|
Events & Issues
New Delhi, 28 April 2008
Populist Agenda
MASSES CANNOT BE
IGNORED
By Dhurjati Mukherjee
Programmes for the poor and the deprived sections are termed
‘populist’ though their importance in grassroot development cannot be
undermined. One may recall the role of economist-politician Dr. Arjun Sengupta
for his initiative in taking up with the Prime Minister the need for a “minimum
programme of action that can be seen specifically targeting the poorest of the
poor”.
Dr Sengupta had also categorically stated that
notwithstanding high rates of economic growth and large expenditures on social
development, the “benefits of all programmes usually bypass the poor and the
vulnerable unless they are specifically targeted to them”. And, even if
targeted for the poor, the benefits barely reach 30 to 40 per cent of the
beneficiaries while the rest are cornered by the rich and the powerful.
These contentions speak very poorly of a country which has
averaged around 9 per cent growth for the last five years as over 30 per cent
(22 per cent officially in the BPL category) of the poor live in critical
conditions, especially in rural areas. Whether it is the farming community, the
unorganized workers, the tribals or the dalits, their condition leaves much to
be desired.
This leads to the question whether development programmes
being undertaken are cornered by the well off sections, leaving the needy in
the lurch? And, whether the lackadaisical approach of the state machinery in
ensuring that the benefits reach the real beneficiaries can be stemmed?
Various surveys and studies have been conducted at home and abroad,
all of which point to the depressing conditions of the poorer sections of
society and the inadequate steps being taken for their uplift. In these
circumstances, some measures taken by the Centre need to be taken note of.
Take the case of the National Rural Employment Guarantee
Scheme (NREGS) which has now been extended to all the 604 districts of the
country from this April. If implemented properly (and this proposition leaves a
big question mark), this will take care of the dual purpose of generating
employment as also building rural infrastructure, which is vitally necessary at
such a juncture.
In the Union Budget Rs 16,000 crores has been earmarked for
the NREGS, though the sum is indeed quite inadequate if all the districts are
really to be covered. However, it is essential that the programme is monitored
effectively so that the beneficiaries get the right amount of money for the
work and for the entire period they have put in labour. There is every scope of
the poor and the illiterate being cheated and this should not be allowed to
happen at any cost.
It needs to be mentioned here that the performance of the NREGS
in some States during the financial year 2006-07 has been utterly distressing.
The draft report of the Comptroller & Auditor General reveals only 3.2 per
cent of the 2.73 crore registered households could avail of the guaranteed 100
days work. The average employment under NREGS was merely 18 days and there have
been reports of embezzlement and waste.
The above needs to be checked through careful monitoring
both by the Centre and the States. Moreover, against the aim of 100 person days
of employment, West Bengal was successful in creating only 14 person days, U.
P. 32 person days, Bihar 35 person days and
Jharkhand 37 person days. Rajasthan has been the highest performer with the
average of 85 person days of employment followed by Madhya Pradesh with 68
person days.
It is also distressing to note that only a 10th
of the three crore households that the Government says received jobs over the
past one year were employed for the full quota of 100 days. Also of the 15.61
lakh projects taken up, only 4.96 (less than a third) have been completed,
according to reports.
In this connection one may refer to the eminent agricultural
scientist, Dr. M. S. Swaminathan, who recently pointed out that the rural
sector needs to be the centre of planning and development not only to alleviate
poverty but to aid the process of growth. The emphasis on rural infrastructure
development could be the cornerstone for giving a fillip to employment
generation in areas such as horticulture, floriculture, value-added crops and
agro industries, most of which have high export potential and have largely been
unexplored.
A significant development that may go a long way to help the
poor has been the announcement of the National Policy on Rehabilitation &
Resettlement 2007, which obviously tries to end the controversy of land
acquisition by the States for industrial and/or urban development. In any
civilized country where land acquisition has always denied the poor of their
due rights the policy should have been in place at least by the early 70s. But
there was no such policy of the Government and the States did not have the
necessary guidelines to acquire land.
As a result of which, even multi-crop land was acquired in
Singur, West Bengal and other places for
setting up industrial projects, without proper compensation, thus depriving
farmers of their right to livelihood. The rural poor were the victims because of
displacement and no employment opportunities guaranteed. This obviously evokes
anger. And, we have recently been witness to violent protests all over the
country as people felt, and quite rightly, that industrialization was being
promoted at the cost of the rural poor.
The present policy has no doubt been a step in the right
direction. It has stipulated that the State can now acquire 30 per cent of land
demanded by corporates, that too only if 70 per cent of it has been bought by
the latter.Farmland takeover would be minimum while multi-crop land has to be
avoided. One key feature of the Policy is that the gram sabhas (village councils) must be consulted on the
rehabilitation package before land takeover, dissenting opinion recorded and
attempts made to persuade the Council to agree.
The Policy allows developers to give 20 per cent of the
compensation in the form of shares in the project while a share of 50 per cent
may be allowed in some cases. It has rightly been decided to extend the social
benefits to the landowners’ tenants, agriculture and non-agricultural labourers
and all those who made a living from the land acquired.
The cry for land by the State to help the industrial class
in the name of globalization and rapid industrialization, depriving the farming
community is nothing but shameful. Most economists and development experts have
criticized such action as States had been vying with each other to attract
industrialists and provide them land next to highways and roads at below market
prices. But it is expected that things should change with the setting of the
National Land Reforms Council (NLRC), hopefully a positive step in this direction.
In a welfare State like India, major policies have always
benefited the rich and the powerful realization has dawned on the political
elite that the rural masses cannot be neglected for long. As such, the
extension of the NREGS, the rehabilitation policy and the NLRC are no doubt
very crucial steps taken by the Government. But sincerity in implementation and
allocation of adequate resources for the above two schemes, while formulation
of a comprehensive land policy after deliberations with experts from all walks
of life would make these effective and fruitful. Moreover with the unfinished
task in land reforms being accomplished, land struggles would be checked to a
great extent.
Land and employment for the poor are necessary for their
survival and reports reveal that in spite of the galloping GDP growth, a major
segment of the rural population is struggling for existence. This segment has
to be given certain benefits by providing employment for some part of the year
and technological inputs for those who have small pieces of land for effective
cultivation. One could also experiment with small cooperatives being set up by
panchayats with land, of say 30-40 families and cultivating value-added crops.
There has to be renewed emphasis on the rural sector simultaneously with
industrial development, rural productivity and greater efficiency so as to
ensure wider spread of the benefits of development. ---INFA
(Copyright,
India News and Feature Alliance)
|
Archives 
