Stronger implementation mechanism, not Food Security Bill, can better feed hungry India

There is no dearth of talent in Indian bureaucracy, since the selection process is highly competitive, but the problem lies elsewhere. We have some innovative food security schemes like Antyodaya Anna yojana (AAY), Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS), Mid Day Meal Scheme (MDMS), Targeted Public Distribution System (TPDS), etc.. But the real problem is at the implementation stage. No matter how innovative the scheme is, if it is not able to deliver it’s benefits to targeted people, due to the hurdles in implementation, it’s of no use. The intentions of proposed Food Security Bill, no doubt, are novel and guided by principles of equality and justice, but if this becomes another scheme placed under the existing implementation mechanism, it will be a disaster for BPL families.

The Food Security Bill has proposed to,

1.  Provide 25kg of rice/wheat at Rs.3 per month. 
2. Benefit approximately 260 million Below Poverty Line (BPL) people.
3. Benefit the households headed by single women, HIV infected and mentally ill people, bonded labors, destitute etc..
4. Also, Senior citizen, single women and physically challenged can eat at ICDS centers or at Mid Day Meal in schools.
5. And policy makers have suggested that the construction workers, street vendors, rickshaw pullers, domestic workers, and all covered by Antyodaya Anna yojana (AAY) are also included.

It all sounds good and beneficial to common man. But there are hidden shortcomings under the scheme which we might end up realizing only when it fails to deliver to targeted people, as it happened in many good schemes before.

1. It proposes to provide only 25kg of rice/wheat per month which is 10kg less than the present 35kg of foodgrains provided under exising Public Distribution System.
2. More over, the bill, unlike what the Congress president had suggested in her note, limits itself to distribution of wheat and rice and does not take a wider view of nutritional security.
3. While the states have already distributed more than 10 crore BPL cards, the Centre's estimate of BPL families is way smaller, at 6.52 crore. And states have to bear the burden,  if they decide to pass on the benefits to all the poor.
4. This bill, if passed, would replace the existing food security schemes [?] and this may put thousands of BPL families in a difficult situation. (Ex: Coverage, both population wise and the variety of foodgrains provided).
5. There are possibilities of increased food subsidies amounting to Rs. 70,000 crore per annum if the Bill becomes a law.

On the other hand, It is important to realize that, we need a law to bring the benefits like those enshrined in the Food security bill to the common man. What we need at this point of time is strengthening of existing schemes and our public distribution system. Instead of better implementation of the already existing schemes such as TPDS, AAY, ICDS, MDMS, etc the Food Security law might make things unduly worse and unnecessarily complicated.

The core problems arising out of all the shortcomings of Food security bill are,

1. Identification of “actual” poor,
2. Inefficient Public Distribution System,
3. Corruption (middlemen),
4. Widening the food basket.

Most of these core problems are faced during the implementation stages. As Economic Survey articulates, “To assume that all those entrusted with the task of administering the programme will do so flawlessly and then to blame them when the system fails, is not the mark of good strategist. For effective policy, what is needed is to take people to be the way they are and then create ‘incentive-compatible interventions’”.

There are many ways overcome the implementation hurdles, some of them can be noted here. These alternative mechanisms were suggested in many policy discussions and the Economic Survey 2009-10.

The Coupon System:
The two planks of this system are,

1. The subsidy should be handed over directly to the households, instead of giving it to the PDS store-keeper in the form of cheap grain and then have him deliver it to the needy households.
2. The household should be given the freedom to choose which store it buys the food from.

Suppose, the BPL household gets the subsidy of Rs.X for wheat each month. Instead of giving this by charging the household less than the market price of wheat, it should be given coupons worth Rs.X which can be used at PDS stores in lieu of money when buying wheat. And the poor consumer should be allowed to exchange the coupons with foodgrains at any PDS store rather than at a pre-allocated store.

Such a system will be more impervious to corruption. Since the store owners will get the same price for grain from all buyers, poor and rich, he will have no incentive, to turn the poor buyers away, as happens currently.

