FOCUS
NATIONAL FOOD SECURITY ACT
Having our godowns full and its silos bursting at the seams, does it represents food security? It is a question of multiple dimension. 60 million tonnes of grain in the government warehouse and the seemingly endless household food insecurity represents the dichotomy of India’s weird situation where millions of Indians still go to bed hungry or half hungry while foodgrains rot in open and rodents make merry in the FCI godowns. They could be in hundreds of millions of people. After all ours is a country of around 1200 million people. Even 10% represents some 120 million, and the truth is, the number of people who go to bed with little or no food is far greater than this 10%. Rich and poor are found in all countries. While rich are rich everywhere poor are of varying degrees. A poor in U.S. is not the same in Sub-Saharan Africa or India. In U.S. or in Europe a poor may not go hungry even for a part of the day. Same cannot be true of Africa or India where hunger among poor is lurking all over. According to Planning Commission 27% Indians are poor. But Prof. Arjun Sengupta says its 77%. The truth lies between these two extremes. In a country as vast as India with such huge population, always had equally huge problem on hand, of feeding its teeming millions. Hence the necessity of securing the production and acquisition was always of paramount importance.
The need to augment food production was recognised even during colonial days. However, the separation of canal irrigated areas of Sind and Punjab from India, in favour of Pakistan, caused rupture in the food production chain. Then the rice producing low lands in East Bengal too was lost to India which really added to the aggravation of food scarcity.
Although in the wake of independence, food controls were dismantled, it was reintroduced with statutory rationing in 1948. The first five year plan started in 1952, hence, gave priority to agriculture in development planning, which accepted as the basis of government policy, the principle of ‘Food for All’. Food scarcity persisted through fiftees into the sixtees. Large scale imports of wheat from the U.S. vide their PL480 was resorted to. Monsoon failures exacerbated the scarcity. In a situation of food scarcity, the people who suffer most are the BPL families, with less and less food availability at more and more price. For those who live near the margin of subsistence and beyond, a certain minimum supply of food grains at affordable price constitutes the bed-rock of the standard of living. The state in its welfare measures must necessarily ensure that this segment, provided with the minimum liveable supply at a price fixed to ensure no unpleasant surprises. Thus an assured distribution system became imperative. Fair price shops of the fiftees and sixtees were the product of government policy. However this FPS were widely criticised for its failure to serve truly the BPL families, its urban bias, neglect of rural poor, non-transparency in stock and sales to people. In 1997, Janata government of HD Deve Gowda, formally launched a modified version of distribution of food grains called TPDS (Targeted Public Distribution System)
In 1997, TDPS, envisaged a target of 320 million people under BPL category, with 10 kg of food grains at subsidised price; supplied through FPS. These FPS had to display number of BPL families to be served with quantity of grains and its prices, with a role for the local authorities at Taluk and Block levels.
Despite good intensions, the problem with TDPS persisted, basically with lot of BPL families’ inability to pay even the subsidised prices and the diversion of stock from the PDS to the black market. There were also many instances of unscrupulous shop keepers bringing in poor quality food grains, to divert the better quality supplies from the PDS. The problem appears to have increased over the years. Hence a better system of provision of food with increased quantity and other checks to improve the delivery system was thought of by the government of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. The National Advisory Council, chaired by the Congress President, took upon itself the responsibility of drafting what is called as ‘National Food Security Act 2010’. While the Act gave definitions to most terminologies used in the operation of the act, three most important were 1) Food Security 2) Social Audit 3) Vigilance Committee.
Food Security Act provided the minimum quantity of food to be supplied at 25kgs of rice/wheat per BPL family at a subsidised price (presently Rs: 3/-per kg) fixed from time to time by the government. Social Audit provided for an informed evaluation of the delivery system of the act, whereas vigilance committees were to be formed to oversee the working of the FPS under TDPS, consisting of local stake holders and government functionaries.
While accountability and transparency in the PDS was always a problem due to human avarice, the latest draft act provided that all PDS related records are to be placed in the public domain and to be kept open to public scrutiny.
