"JNNURM is a great success"

Arun Maira, member, planning commission, talks about the UPA's flagship scheme

Prasanna Mohanty | June 18 2012

The Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM), one of UPA’s flagship schemes, is a big failure, according to a steering committee of the planning commission on urbanisation. More than Rs 66,000 crore of central assistance was given (starting from 2005) for holistic development of 71 cities over a period of seven years – for renewal and upgradation of infrastructure like water, sanitation, transportation, street lighting as well as redevelopment of old cities, integrated development of slums, child care centres etc. The mission has already run its course but there is little to show by way of achievements.
The report of the committee, headed by plan panel member Arun Maira, says only 60 percent of the fund has been spent and only 18 percent of projects taken up under its sub-mission, Urban Infrastructure and Governance (UIG), and 40 percent of projects under the other sub-mission, Basic Services to Urban Poor (BSUP), have been completed. The report points out several factors for the poor show – ‘poor planning’ and near absence of people’s participation leading to ‘lack of ownership’; ‘acute capacity deficit’ at the municipal level; focus on expenditure-related targets rather than improvements in service-level outcomes; ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach to reforms and failure to carry out ‘crucial’ reforms relating to rationalisation of user charges, property tax, land market etc.
Maira, however, refuses to describe it as a failure and stresses that it was a first-of-its-kind innovation, a large pilot project which has provided many valuable lessons for the future and has recommended for its renewal with some modifications to achieve the stated objectives. Meanwhile, the finance ministry has committed to continue the funding for the next two years, though allocations for the 12th plan have not been made yet. In an interview with Prasanna Mohanty, Maira shares his views on the flagship programme.
Your report on JNNURM shows it is a failure.
No, not at all. JNNURM was one of the first major innovations on a national scale by the government of India, the other being MNREGS. Both are innovations. The expectation to get it right is a shot in the dark. The difference between the two is that in MNREGS it is a simple transaction – giving money for work done, but in JNNURM we are talking about renewal of cities – both physical infrastructure as well as management infrastructure. On top of it, the cities are to reform. In MNREGS there is no requirement of reforms.
I term JNNURM a success. Considering the fact that we were doing it for the first time and have learnt what to do the next time, it is a great success.