The UID Scheme:
For the full success of this “coupons system” what is needed is an effective method of identifying the poor. This is where the unique identification (UID) system, an initiative already launched, comes into play. Since UID system will come into effect in 2012, it is possible to plan on a switch to a coupons system by 2012.

The way forward
Thus, the core problems of identifying the poor, corruption (middlemen) and hurdles in public distribution system can be checkmated by such alternative system. Under this alternative  implementation mechanism, even if the government substantially cuts back total size of the subsidy, we should still see more households getting more benefits than they currently do!

The proposed food security bill, if passed, without having foolproof implementation framework would be a disaster. The need of the hour is to strengthen the existing implementation mechanism before the Food Security Bill is enacted.

It's high time for the world to realize it's the time for Africa!

Way back in 2006-07, when I saw Blood Diamond for the first time, plight of children who were conscripted into the rebel forces dragged me into continued catharsis for a long time. Just for the fact that such things (still?) exist in Africa. Today, when I saw a picture of kids in Africa playing “soccer with a ball made out of plastic bags on a dirt pitch in a small town in Branfort, outside Bloemfontein, South Africa, where the historical legacy of the Boer war is inescapable.”

Two contrasting pictures!

That picture of Dia, son of Solomon Vandy in Blood Diamond and the picture of those kids playing soccer gives a contrasting picture of Africa. Africa has come a long way from those days of slave trade, to the days of Boer war and reached a time where it can host the biggest single sporting event in the human history. The story of this transition has seen many wars and subsequent socio-economic crisis, violation of human rights, extreme poverty and many humanitarian crisis. Africa sees FIFA World Cup 2010 as an all-important event marking the end of ‘transition’ and the beginning of what it hopes will be a post racial era. The world cup is the final stamp of world approval that will help Africa put a lid on the past.

FIFA World cup 2010 will be remembered, for a long time to come, for various reason.

Firstly, for Africa. World Cup has given the continent a chance to present a more positive image to the world. Glare of international publicity helps Africa to draw attention on various issues like Rwanda, HIV-AIDS, Starvation, Darfur, Poverty, etc. The mega event has provided a stage for Africa to project it’s culture. It will help endorse the South African idea of “Rainbow Nation” which is supported by greats like Nelson Mandela. This African opportunity can be best described in the words of South Africa's President, Mr Thabo Mbeki, "We want to ensure that one day, historians will reflect upon the 2010 FIFA World Cup as a moment when Africa stood tall and resolutely turned the tide on centuries of poverty and conflict. We want to show that Africa's time has come.”

Secondly, for Geo-political and economic importance of Africa. As president Mbeki said, time has come for Africa. “If we have the World Cup [here],” said one African official, “we will not be the same again.” Africa is important to the world and especially to developed nations not just for trade in growing African market, but also for various issues of social, economic, humanitarian and also security issues. Entire world is in the verge of realization that, without peaceful and poverty free Africa, one cannot think of peaceful world and prosperous global society. This world cup can take this message far and wide.

Thirdly, for FIFA, this event will expand it’s territory. “FIFA’s conscious effort to go global began in 1994 World cup. First time the world cup exited its traditional Europe-Latin America orbit. The commercial success of 1994 despite the absence of prior fan-base, encouraged further expansion and 2002 saw the world cup entering Asia for the first time with South Korea and Japan as co-hosts. World cup 2010 effectively marks the conquest of the globe by brand FIFA and its efforts to market the most popular game known to humanity [EPW, June 12, 2010 issue].”

Finally, for the future of soccer in Africa. "You can't find anyone in Africa who says, 'I don't care about football.' This time, many African players might have been made to “watch others score the goals”, but future will not be same for African teams. Many African players like Samuel Eto’t(Cameroon, Inter Milan), Didier Drogba(Chelsea), Micheal Essien(Ghana, Chelsea), Frederic Kanoute(Mali, Sevilla) and others have shown their talent in European leagues. This world cup will take the soccer to African corners where it was unheard of and we aren’t too far from seeing world class players from Africa.

