Cong states join protests on Food Bill

In their responses to the Centre on the proposed law,which the UPA-II government hopes to make a flagship programme similar to UPA-I’s National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS),most of the states have expressed strong views against the present format of the Bill.

* For instance,Congress-ruled Rajasthan wants removal of the clause empowering the central government to conduct social audit of the implementation of the public distribution system (PDS) and functioning of ration shops.

* Another Congress-ruled state,Maharashtra,has opposed the idea of having Food Commissions at the national and state levels to monitor the implementation of the proposed law.

“Setting up of State and National Food Security Commissions parallel with the existing arrangements — such as State Human Right Commission,State Consumer Redressal Commission,State Commissions for SC/ST,Minorities and Women — will only lead to expansion of bureaucracy and duplication of functions of existing institutions,” it has said.

Maharashtra has also red-flagged provisions in the proposed Act which empower the proposed State Commission to issue guidelines to state governments regarding the implementation of the scheme.

* Echoing the objection,the Shivraj Singh Chouhan-led Madhya Pradesh government has also “strongly objected to the creation of such a commission” as it will “only add to the existing bureaucracy” and render the department meant for this job “superfluous”.

* In an important suggestion,the Bihar government wants an “independent body” — an Identification Commission on the lines of the Election Commission — to undertake the process of identification and listing of beneficiaries in order to ensure transparency.

In fact,Bihar has raised the most objections,ranging from “inadequate attention to meeting the nutritional requirements of the poor based upon scientific parameters” to putting additional financial burden on the states without “making adequate financial provisions”.

The Nitish Kumar government has also told the Centre that it would “prefer” a system of cash transfers to the time consuming,cost-intensive PDS reform since it would mean less leakages and minimum implementation cost.

* On the other hand,the Left Front government in Tripura has “strongly opposed” the cash transfer option. “Supply of foodgrain is to be ensured by the Government of India to the states which are deficit in food production,” it has said.

* The BJP government in Chhattisgarh has suggested that the National Food Commission should be empowered to hear the complaints by state governments and pass appropriate recommendations to the Centre.

However,the Centre has said that “subordinate statutory bodies created by an Act of Parliament cannot be conferred such powers. They cannot have functions to direct a sovereign government that created it.”

Chhattisgarh has also suggested that the Centre should allow the state governments to use the services of the State Food Security Commissions for monitoring the implementation of other welfare schemes in the state.

* Punjab has asked the Centre to share the cost of transporting the foodgrain to the ration shops.

* In West Bengal,the Mamata Bannerjee-led government has suggested that the “restriction” of six months of free meals to persons living in starvation should be dropped. In this context,Bihar and Madhya Pradesh governments have sought an unambiguous definition of what should be construed as starvation.

The special provisions proposed in the food security law specifically for persons living in starvation,homeless and destitute has attracted the attention of almost all the 18 state governments whose responses have been compiled in the Cabinet note.

Most states have asked the Centre to refrain from interfering in matters like qualifications,methods and terms of appointments of district-level grievance redressal officers.

* Manipur is the only state that has agreed “in toto” to the draft National Food Security Bill,while Congress-led Kerala government has favoured adoption of the Sonia Gandhi-led NAC’s proposals “in toto”.

“We will place the views of the states along with our comments before the Cabinet. It is for the Cabinet to take a final view on the issue,” said a senior officer.