India passes world's largest welfare food law

India’s $20bn leap of faith for food to poor By Subhash Chopra India’s truly landmark Food Security Bill to fight poverty and malnutrition which cleared its passage through parliament promises food security to 800 million people or two-thirds of its population at virtually throw away prices. The Upper House passed it by a voice vote on 2 September 2013, with the Lower House having cleared it the previous week. Billed as the world’s largest welfare programme, it promises 75% of the country’s rural population and 50% of urban population rice at Rs 3 (7US cents or 5p) a kg, wheat at Rs 2 a kg and coarse grains at Rs 1 a kg. It will guarantee 5 kg of rice, wheat and coarse cereals per month per person. And it’s not just a promise, it’s already being delivered in parts of the country. Over the coming weeks and months it will cover the entire nation. The measure had already become operative through an ordinance promulgated in July but the government had for long wanted to have it approved by parliament. The six-hour long debate on the final day in the Lok Sabha (Lower House) saw 18 divisions forced by MPs but the government’s patience and perseverance paid off. Pushed through against the given wisdom of the economists of World Bank, IMF and their allied tribes in India and elsewhere, it sets out a model of human development from grassroots upwards rather than trickle-down palliatives to save lives or improve living standards. But economists like Nobel Laureate Amaratiya Sen and Professor Jean Dreze have broadly backed it, even though it falls short of their expectations. In fact, Prof Dreze resigned from the National Advisory Council of Congress president Sonia Gandhi because the bill did not go far enough or was not comprehensive enough. Shortcomings notwithstanding, it’s a leap of faith against dire warnings of the cost of food subsidy which could top Rs 1 lakh crore ($20 billion) a year. And it’s a leap of faith for India’s current coalition United Progressive Alliance government led by the Congress party which in turn is headed by Sonia Gandhi. It’s also the fulfilment of the party’s promise which it made in 2009 when the UPA returned to power for its second consecutive term of five years. Speaking on the final day of debate in Parliament Mrs Gandhi said: "Some people ask - do we have the resources for such a legislation? I would like to say, the question is not about resources; we will have to manage resources for this. "The question is not if we can do this. We have to do this," she told MPs and urged them to pass the welfare measure which was part of the “empowerment revolution” for the people of the country and deserved unanimous support. Yet having fought for the bill so doggedly Mrs Gandhi could not vote in the final count because she was suddenly taken ill and had to be rushed to the hospital after feeling chest pain. Her son Rajiv too could not vote as he left parliament to accompany his mother to the hospital. Soon everybody was relieved to find that Mrs Gandhi had been discharged after a short medical check-up. The UPA had unveiled its bold welfare vision for the Aam Admi or the Common Man by launching Narega, the 100-day guaranteed rural job plan for all adults in villages across the country midway through its first five year term which began in 2004. The jobs scheme, which covered the entire country by the end of the first term, lifted the wages and spirits of rural workers in an unprecedented sweep and proved a major factor in swinging the 2009 election for the UPA . Unfazed by the barrage of corruption charges but buoyed by the people’s response to its welfare programmes, the UPA has definitively launched the second tranche of its welfare strategy in the shape of the just cleared Food Security Bill. This latest initiative has all the makings of an election swinger in 2014 and could win a hat trick for the UPA. It could indeed be a “game changer” politically for the parties and economically for the Aam Admi. Sushma Swaraj, the BJP leader of the opposition in the Lok Sabha, may have tried to make fun of the Food Security Bill by calling it “Vote Security Bill” but her party still saw the wisdom of voting for it. Others called it a gimmick and lollipop but they all let it through. Any party voting against it could see itself branded as anti-people. As a result nearly 300 pin prick amendments were dismissed .Some of the amendments, though, were quite weighty and sought to make it obligatory for the government to give food even at times of natural calamities. The left parties wanted it to cover the entire population. Others wanted elimination of financial liability or burden on state governments in implementing the law. Yet others demanded imposition of higher fines on public authorities from the existing Rs5,000 to Rs25,000 in case of failure to provide food to the needy. Finally the bill was carried by a voice vote because no party wanted to be branded as obstructive and anti-poor. ......................................................................................................................