“The World Cup is the tournament by which most countries measure themselves. It is the most visible way nations are represented on the global stage [Alan Bairner].” With South Africa acting as ambassador for the whole continent in this FIFA world cup, Africa can project a dynamic image of the continent despite prevailing poverty. As I mentioned before, without peaceful and poverty free Africa, one cannot think of peaceful world and prosperous global society. It’s high time for the world to realize that it’s the time for Africa!

What really motivates insurgents to bloody their hands?

On almost everyday in the last two months, I woke up with news stories depicting the brutality of insurgents. A 16 year old girl who fled the Maoist camp was allegedly raped by the Maoists [May 2]. Eight Indian paramilitary troopers were killed when Naxalite rebels blew up a police vehicle in the central state of Chhattisgarh [May 8]. Six villagers were murdered by slitting their throats by the maoists [May 16]. Two similar blasts in Dantewada killed over hundred security personnel [April 6 and May 17]. Gyaneshwari Express derailment before an oncoming goods train hit the loose carriages that killed at least 100 passengers [May 28]. Last two months were undoubtedly the bloodiest times in the history of insurgency and have given enough nightmares to Home minister and his team.

One thing that has always puzzled me is, the kind of motivation and support naxalites get for violence. We often say, "I will kill you!" in our day to day conversations, but most of us really don't have that 'driving force' to kill some one! Where does that come from? What really motivates the comrades in the red corridor to bloody their hands? The fundamental reasons like poverty, lack of education, lack of exposure to outside world, etc, have been used by our political leaders so often that, they no more appeal to our reasoning. But then, what really motivates the insurgents?

Other side of the story
“You cannot end the world’s injustices without stirring a revolution. No revolution happens without bloodying your hands. We are fighting a people’s war – a protracted people’s war”, says a maoist comrade. Another comrade says, their struggle is "to end exploitation, oppression and block aggressive moves of big corporates and the state. More importantly, it is a long term struggle projecting a different type of living."

What does he mean by "different type of living"? He says, "This type of living is nothing but sustainable development; people’s friendly education; growing emancipation of women; a halt to domination and plunder of foreign and Indian exploiters; a new culture that rebuilds Adivasi traditions anew instead of mocking them."

But what stops them to lead their life in that way? "Government thinks that Maoists/Naxalites are the real obstacles in the plans of government to open up the whole country to the ravages of globalization. This is why, the Central and State governments devote funds and forces to suppress them evenwhile they cut down on social services with the plea of resource shortage." "It is certainly true that a number of monopolies like Tata, Mittal and Vedanta are just waiting to plunder the resources of these areas. A good part of it is slated for export as raw material to imperialist countries. The only thing preventing this right now is the people’s war and politicised Adivasi masses led by the CPI (Maoist)."

Core issues
Thus, the question of "control over resource" is involved in the tussle between government and the Maoists/Naxalites. But, "this is neither the sole issue, nor even the main one", comrades emphasize. Privatisation, displacement, environmental destruction, atrocities of the security forces and many other issues surface every now and then to keep their struggle alive.

History of exploitation
Exploitation caused by "interference" in their lives or the misuse of official powers by security forces is not new. The construction of railways during British Raj worsened their misery. The railway contractors used brute force to employ them cheaply on construction work and even kidnapped and raped Santal women. The railways even took away the grains produced by Santals and created food shortage. Silent protest of Santals until 1855 did not help at all. They started attacking Zamindars and money lenders, disrupted rail traffic. The Santal declared the end of company rule and proclaimed Santal Raj.

In the post independence era, atrocities of security forces in the red corridor area is one of the important reason for their fight against security personnel. It is disappointing to note that, staggering 48,939 cases  were filed against policemen in 2008-2009 for their (alleged) atrocities according to the report by the Crime Records Bureau [More here]. Government's mega projects in Naxal/Maoist affected areas have been the reasons for conflict and violence. Many of the acts passed by the parliament on land reforms and tribal rights have had a negative impact on the lives of Adivasis in insurgency affected areas. Their struggles and demands are mainly focused on Privatisation, displacement, environmental destruction, atrocities of the security forces, etc.

