Food Bill | UPA's hand-to-mouth card is a political weapon

The Congress is hoping that the Bill will be a game-changer in the 2014 general elections

United Progressive Alliance (UPA) chairperson Sonia Gandhi’s political masterstroke has the potential to turn the tide and equip the party with a powerful weapon as it battles a resurgent Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) led by Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi who is focusing on the charge of policy paralysis at the Centre. The Congress considers its food security programme as a game-changer and it may significantly swing the rural and economically weaker voters for whom food inflation and price rise is the biggest issue. Last month on micro blogging site Twitter, Modi said: "For the last 10 years in Gujarat, the poor are getting wheat at Rs 2 per kg and rice at Rs 3 per kg through the public distribution system. Is this not food security?" 

Political pundits are of the view that by bringing an ordinance, the Manmohan Singh government has created an opportunity to remind voters that the BJP did not allow Parliament to function despite such welfare measures crying for attention. With the Congress providing support to the Janata Dal (United) government in Bihar during the confidence vote and to Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam's (DMK) Kanimozhi in Rajya Sabha polls, the government is expected to get support of MPs from these parties to pass the Bill in Parliament. 

The ambitious Rs 1.25 lakh crore food security plan is likely to help it gain significant political mileage in the run-up to the 2014 general election and polls in six states this year and next, although the move will stretch New Delhi’s already extended finances. From growing at an average of 9% between FY06 and FY11, India is struggling to even touch the 5% mark now. Slower growth has meant a sharp fall in tax revenues. The fiscal deficit is also a major concern and if India further slips on its promised 5.2% growth rate in FY14, the credit rating agencies could downgrade the country’s investment climate to “junk” status. If that happens, corporate India would find it harder, and costlier, to raise loans for investment. 

The food programme aims to provide subsidised rice and wheat to 67% of population. When implemented fully, the scheme is likely to cost the exchequer Rs 1,24,724 crore, almost Rs 34, 724 crore  more than the 2013-14 Budget estimate of food security. Critics say beneficiaries do not stand to gain as about 40% of rice and wheat earmarked for the poor gets siphoned off due to corruption. A study by the Planning Commission in 2005 showed that an estimated 58% of grains purchased by the government failed to meet their intended targets.

Ironically, one of the biggest concerns with the current bill is that despite huge public spending, those it intends to feed will be left out. The bill says states will provide the list of the poor, but states say they don't have any. With the government relying heavily on Public Distribution System (PDS) to see implementation of the bill through, there are concerns about pilferage, corruption and loss of produce. 

Tainted by controversies, the congress’ hunger-hatao message is: if properly implemented, the bill will not only guarantee food security for poor households but will also improve their quality of life by enabling them to spend more on health, education, protein-rich food and other consumables. However, there is one school of thought that argues that a beggar getting alms from the state will never be able to come out of dire poverty. The poor will perpetually seek state patronage and remain poor, generation after generation. Their condition can only be improved by making investments in the economy. Doles and alms cannot be a permanent cure for poverty.

But, merely making legislations is not going to fulfil Mahatma Gandhi’s dream of a hunger-free India. Many doubt whether the food will reach the needy at all. In a country plagued with corruption, can the law implementing authorities be expected to be honest in carrying out their duties? Will the bill end up benefiting the rich only?  Although the supporters of the Bill will project this as a victory of the have-nots over elitist concerns, nothing could be farther from the truth.  

Economists say what the country needs is not a food security bill but agrarian reforms. According to a study, of the hundreds of millions of rupees spent on agricultural research, 70% is wasted on administrative costs. What remains is not enough for the cutting-edge technology needed to improve yields. According to the World Food Programme, the food aid arm of the United Nations, India is home to nearly 25% of the world's hungry poor. India is one of the world's biggest producers of rice, wheat and sugar, but it is also one of the largest consumers with a 1.2 billion population.

In 2009, the UPA managed to win a second term, an accomplishment experts thought was achieved on the back of populist schemes offered to nearly 200 million voters. Consider this: the government, in its budget for 2008-09, announced a Rs 60,000 crore debt-waiver package to bail out some 37 million small and marginal farmers ahead of the 2009 general polls. A CAG report pointed out irregularities in the scheme announced by P Chidambaram in Budget 2008-09. The report claimed that over 6,800 beneficiaries had taken loans for even buying vehicles or building houses, while 1,257 eligible farmers were turned down.

Around 52 million households had reaped the benefits of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS). And, implementation of the recommendations of the Sixth Pay Commission benefited five million central government employees and their families. The UPA-I managed to please nearly 94 million families. The number of actual beneficiaries would have been slightly less than this number because of overlapping between MGNREGS and the farm loan waiver. There were families who benefited from both schemes.

The Direct Benefits Transfer (DBT) scheme, launched earlier this year, is likely to impact the lives of nearly 100 million families. In the first year of its implementation, the food security scheme will cover 60 to 70 million families. Assuming two voters a family, the schemes are likely to impact 120 million voters each.

Adopting a short cut, the Congress is driven by its political insecurity in the run-up to elections.

Journey to food security

From Bill to Ordinance

Feb 12, 2009

. President Pratibha Patil addresses Parliament after UPA-II ministers sworn in
. She puts food security scheme on the government agenda for the first time
 

Dec 2011
. Food security Bill first tabled in Parliament

2012

. Bill goes to the Standing Committee of Parliament
. Jean Dreze and some economists push Plan-B, which removes distinction between priority groups and non-poor.  Representation is also made to the standing committee to move towards individual entitlement of 5 kg per person a month

Jan 2013

. Standing committee submits recommendation

. Final version of Bill incorporates Plan-B and standing committee’s recommendations

May 2013

. Bill tabled in the Lok Sabha in Budget session but not taken taken up due to chaos in Parliament

July 2013 

. Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs passes ordinance on food security