loading-bottom-evacuation grain storage facilities.A pilot project, funded by the World Bank, was also awarded to private players on the basis of international competitive bids.

The pilot project involved setting up storage facilities at multiple locations for storing a total of 600,000 tonnes of grain. The plan was to follow up this project with many more such storage units on a public-private-partnership basis.But the current government clearly did not see the protection of grain as its priority, and the project has been almost forgotten.

What is equally worrying is that the government’s proposed Food Security Bill (FSB) is rapidly becoming a Food Supply Bill, in much the same way as the Right to Education Act is likely to become a Right to Enrolment Act.Emphasis is being paid to how much grain should be distributed, and not on how much should be produced, properly stored, and accounted for.

The policymakers who are still giving finishing touches to the Proposed FSB have spenta lot of time debating whether BPL members should get 25 kg of grain or 35 kg.As of now the view of the Congress Party is that it will ensure that each BPL family gets 35 kg of wheat or rice per month at a subsidized rate of Rs.3 per kg.

This is against the prevailing market prices of around Rs.15 a kg.In case a BPL family does not get the grain, the government wants to set up a Central Food Security Fund to monetarily compensate the BPL families in a manner to enable the family to purchase the grain from the open market.No clear details are as yet available about how this Targeted Public Distribution System (TPDS) is to function.

Critics of the government’s policy point out how, in programme after programme, the government has chosen to announce distribution packages, rather than focus on augmenting supply and collection.

“This is what happened when the government waived loans,” says a banker who prefers to remain anonymous.“This is what happened with food security as well.”

Critics of the loan-waiver scheme include authorities like Nobel Muhammed Yunus, the Nobel Prize for Peace winner in 2006.He is on record stating that if a government wants to help farmers with money, a better way out is to give the farmers cash, and then ask them to repay the loans to banks.

Teaching people not to repay loans is a dangerous game, with long-term deleterious effects for the economy and its banking sector.

But with a food shortage just round the corner, the government may have no option but to take a serious re-look at all these leakages.If it does not address the food shortage, and the causes that build up inflationary pressures, it might even.

Can't follow tips on foodgrain storage, Supreme Court told

2010-09-06 20:30:00
The central government Monday told the Supreme Court that it could not follow its suggestion to procure foodgrains in proportion to storage capacity as it had to cater to the farmers by providing them minimum support price (MSP) for their produce.

The government said that the 'procurement policy of the government of India has twin objectives of ensuring minimum support price to the farmers and meeting the requirements of the food grains for the public distribution system (PDS) and other welfare schemes'.

The court was told that if procurement agencies of both the central government and state governments were not to lift the farmers' produce then in peak procurement season, they (farmers) would be left at the mercy of traders who may not pay adequate price.

The inadequate returns would be a disincentive for the farmers to sow these crops which in turn would 'drastically impact food security of the nation'.

The central government told this to an apex court bench of Justice Dalveer Bhandari and Justice Deepak Verma in its comprehensive affidavit filed in pursuance to the court's directions seeking information on its procurement and storage policy and public distribution system for the below poverty line (BPL), above poverty line (APL) and Antyodaya Anna Yojna (AAY) ration card holders.

The court directions of Aug 31 came during the hearing on a petition filed by the People's Union for Civil Liberties pointing to the wastage of foodgrains because of improper storage, exposure to vagaries of nature and corruption in the functioning of the PDS.

The court has also received a report which has pointed to corruption in the functioning of the PDS.

The government's affidavit did not directly say so but it made it clear that it was not inclined to heed the apex court's suggestion to supply foodgrains free to the poor.

The government said that under AAY the element of subsidy was 87.05 percent in case of wheat and 85.32 percent in respect of rice.

For the BPL card holders, the subsidy component was 73.12 percent and 72.35 percent for wheat and the rice, respectively.

The central government said the abolition of APL category of card holders was not desirable in view of the food security law under consideration of the government.

The court was told that the National Advisory Council was already examining the entire issue of food security and the proposed legislation would be finalized soon.

The affidavit was filed by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution Joint Secretary C. Vishwanath.

Supreme Court order on grain distribution interprets Article 21: BJP

The BJP today reacted sharply to prime minister's statement on the issue of distributing food grains free to the poor, saying the Supreme Court was not delving into policy making but interpreting the provision of the Constitution on right to life.

"I am amazed. Prime minister talks about policy. I would most humbly inform him that the Supreme Court has the right to interpret Right to Life as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court has not talked about the policy," BJP chief spokesperson Ravishankar Prasad told reporters here.

He was referring to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's remarks that the apex court should not get into the "realm of policy formulation".

Prasad said since the government has admitted that food grains were rotting at several godowns, it would be better if it was distributed among the BPL families especially during situations like drought and flood.

"How can food grains be distributed free to an estimated 37% of the population which lives below the poverty line," the prime minister said during an interaction with editors.

Leader of the Opposition in Lok Sabha Sushma Swaraj was also critical of the prime minister's remarks.

"If the government cannot distribute food grains then why are they talking about a food security bill. As for how to distribute the foodgrains, they can learn from the Chhattisgarh government. The rations are distributed on the seventh of every month and MLAs and public servants ensure it is done smoothly and fairly," Swaraj said.

The food security should be extended to APL families also, she added.

Do not get into policy formulation: PM to SC

New Delhi, Sept 6 (PTI) Prime Minister Manmohan Singh today gently told the Supreme Court, which recently directed the government to distribute foodgrains free to the poor, not not to get into the "realm of policy formulation".

How can foodgrains be distributed free to an estimated 37 per cent of the population which lives below the poverty line, Singh asserted during an interaction with editors at his residence here.

It was not not possible to give free foodgrains to all the poor, he said while answering a question on the order of the the apex court which had directed Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar to distribute foodgrains to the poor instead of allowing them to rot.

Five-judge bench to hear plea on law on free education

New Delhi, Sep 6 (PTI) The Supreme Court today referred to the five-judge constitution bench a bunch of petitions challenging the validity of the law providing free and compulsory education.

A bench headed by Chief Justice S H Kapadia said that the the matter will be put before a larger bench of five judges to pass direction on the petitions challenging the constitutional validity of provisions in the Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act.

The petitions claimed that the Act providing free and compulsory education was "unconstitutional" and "violative" of fundamental rights.

The Act made free and compulsory education a fundamental right for children between 6-14 years, besides mandating that even private educational institutions have to reserve 25 per cent of the seats for children from poor families.