Demands of Maoists/Naxalites
The main premise of the Naxals was the upliftment of the poor peasants and they wanted the land tiller to be the land owners. But with time, the list of their demands kept growing. Now, following are the main demands [HT]:

• A democratic atmosphere should be created in the State. The government should respect people's right to fight for their democratic demands.
• Implement reforms in the agricultural sector like Land Ceiling Act.
• Implement policies of industrialisation and other schemes based on local resources in place of the liberalisation, privatisation and globalisation policies being followed now.
• Recognise the tribal people's rights on forest.
• Form a separate Telangana State.
• Cessation of atrocities on Dalits.
• Recover money from the affluent who evade taxes.

Naxals never had a peaceful approach to attain their demands. They often resorted to violence. It's an irony that they soon started following what they had set out to crush--atrocities.

The way forward
There may be many factors motivating the Maoists/Naxals to create violence in our society. But nothing can justify the killing of innocent lives and security personnel. The so called "Gandhi with Gun"kind of reasoning is undoubtedly flawed and sounds like Gandhigir with Gundagiri! Something which can never co-exists. Such reasonings does not inspire the confidence of those who are trying to bring some peace in the lives of innocent people. There are certain genuine reasons behind Maoists/Naxalites struggle which definitely demand the attention from "mainstream government". Sooner the mainstream India accepts those genuine reasons, better it is for peaceful co-existence within our boundaries.

Two twitter fellas and the murky IPL controversy

Mr. Shashi Twittoor's wicket in the IPL controversy has opened a Pandora's box and heads have already started falling with Lalit Modi's departure. The IPL controversy is threatening to become the biggest cricket scandal ever, bigger even than the match fixing story of the 90s. Politicians, Sports Administrators, Cricketers, Bollywood Celebrities, Gangsters, Mafia, Businessmen, Models.. everyone seems to be involved. The Indian Premier League owes its success to millions of cricket fans across the world. Cricket lovers in India certainly deserve an explanation for all the mess that happened so far.

What is IPL controversy all about?
It all started with Mr. Tharoor's so called mentoring of the Kerala franchise. The war of words with (former) IPL boss, Lalit Modi, revealed that, Mr. Tharoor negotiated with Rendezvous for a higher share of "sweat equity" for his (girl) friend Sunanda Pushkar. This is not the first time Mr. Tharoor is helping someone who is very close to him. "When appointed head of the public affairs division in the UN headquarters in New York, he moved his girlfriend to the office next to him." More over, he is no stranger to controversies. His statements on Pandit Nehru's foreign policy, about Mahatma Gandhi, about India's stand on Indo-Pak relations and his "equivocal" comments on Twitter have created more problems and embarrassment to the government than solving the problems.

Note: Sweat equity is a term used to describe the contribution made to a project by people who contribute their time and effort.

Firstly, Mr. Tharoor's explanations on the sweat equity for Ms Pushkar was unsatisfactory. The minister had told Lok Sabha that “Rendezvous has clarified that it issued sweat equity to its associates in lieu of salary, which is a common practice around the world for start-up ventures”. It must be noted that, Ms Pushkar was awarded 19% stake in the 25% free equity owned by Rendezvous Sports World Pvt Ltd, the company that led the consortium that finally won the team. The value of Pushkar's stake is $15.82 million (about Rs 70 crore). However,

• According to Section 79A of the Companies Act 1956, a company can issue “sweat equity” only a year after commencing business. The Kochi franchise was registered only on March 17, 2010.
• A company cannot issue sweat equity shares for over 15% of the total paid-up capital in a year or shares of the value of Rs 5 crore, whichever is higher and the firm has to get prior approval of the government.  There is proof that Ms Pushkar got more than what is allowed under law.

More over, Mr Tharoor’s argument, that sweat equity was given to Ms Pushkar for providing “intellectual property” to the company, is flawed. For allotting shares for considerations other than tax, a company is supposed to conduct a valuation of the intellectual property. “It has to be carried out by a valuer before awarding sweat equity. In Ms Pushkar’s case, this was not carried out by the company. The explanation provided by the minister clearly shows his association with Rendezvous was not an indifferent one as he claims [Economic Times]. This triggered "trial by media" and Mr. Shashi Twittoor had to step down.