But the guarantee of 25kg as proposed by the present legislation is less than the 35kgs these BPL families were already getting. While it is laudable that enactment of law makes this entitlement a right, the reduction in the quantity of grain has failed to enthuse the Congress Party leadership, and rightly so. Pranab Mukherjee, the chairman of the drafting committee, is a good politician who always provided an escape route in whatever he does. But unfortunately this escape route is against justice and against powerless people most of the time. By making it as a right of BPL families to claim 25kg food grains, he was only saving 10kgs for the government, on its existing commitment. While 35kgs were already there, Pranab Mukherjee had only to guarantee that quantity, without increasing the burden to the government. This is where the worry is all about. Although government always flaunted to the media, that there is buffer stock, somehow for all these years, this stock did not reach the intended target. Like Jean Dreze says "Instead of ‘whining’ about food inflation, and blaming ‘hoarders’ for it, the government would do well to release some of the gigantic food stocks". Thus it has always been the delivery system that failed. There was no lack of intention to help the needy. But the intention to guarantee the delivery, that it reached the group concerned, was lacking. It was always the same story of Rajeev Gandhi’s famous phrase ‘15 paise reaching the people and 85 paise getting lost in transit.’
Now that there is going to be a law, which is enforceable, it is indeed a welcome development. However as it is expressed in the media, there are indeed apprehensions that it is the delivery system that needs to be made fool proof. The PDS indeed need to be strengthened, so that the good intention of successive governments is translated into a heart warming reality. Nowhere in the world, anybody would want its poor to suffer. But intention has to be backed by strength of character. Yes our national character is phoney, hence the backing of law is needed to support the good intention.
Thus the Public Distribution System becomes the core of the new legislation, if the Food Security Act has to be relevant. Of course there have been other objections too to the draft legislation, besides the reduction in quantity and the PDS. Congress President and the current National Advisory Council (NAC) Chairperson wanted the number of BPL beneficiaries to increase, so also to bring women, children, the elderly and the urban poor into its ambit. Also demanded was a monitoring and a grievance redressal system. This desire of the NAC Chairperson was based on the Right to Food campaign initiated by Jean Dreze, a Professor at Delhi School of Economics, who is also a member of NAC.
Writing in The Hindu, on his experience about dysfunctional PDS of Sarguja district in Chattisgarh some 10 years ago he said "The whole system looked like it has been designed to fail. Ration shops were in the hands of corrupt private dealers, who made money by selling PDS grain in the open market. People were powerless to argue when a dealer told them that, ‘for no fault of his, the stocks were bare’. Hunger haunted the land", and he adds, that despite raging multiple negatives achieved by the Chattisgarh government in different domain, it is to the credit of this government that it succeeded in reviving the PDS very significantly. Recounting his recent trip to Sarguja he writes, commending the breakthrough in PDS, "What is more, the system is working everywhere we went, we found that people were getting 35kg of grain on time, every month. For people who live on the margins of subsistence, this is a dream."
Yes, where there is will there is a way. This is what Jean Dreze, had seen in Sarguja district. Thus it is eminently possible to make things happen if one sincerely so decides. Hence quite logically he feels that the proposed National Food Security Act represents a unique opportunity to achieve similar gain across the country.
While PDS is very crucial for any success of this proposed act, what is equally important is the tag of BPL. All these years of exercise and experimentation could not ensure a fool proof and reliable identification and listing of BPL families. Central Government is desirous of raising the poverty line to include more families to be included under BPL tag. Manipulation, power equations and influence peddling have always been the bane of BPL listing, in which many deserving were left out and many in the APL got themselves included in BPL.
