Mainstream Weekly

Home > Archives (2006 on) > 2010 > Open Letter to the PM

Mainstream, Vol XLVIII, No 39, September 18, 2010

Open Letter to the PM

Monday 20 September 2010, by Shree Shankar Sharan

#socialtags

Respected Prime Minister,

In a landmark ruling from the viewpoint of the poor, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has directed that surplus foodgrains without proper storage should be distributed among the poor rather than be allowed to rot. The Government of India is reported to be unwilling to abide by the ruling maybe because it is not on all fours with the Bill of right to food in which there is provision only for cheap grains, not free grain. There is a provision in the Natural Calamities Code for the distribution of gratuitous relief including free cooked food or grains. The fear is what is conceded now will be demanded in future. The question is whether distress is limited to the times of natural calamities or does also exist due to acute poverty or prolonged unemployment or disease in normal times which cannot be taken care of by the NREGA in the best of times, though the best of times seldom occur and the scheme is eaten away and wages earned stolen by the implementing bureaucratic machine. The scheme also has a life of only six months. The answer of a lot of us is ‘no’ and we have the Supreme Court on our side. The Government of India should not be unnerved by numbers. The Supreme Court has not directed covering the entire poor population. There is a natural calamity in some parts of the country or the other which hits the poor the most. Free distribution can be tied to these areas for the poor.

Some of us will even contest this limited view which delinks free grains from poverty, and links it with natural calamity alone. If free grain is not a desirable option we have to give the poor the means to buy it cheap. The government should open a postal account for every BPL family and deposit Rs 500 a month. This will cover the most vulnerable, the old, women and children. The NREGA leaves out this section because they do not fit the rigours of hard earthwork. The NREGA has a life of only six months. The wages of Rs 100 a day is meagre and a sure way to keep the poor poor in terms of the calories consumed. A 500 rupees allowance will still be meagre but be some proof that we care for the poor beyond paying them wages for the hard work done.

Poor members of the community are also public servants since they contribute to the country‘s productive wealth but we reserve our special care only for a section of public servants formally appointed by the government. The distinction is purely artificial and arbitrary. The sooner we expand the boundary of public servants for affording basic amenities, the better.

The topmost law-makers have laid a road- map for law enforcement with a heart. Laws and policies should mirror and codify our inclusive and generous impulses

I have often grieved over the absence of a mechanism to transmit to the poor a share of the nation’s growing prosperity, except expansion of the service sector at fairly inelastic wages and a small rise in employment, nowhere comparable to the rise in profits and executive-I salaries, or even the salaries that people’s representatives sanction to themselves. The right to food to the vulnerable sections of the poor will be one such mechanism, part of Bharat Nirman in human resource. Without it we may win the economic battle but lose out on the political.

The other will be to make it mandatory for business undertakings to allow a share of equity to the panchayat members in which the industry is located, besides the payment of compensation at market rates to the victims of land acquisition, jobs as far as possible and training as apprentices to others so that the rural areas perceive a change in both their physical and mental landscape and are more welcoming of industry.

I am conscious that there is a growing awareness among our rural folk of industriali-sation being the only ticket out of the trap of poverty for some, if not all, of them. That is why they vote parties that support and promote industrialisation. Even land reforms, though very desirable to create an ambience of equity, cannot end poverty and can best create full employment with poverty. So growth must go on but with as many concessions to equity in distribution as we can think of. Our most serious human and political problem is poverty, more than growing rich or strong. The latter will be welcomed to the extent the former is eased.

The NREGA should be additive to survival money of a bare allowance of Rs 500 for the vulnerable sections. It should not only include earthwork but training in semi-skilled jobs like electricians, plumbers and computer mainte-nance which will have a growing market. Besides it should, to honour the Father of the Nation after whom it has been named, also include khadi, weaving and selected cottage industry to guarantee minimum wages to skilled workers hit by industrialisation.

TALKING of law enforcement with a heart let me touch on the Naxal problem which has grown out of poverty and endeared itself to a section of them. We should try and negotiate a deal on rural problems and involve them in a sort of land army, a Lohia vision, or a vigilance committee at the rural level. Killings, selective or indiscrinminate, will get us nowhere nor kill the movement. Nor will the government’s misuse of authority to snuff out proactive support to tribal and environment policies that impede development by dubbing them as pro-Naxal. It will only get worse.

Finally, we have to learn to live with difficult and troublesome neighbours, driven by oversized ambitions. But we can only be patient and not overreact till we have earned their respect by our own growth and put a cost-tag on unfriendli-ness difficult to bear.

Kashmiris are not our neighbours, they are our own people. We should heed them as we heed others. We may be tough for a while but not indefinitely. We should appoint an impartial commission of inquiry by someone like Rajindar Sachar or Kuldip Nayar to look into specific allegations. We should not panic and courageously reduce the security forces’ presence. We should invoke help from one of the dissident leaders like Yasin Malik or Shabbir Shah by offers of power, sharing besides using more informed men than Lambah like Kuldip Nayar, to carry on behind the scene talks both with the Kashmiris and Pakistan. If Pakistan does not respond we should put on the table Nehru’s own solution to the problem before he died, as recorded by Sheikh Abdullah in his book Chinar in Flames, that he personally took to Marshal Ayub Khan—of an Indo-Pak-J&K confederation.

Sorry to write this longish letter mainly because I respect your human qualities.

Best regards,

Shree Shankar Sharan
(Convener, Lok Paksh, Patna/ Delhi)

Shree Shankar Sharan is the Convener, Lok Paksh, Patna/Delhi.

ISSN (Mainstream Online) : 2582-7316 | Privacy Policy|
Notice: Mainstream Weekly appears online only.