On the other hand, another Twitter fella, (former) IPL boss Lalit Modi, disclosed the names of some of the owners of the consortium that bought the Kochi franchise for $333 million. Modi has also alleged that he was told by Tharoor not to ask who these shareholders were. "The Franchise Agreement does have a confidentiality clause, which prohibits disclosure of the agreement, other than as might be required under the law, without the prior written agreement of both parties (the consortium and the IPL arm of the Board of Control for Cricket in India) [The Hindu]." Mr. Tharoor and the co-owner(s) of Kochi consortium have blamed Mr. Modi for betraying the confidentiality clause. The issue got even worst when a Kochi consortium co-owner has alleged that Mr. Modi offered the owners $50 million as a 'bribe' to withdraw from the bid after they had won it. The IPL Chairman has strenuously denied this.

This entire murky affair attracted the attention of the nation and raids by Income Tax department made the matters worst. BCCI and IPL governing council suddenly woke up (as if from deep sleep) and realized that there is something fishy in the entire gamut of IPL.

What really went wrong?
The primary purpose of corporate leadership is to create wealth legally and ethically. IPL management has given a decent burial to both legality and ethics. There are no well defined stringent rules to ensure the transparency in the management of IPL. There are serious doubts regarding the ownership of Kings XI Punjab, Rajasthan Royals, Kolkata Knight Riders franchises [More here and here]. There is enough proof to show Mr. Modi's finantial irregularities and his influence on bidding process [More here and here]. He ran the IPL like a one-man show. His dictator like leadership has struck coup de grâce to democratic decision making in corporate body (IPL). "He antagonised the BCCI general body, whose support he may need to remain in control. Mr. Modi embarrassed the Government on the apparent boycott of Pakistan players by team franchisees in the run-up to IPL3. As controversies swirled around him over financial irregularities and him influencing the bidding process, he shrugged-or tweeted-off the allegations as if the laws of the land and public scrutiny were such banalities meant only for lesser mortals. [India Today]"

This forced the BCCI boss Mr. Shashank Manohar to assert that, "IPL doesn’t belong to any individual. It remains a BCCI property and we don’t want anybody’s advise on who should run the tournament or how to go about organising it. The IPL’s governance is BCCI’s prerogative."

The way forward
Shashank Manohar is a powerful man who, unlike Mr. Modi, doesn't speak much and when he speaks every one listens. Mr. Manohar seems to be the right man in the right place. One can only hope that he plays a significant role in cleaning up the IPL mess [More here].

BCCI has already appointed a 3 member committee to probe into IPL functioning and the members of the opposition parties are demanding joint parliamentary committee (JPC) to look into the matter which is definitely a good idea. Government should seriously think about constituting a JPC to probe into IPL affairs. There is an urgent need to ensure greater transparency and accountability on the part of both the organizers and the franchisees. The Indian Premier League owes its success to millions of cricket fans across the world and cricket lovers in India certainly deserve an explanation for all the mess that happened so far.

We definitely need Nuclear Liability Bill, but not in haste

Ever since the Chernobyl disaster which killed thousands and affected millions, there have been number of efforts to create common international standards on liability and compensation; so that the responsibility of such a disaster can be fixed and the victims of the disaster are given a fair compensation. There are four international conventions on nuclear liability issue. The 1960 Paris Convention, The 1963 Vienna Convention, 1997 Protocol to Amend Vienna Convention  and 1997 Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage. India is not a party to any of these conventions and hence has no legal obligation to adhere to these conventiosn.

There are about 30 countries that operate civil nuclear power. Most of these countries have "some sort of nuclear liability act in force in their territory either as a result of adherence to these international conventions or through enacting national liability law." In India, "there is no provision in the Indian Atomic Energy Act, 1962 about either nuclear liability or compensation for nuclear damage due to nuclear accident or incident. Nor are there any other laws that deal with nuclear liability. It was in this context that the new law (The Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill) has been proposed and also on the necessity of joining an appropriate international liability regime [Indian Express]."

The Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill says, "The liability due to any damage caused by these plants are borne by the central government. ... It caps the liability of any incident at SDR 300 million (approximately Rs 2100 crore at current conversion rates); the maximum liability of any single operator is capped at Rs 500 crore.  The liability of any damage beyond this level will lie with the central government [PRS]."

What does it mean?
The liability of the operator of (civil) nuclear facility is capped at Rs 500 Crore. This means,  "Central Government shall be liable for nuclear damage in respect of a nuclear incident when such liability exceeds the Rs.500-crore liability limit of the operator or where the accident occurs in a nuclear installation owned by it [i.e. the Indian government]."

Currently, Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL) is responsible for the generation of nuclear power for electricity. NPCIL is the only power utility company in India which uses nuclear fuel sources and hence it becomes the sole operator responsible for nuclear power generation. Since it is owned by government of India, NPCIL's liability becomes the liability of the government and hence the burden falls on tax payers. Thus, in case of nuclear emergency, the suppliers will have no responsibility whatsoever to compensate the victims and all the compensation has to be borne by government and hence tax payers.

On the other hand, "the foreign reactor builder (supplier) — however culpable it is for a nuclear accident — will be completely immune from any victim-initiated civil suit or criminal proceedings in an Indian court or in a court in its home country. So, even if the accident were triggered by wilful negligence on the part of the foreign supplier and the consequences were catastrophic, all claims would have to be filed against the Indian state."

How does this "liability" work in US?
In the united states, Price-Anderson Act deals with the issue of nuclear liability. This act makes the suppliers legally liable for damages caused by the nuclear emergency. But, this liability is "channeled" to the facility operator. What this means is, "in US, the supplier is insured under the nuclear liability facility form policy written by the American Nuclear Insurers (ANI) and purchased by the facility operator." i.e. the supplier is insured under (or with?) ANI and that insurance is purchased by the facility operator. Thus, the supplier is virtually free from legal responsibilities. [More on this here]

Why US wants India to have a liability bill?
"India is on record wanting to buy 10,000 MW of nuclear reactors from the US suppliers. The US nuclear industry wants the billions of dollars in profits from Indian sales, but does not want any risks: good old risk-free capitalism, US style. This is the genesis of the nuclear liability bill – a hefty subsidy from Indian tax payers for the US to be able to market its reactors. [Read More]"

 

What do critics say about the bill?

1. The Price Anderson Act in the United States capped liability at an amount 23 times higher than the sum the Indian Bill seeks to fix.
2. Russians and the French were doing nuclear business with India without demanding this kind of legislation.
3. There cannot be a situation where the foreign supplier has zero liability, and the public sector and the Indian government have all the responsibility and the liability.
4. However, no liability will be fixed on the foreign supplier companies even if there is a mishap because of a manufacturing defect. This provision has been strongly opposed by the Left, the BJP and environment groups.
5. "Government was bringing the law in the PSU regime and may perhaps allow private companies to run nuclear power plants in the country who would be liable under the same rule of law". Though government doesn't intend to bring in private players, "Who knows what the government will do after the law is passed?" Read More.

The way forward
In the united states, American Nuclear Insurers (ANI) plays a significant role. ANI's purpose is to pool the financial assets pledged by it's member companies to provide the significant amount of property and liability insurance required for nuclear power plants and related facilities throughout the world. But in India, there is no institution like ANI and government becomes the insurer of last resort. Government cannot be lenient towards the suppliers and the responsibility of damages should be shared by suppliers at least to a reasonable extent. There cannot be a situation where the foreign supplier has zero liability, and the public sector and the Indian government have all the responsibility and the liability.

In the recent years, though the nuclear industry has achieved an impressive safety record, we cannot say we can obviate an unpredictable emergency situation. Under such context, The Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill has crucial role to play and Government of India and the people of India cannot afford a hasty decision on this issue. Government definitely needs to take a second look at the framework of the bill.