Jyothi Thottam from New Delhi writes in the TIME magazine "Visit any Indian slum and you’ll often find spotless floors, gleaming pots and clean school uniforms hanging from the wall. The inhabitants have food, a roof and the means to educate their children. Those are the indicators India has often used to distinguish the merely hard up from the truly poor-an under class, India’s Planning Commission has reckoned it to be at 37% of its 1.2 billion population". Rural poverty according to her is "the ability to spend Rs. 450/- per month per person, based on which government is trying to widen the pool of people eligible for food subsidies." Jean Dreze similarly feels that instead of BPL/APL divide which has the potential of manufacturing a class conflict, ‘why not have Universal Public Distribution System?’ This way, one can, not only ensure that "there shall be no more cold hearths and empty stomachs. For those at the risk of hunger, the PDS will be a life line and for others it will be a form of income support and social security".
Here, it is important to dwell on the grain handling agency, the Food Corporation of India (FCI). It is the agency procuring, storing and transporting the grain to the point of distribution. It is an agency under Ministry of Food and Agriculture. For long FCI was being criticised for its inept handling. In recent weeks media has shown shocking photographs of food stocks rotting in the open even as stories of chronic hunger and starvation keep coming in. While FCI talks about lack of space in Rajastahan, story is incredibly bizarre. FCI godowns are being used to store liquor while food stocks rot outside. Suddenly Food and Agricultural ministry wakes up from their slumber, and some 9 officers of FCI have been suspended for dereliction of duty, informs the media.
Bungling by FCI top brass was so stupid, they reportedly ‘de-hired’ 170 lakh metric tonnes of storage space during 2006-09. This was done taking into account the projection of procurement at lowest levels instead of peak levels. The outcome is clearly visible, foodgrains rotting in open while millions sleep hungry. To make matters worse, the central government is not releasing stocks while the stock in hand is in excess of the available space and the harvest season is almost round the corner. "The most logical way", feels Biraj Patnaik, the Principal Advisor to the Supreme Court Commissioners in the Right to Food case, "of dealing with this situation would be to immediately release the foodgrains into PDS, for both BPL & APL families. This would also contain inflation." Rejecting the proposal of Food Ministry to release 5 lakh metric tonne every month to APL families, Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee reasoned that "Its likely to extend the food subsidy by Rs: 5000/- crores. This sounds very myopic, especially when storage can take away Rs. 2000 crores added to that is the usual all kinds of waste of foodgrains.
Coming to nutrition, Mr Dreze feels that ‘even in universal version of the PDS, nutrition impact shall be limited, since it shall not really affect young children.’ Nutrition as a part of the food intake is needed for children in their crucial age group, when what is needed is not more food grains but more nutritious food including animal protein. They need to be of better health at birth which requires expectant mothers to be better fed rather than more fed, which can lead to better breast feeding practices, which in turn can lead to better health of infants.
In the ultimate analysis, what is relevant for human health and productivity is nutrition security at the level of each child, woman and man.
The governmental intervention ICDS (Integrated Child Development Scheme) of 1970, which tries to include nutrition, health and education for small children from vulnerable sections of society has to be combined with PDS, for the effective redressal of the malnutrition among growing children.
In this context, the Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS) needs to be looked at, along with Public Distribution System of food grains. ICDS started in late 70s is probably worlds most unique and comprehensive programme to address malnutrition in children below six years. The programme provides a package of services, comprising supplementary nutrition, immunisation, health check up, referral services to children below six years of age, besides expectant and nursing mothers. The programme also include non-formal pre-school education to children in the age group of 3-6 years and envisages health and nutrition education to women in the age group of 15-45 years. It has been recognised for its positive impact on the planned target group and for the enhanced child survival rate.
Ofcourse, this is not likely to come cheap. This probable comprehensive National Food & Nutrition Security Act can probably cost around 100 thousand crores according to one estimate. It may sound huge, but Mr Dreze writes "One hundred thousand crore rupees is just about 1.5% of India’s GDP". "Is that an excessive price to pay to protect everyone from hunger and malnutrition?" he asks. Besides, according to a reliable source, the feeding our millions through PDS shall take only 10 million tonnes per year, and FCI reportedly has a stock of 60 million tonnes! In conclusion Mr Dreze writes "None of this, of course, will be of much use unless the PDS can be made to work. Universalisation itself will help in that respect, as argued earlier. But systemic reforms of the PDS are required, building on the wealth of insights that have been gained from recent initiatives to restore transparency and accountability in various domains. If Chhattisgarh can turn the PDS around, why not other States?
