Gujarat CM objects on Food Security bill

In the name of food security, UPA Government led by Congress drastically reduces food supply to BPL families

-         Gujarat CM objects on anti-poor provisions under NFSO by insensitive UPA Government led by Congress.

-         Narendra Modi writes to Prime Minister and Chief Ministers of various States on reducing food grain entitlement to poor.

-         Gujarat CM requested Prime Minister to convene a meeting of Chief Ministers of States on Food Bill.

Gandhinagar, August 13, 2013 : Under the National Food Security Ordinance (NFSO), issued by the UPA Government led by Congress, the food entitlements to the BPL families have been drastically reduced. According to the NFSO, the entitlement of BPL families has been reduced from 35 kg per family to only 25 kg per month to an average family of 5 persons. As is well known, it is the BPL families, which are most vulnerable and need adequate food supply at a subsidized cost in those remote areas and are not dependent on private merchants. In fact, more than 50% Scheduled Tribes population are under BPL and in those areas; access to food grains is a major issue. The BJP Governments in various states have set examples in public distribution system (PDS) and ensured 35 kg food grains to BPL families. In fact, the work done in Chhattisgarh and Gujarat, have been highly appreciated even by Hon’ble Supreme Court.  

Reducing food entitlement to poorest of the poor cannot be the objective of any food security legislation. In fact, it is a cruel joke with the poor of this country. They have been promised food security and assured supply of 35 kg of food grain has been reduced to 25 kg. Gujarat Chief Minister objected very strongly to this reduction in the entitlement of those who have been identified as being below the poverty line.

The NSFO’s proposed pricing structure for the food grain adds financial burden on BPL families who now have to buy the additional food requirements from the open market. The BPL family will now have to incur Rs. 85 more per month in Gujarat to avail 35 Kg food grain.

The proposed entitlement also affects the required calorie intake of an individual. As per the Ordinance, the distribution of 5 kg food grains per month per person implies the supply of only 165 gm per person per day. Individuals involved in labour intensive activities require at least 2,500 calories per day. The entitled 165 gm grains would provide only 500 calories per day which is hardly 20% of one’s daily calorie requirements. Even in the Mid Day Meal (MDM) scheme, school going children are entitled to about 180 gm of food grain. As against this, an ‘adult food insecure person’ is proposed to be given only 165 gm for 2 meals per day. This does not address even the ‘calorific security’, not to talk about ‘nutritional security’, which is the main objective of food security.

In a letter to the Prime Minister, Chief Minister of Gujarat, Shri Narendra Modi has expressed serious concern with the National Food Security Ordinance (NFSO) promulgated by the Central Government. He said the Ordinance does not fulfill the basic objectives of food security. In fact, this Antodaya card holders, who come under ‘poorest of the poor category’, this National Food Security Ordinance has no additional provisions to ensure food security.

Strangely, Central Government has come out with this Ordinance but in case, there is a shortage of food grain supply, it has refused to take any responsibility to ensure supply of the required quantity of food grains. Instead, this responsibility has been cast upon the respective state Governments to fulfill the shortage of food grains.

If there is drought and/ or States which are food grain deficit, State Governments will find itself in a very difficult situation to manage/ procure the food grains. Central Government with huge wherewithal could have taken this responsibility to make available the food grain during drought/ scarcity.

It seems that the Central Government is trying to take away the bare minimum from the BPL families. On one hand, the Planning Commission has been claiming reduction in the numbers of BPL families by redefining the parameters of a BPL family. On the other, those who still qualify as a BPL family will now suffer because of the NFSO. Strangely, number of beneficiaries has been fixed in the ordinance without specifying eligibility criteria and fix individual entitlements. Between different States, there could be wide regional disparities.

It is also surprising that the Central government chose not to consult any of the state Governments on the issue of NFSO. In a federal democracy, it is vital that the centre and the state Governments work in tandem with each other. In his letter, Shri Modi has pointed out that in the Ordinance, unworkable statutory responsibilities have been given to Central and State governments.

Gujarat Chief Minister has requested the Prime Minister to call a meeting of Chief Ministers as it concerns both Centre and State Governments with huge implications. The Chief Minister has also written to all the State Chief Ministers for a meeting on the same.

The insensitivity of the UPA Government has left very little for the states to decide. While some states have successfully provided food security to their people, the central Government fails to consult even these states for an effective food security ordinance.

****

Effect of proposed National Food Security Ordinance (NFSO) on a BPL Family (monthly)
Before  NFSO (Quantity : 35 Kg)
Item	Quantity in Kg	Rate in Rs.			Expense in Rs.
Wheat	13	2.00			26.00
Rice	3	3.00			9.00
wheat	16	7.50			120.00
Rice	3	7.00s			21.00
	Total				176.00
As Per NFSO (Expenditure for 35 Kg for a family of 5 persons)
As Per NFSO  :    25 kg
Open Market  :    10 kg
Item	Quantity in Kg		Rate in Rs.	Expense in Rs.
Wheat	19		2.00	38.00
Rice	6		3.00	18.00
wheat	5		19.00	95.00
Rice	5		22.00	110.00
	Total			261.00
Additional Expanses Rs. 85 per month With the Food Security Bill coming up for consideration in the Lok Sabha on Wednesday, Congress has issued a whip to its members in the House to be present and vote in favour of the legislation. A discussion on the Bill in the Lok Sabha began on Tuesday but was scuttled by disruptions over Telangana issue caused by TDP members storming the Well. UPA Chairperson Sonia Gandhi, who played a key role formulating and taking the Bill to Parliament, is likely to be the first speaker from the Congress in the debate in Lok Sabha on the subject.