The National Food Security Act is not going to eliminate malnutrition in one go. But it could be the end of the hunger, and the beginning of a new movement for the realisation of everyone’s right to good nutrition. Let all this be clear before the idea is dismissed as unaffordable."
Or will our Finance Minister puts his fork in the possible passing of this very important piece of act? May be his political boss the NAC Chairperson shall have the last word. With huge electoral gains possible, the comprehensive reforms in the food economy may after all come. Lets hope it does.
The need to augment food production was recognised even during colonial days. However, the separation of canal irrigated areas of Sind and Punjab from India, in favour of Pakistan, caused rupture in the food production chain. Then the rice producing low lands in East Bengal too was lost to India which really added to the aggravation of food scarcity.
Although in the wake of independence, food controls were dismantled, it was reintroduced with statutory rationing in 1948. The first five year plan started in 1952, hence, gave priority to agriculture in development planning, which accepted as the basis of government policy, the principle of ‘Food for All’. Food scarcity persisted through fiftees into the sixtees. Large scale imports of wheat from the U.S. vide their PL480 was resorted to. Monsoon failures exacerbated the scarcity. In a situation of food scarcity, the people who suffer most are the BPL families, with less and less food availability at more and more price. For those who live near the margin of subsistence and beyond, a certain minimum supply of food grains at affordable price constitutes the bed-rock of the standard of living. The state in its welfare measures must necessarily ensure that this segment, provided with the minimum liveable supply at a price fixed to ensure no unpleasant surprises. Thus an assured distribution system became imperative. Fair price shops of the fiftees and sixtees were the product of government policy. However this FPS were widely criticised for its failure to serve truly the BPL families, its urban bias, neglect of rural poor, non-transparency in stock and sales to people. In 1997, Janata government of HD Deve Gowda, formally launched a modified version of distribution of food grains called TPDS (Targeted Public Distribution System)
In 1997, TDPS, envisaged a target of 320 million people under BPL category, with 10 kg of food grains at subsidised price; supplied through FPS. These FPS had to display number of BPL families to be served with quantity of grains and its prices, with a role for the local authorities at Taluk and Block levels.
Despite good intensions, the problem with TDPS persisted, basically with lot of BPL families’ inability to pay even the subsidised prices and the diversion of stock from the PDS to the black market. There were also many instances of unscrupulous shop keepers bringing in poor quality food grains, to divert the better quality supplies from the PDS. The problem appears to have increased over the years. Hence a better system of provision of food with increased quantity and other checks to improve the delivery system was thought of by the government of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. The National Advisory Council, chaired by the Congress President, took upon itself the responsibility of drafting what is called as ‘National Food Security Act 2010’. While the Act gave definitions to most terminologies used in the operation of the act, three most important were 1) Food Security 2) Social Audit 3) Vigilance Committee.
Food Security Act provided the minimum quantity of food to be supplied at 25kgs of rice/wheat per BPL family at a subsidised price (presently Rs: 3/-per kg) fixed from time to time by the government. Social Audit provided for an informed evaluation of the delivery system of the act, whereas vigilance committees were to be formed to oversee the working of the FPS under TDPS, consisting of local stake holders and government functionaries.
While accountability and transparency in the PDS was always a problem due to human avarice, the latest draft act provided that all PDS related records are to be placed in the public domain and to be kept open to public scrutiny.
But the guarantee of 25kg as proposed by the present legislation is less than the 35kgs these BPL families were already getting. While it is laudable that enactment of law makes this entitlement a right, the reduction in the quantity of grain has failed to enthuse the Congress Party leadership, and rightly so. Pranab Mukherjee, the chairman of the drafting committee, is a good politician who always provided an escape route in whatever he does. But unfortunately this escape route is against justice and against powerless people most of the time. By making it as a right of BPL families to claim 25kg food grains, he was only saving 10kgs for the government, on its existing commitment. While 35kgs were already there, Pranab Mukherjee had only to guarantee that quantity, without increasing the burden to the government. This is where the worry is all about. Although government always flaunted to the media, that there is buffer stock, somehow for all these years, this stock did not reach the intended target. Like Jean Dreze says "Instead of ‘whining’ about food inflation, and blaming ‘hoarders’ for it, the government would do well to release some of the gigantic food stocks". Thus it has always been the delivery system that failed. There was no lack of intention to help the needy. But the intention to guarantee the delivery, that it reached the group concerned, was lacking. It was always the same story of Rajeev Gandhi’s famous phrase ‘15 paise reaching the people and 85 paise getting lost in transit.’
Now that there is going to be a law, which is enforceable, it is indeed a welcome development. However as it is expressed in the media, there are indeed apprehensions that it is the delivery system that needs to be made fool proof. The PDS indeed need to be strengthened, so that the good intention of successive governments is translated into a heart warming reality. Nowhere in the world, anybody would want its poor to suffer. But intention has to be backed by strength of character. Yes our national character is phoney, hence the backing of law is needed to support the good intention.
Thus the Public Distribution System becomes the core of the new legislation, if the Food Security Act has to be relevant. Of course there have been other objections too to the draft legislation, besides the reduction in quantity and the PDS. Congress President and the current National Advisory Council (NAC) Chairperson wanted the number of BPL beneficiaries to increase, so also to bring women, children, the elderly and the urban poor into its ambit. Also demanded was a monitoring and a grievance redressal system. This desire of the NAC Chairperson was based on the Right to Food campaign initiated by Jean Dreze, a Professor at Delhi School of Economics, who is also a member of NAC.
Writing in The Hindu, on his experience about dysfunctional PDS of Sarguja district in Chattisgarh some 10 years ago he said "The whole system looked like it has been designed to fail. Ration shops were in the hands of corrupt private dealers, who made money by selling PDS grain in the open market. People were powerless to argue when a dealer told them that, ‘for no fault of his, the stocks were bare’. Hunger haunted the land", and he adds, that despite raging multiple negatives achieved by the Chattisgarh government in different domain, it is to the credit of this government that it succeeded in reviving the PDS very significantly. Recounting his recent trip to Sarguja he writes, commending the breakthrough in PDS, "What is more, the system is working everywhere we went, we found that people were getting 35kg of grain on time, every month. For people who live on the margins of subsistence, this is a dream."
Yes, where there is will there is a way. This is what Jean Dreze, had seen in Sarguja district. Thus it is eminently possible to make things happen if one sincerely so decides. Hence quite logically he feels that the proposed National Food Security Act represents a unique opportunity to achieve similar gain across the country.
While PDS is very crucial for any success of this proposed act, what is equally important is the tag of BPL. All these years of exercise and experimentation could not ensure a fool proof and reliable identification and listing of BPL families. Central Government is desirous of raising the poverty line to include more families to be included under BPL tag. Manipulation, power equations and influence peddling have always been the bane of BPL listing, in which many deserving were left out and many in the APL got themselves included in BPL.
Jyothi Thottam from New Delhi writes in the TIME magazine "Visit any Indian slum and you’ll often find spotless floors, gleaming pots and clean school uniforms hanging from the wall. The inhabitants have food, a roof and the means to educate their children. Those are the indicators India has often used to distinguish the merely hard up from the truly poor-an under class, India’s Planning Commission has reckoned it to be at 37% of its 1.2 billion population". Rural poverty according to her is "the ability to spend Rs. 450/- per month per person, based on which government is trying to widen the pool of people eligible for food subsidies." Jean Dreze similarly feels that instead of BPL/APL divide which has the potential of manufacturing a class conflict, ‘why not have Universal Public Distribution System?’ This way, one can, not only ensure that "there shall be no more cold hearths and empty stomachs. For those at the risk of hunger, the PDS will be a life line and for others it will be a form of income support and social security".
Here, it is important to dwell on the grain handling agency, the Food Corporation of India (FCI). It is the agency procuring, storing and transporting the grain to the point of distribution. It is an agency under Ministry of Food and Agriculture. For long FCI was being criticised for its inept handling. In recent weeks media has shown shocking photographs of food stocks rotting in the open even as stories of chronic hunger and starvation keep coming in. While FCI talks about lack of space in Rajastahan, story is incredibly bizarre. FCI godowns are being used to store liquor while food stocks rot outside. Suddenly Food and Agricultural ministry wakes up from their slumber, and some 9 officers of FCI have been suspended for dereliction of duty, informs the media.
Bungling by FCI top brass was so stupid, they reportedly ‘de-hired’ 170 lakh metric tonnes of storage space during 2006-09. This was done taking into account the projection of procurement at lowest levels instead of peak levels. The outcome is clearly visible, foodgrains rotting in open while millions sleep hungry. To make matters worse, the central government is not releasing stocks while the stock in hand is in excess of the available space and the harvest season is almost round the corner. "The most logical way", feels Biraj Patnaik, the Principal Advisor to the Supreme Court Commissioners in the Right to Food case, "of dealing with this situation would be to immediately release the foodgrains into PDS, for both BPL & APL families. This would also contain inflation." Rejecting the proposal of Food Ministry to release 5 lakh metric tonne every month to APL families, Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee reasoned that "Its likely to extend the food subsidy by Rs: 5000/- crores. This sounds very myopic, especially when storage can take away Rs. 2000 crores added to that is the usual all kinds of waste of foodgrains.
Coming to nutrition, Mr Dreze feels that ‘even in universal version of the PDS, nutrition impact shall be limited, since it shall not really affect young children.’ Nutrition as a part of the food intake is needed for children in their crucial age group, when what is needed is not more food grains but more nutritious food including animal protein. They need to be of better health at birth which requires expectant mothers to be better fed rather than more fed, which can lead to better breast feeding practices, which in turn can lead to better health of infants.
In the ultimate analysis, what is relevant for human health and productivity is nutrition security at the level of each child, woman and man.
The governmental intervention ICDS (Integrated Child Development Scheme) of 1970, which tries to include nutrition, health and education for small children from vulnerable sections of society has to be combined with PDS, for the effective redressal of the malnutrition among growing children.
In this context, the Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS) needs to be looked at, along with Public Distribution System of food grains. ICDS started in late 70s is probably worlds most unique and comprehensive programme to address malnutrition in children below six years. The programme provides a package of services, comprising supplementary nutrition, immunisation, health check up, referral services to children below six years of age, besides expectant and nursing mothers. The programme also include non-formal pre-school education to children in the age group of 3-6 years and envisages health and nutrition education to women in the age group of 15-45 years. It has been recognised for its positive impact on the planned target group and for the enhanced child survival rate.
Ofcourse, this is not likely to come cheap. This probable comprehensive National Food & Nutrition Security Act can probably cost around 100 thousand crores according to one estimate. It may sound huge, but Mr Dreze writes "One hundred thousand crore rupees is just about 1.5% of India’s GDP". "Is that an excessive price to pay to protect everyone from hunger and malnutrition?" he asks. Besides, according to a reliable source, the feeding our millions through PDS shall take only 10 million tonnes per year, and FCI reportedly has a stock of 60 million tonnes! In conclusion Mr Dreze writes "None of this, of course, will be of much use unless the PDS can be made to work. Universalisation itself will help in that respect, as argued earlier. But systemic reforms of the PDS are required, building on the wealth of insights that have been gained from recent initiatives to restore transparency and accountability in various domains. If Chhattisgarh can turn the PDS around, why not other States?
The National Food Security Act is not going to eliminate malnutrition in one go. But it could be the end of the hunger, and the beginning of a new movement for the realisation of everyone’s right to good nutrition. Let all this be clear before the idea is dismissed as unaffordable."
Or will our Finance Minister puts his fork in the possible passing of this very important piece of act? May be his political boss the NAC Chairperson shall have the last word. With huge electoral gains possible, the comprehensive reforms in the food economy may after all come. Lets hope it does.
Comments