What lessons have been learnt?
We learnt a few crucial things. First, the capabilities of our governance system are very weak compared to the challenges – both in urban and rural development. Unfortunately we have made rural development the mantra of our governance systems. In urban areas our capabilities are not sufficient. JNNURM proves that. As we evaluate the first massive pilot project in urban development the governance challenges are much bigger than what was anticipated.
Other lessons are a sub-set of it:
a)     Jurisdiction of civic, regional and state bodies overlap. Clarity about responsibilities, mutual connections and harmonious collaborations are needed.
b)     Skills required to design and maintain water, road and power systems for 200 or 250 million of more people are enormous.
c)     City planning: worldwide it was thought to be a technical issue to be handled by engineers. Realisation is dawning that city is not a mere physical infrastructure. It is primarily an aggregation of social and economic activities. So linkages and patterns are key to planning. Physical infrastructure must conform to that, not the other way round. So for city planning we need engineering and architectures to support and not at the lead of it. The whole world is discovering it and so are we.
There is (relatively) little problem in setting up new cities. In the existing cities, people are central to it and they have to adjust to the execution of the plan. We are not doing this very well. People come out in the streets protesting and they are not just confined to the slum dwellers. Lata Mangeshkar objected to the Peddar Road flyover. There was a protest against a flyover in south Delhi. People do get affected. City belongs to everybody, not just a few. Those leading the toughest life have the least support structure. The poor need to earn their livelihood. If they get displaced by infrastructure it gets harder for them. They should be included in the planning process. Infrastructure is not a luxury but a means for inclusion. The cities are the best means human civilisations have found to include poor people into the process of economic growth.
After all, what is the purpose of a city and what is the meaning of a world-class city? It is a city that enables people to lift themselves out of poverty and fast. Which Indian city do you think is world-class? In his book, “Welcome to the Urban Revolution – How cities are changing the world”, Jeb Brugmann [an expert on urbanisation who teaches at Cambridge], picks up Mumbai’s Dharavi. He describes Dharavi as a city-system that is proving itself every day in the market place to be world-class! Dharavi asks for no assistance of the state, no subsidy, but provides people the opportunity to better their lives.
(Brugmann argues against the dismantling of Dharavi to redevelop it and writes: “It (Dharavi) stood as probably the most successful, scaled poverty-reduction programme in the history of international development. Within the Indian context, Dharavi’s migrant generations had developed an accessible, replicable city-system for the advancement of the country’s poor majority. It was a stunning example of Indian entrepreneurial ability and ambition. With millions of poor households migrating to India’s cities each year, it seemed almost obvious that this migrant city system just needed to be accompanied with the same public investment in urban infrastructure offered to every other Mumbai city model and masterplanned suburb, and replicated throughout country.” – Editor)
If we are to expand JNNURM to new cities, we need huge money. But the chances of getting more money at the cost of health, education and other social support programmes are very low. So, the cities need to and should be able to raise their funds.
Which states have fared better in JNNURM?
Gujarat is doing the best. It goes back to years before Modi came into picture. Surat is the best example. During the 1994 plague, local administration got people involved in cleaning the city. It was a good instance of collaboration between people and the state. Ahmedabad and Vadodara have done very well in recent times. These cities have adopted ideas and schemes to improve housing and transport. People are involved. They are also getting technical help from outside.
In Maharashtra, Pune is a great example. Changes have been brought about in and around the city. In Chhattisgarh, Raipur and Bhilai are doing well.
Which projects under the mission were taken up most?
The first to be taken up are water and sanitation projects. The reasons are clear: firstly, water and sanitation bother people the most, and secondly, the cost of these projects is less. Besides, these projects have health benefits. More cities have taken up such projects. In the JNNURM, fund allocation is linked to reforms. Water and sanitation need less money and are also less complicated in terms of reforms needed.
What are your recommendations for the second phase of JNNURM?
We have recommended a few things. (1) Start building capacity; (2) improve planning and ensure people’s participation in it; (3) concentrate on water, sanitation and public transport; (4) resolve the jurisdiction issues – water, sanitation and transport projects cross municipal limits and (5) in the first phase we concentrated on the metros. We thought metros are the biggest engines of growth and so 80-90 percent of funds went to the metros. What has happened and will happen, as census 2011 points it out, more than 80 percent growth is taking place in smaller towns and peripherals of metros, which are not part of the metro. So to improve urbanisation and improve livelihood we have to concentrate on these areas. This is the strategic shift we are making – from metros to peri-urban and small towns.
You said about cities needing to raise their own resources. Can they do it and if yes, how?
Yes, they will be able to do it if they get the governance right. People want to know if the plan is good for them, whether it would be completed in time and what the future holds for them. If you plan well, develop the city and demonstrate it then it will evoke trust in people and they will pay for the services.
We, from the centre, will like to help in developing this ability to plan, build capacity and improve governance. If we are able to do all this, cities will be able to stand on their own. In developed countries, cities don’t depend on the central governments. They are the engines of growth.
How the states have fared in carrying out reforms mandated in JNNURM?
They have not done enough. The capacity hasn’t been built, governance hasn’t improved. The reforms proposed in JNNURM were the right ones. Now we have to adjust it a bit in some areas like providing public services and improving efficiencies so that people are willing to pay for services; increasing the coverage and collection of property taxes and user charges on water and solid waste management; capability building at municipal and state levels; reforms addressing distortions in urban land markets and so on. We would definitely like to incentivise the structure so that the cities performing to a certain level will get monetary bonus.

Odisha's own October Revolution

Villagers take fate into own hands, join palli and gram sabhas to decide development work, demand their entitlements

Prasanna Mohanty | New Delhi | November 06 2012

Prasanna

Gram Sabha meeting in progress in Dhavalapur in Sheragada block in Ganjamon on October 18

 Image Gallery

Something historic took place in Odisha last month — a first for not only the state but the entire country.
While the panchayati raj institutions were revived through the 73rd constitutional amendment in 1992, never have village meetings (or palli sabhas, as they are called here) and gram sabhas (comprising adult members of all villages of a gram panchayat) been truly meaningful or participatory. People have never demanded and decided the kind of development work they want in their area.
Also read more Reports from Other India


Take it to each village across the state, and the dimension of Odisha’s own ‘October revolution’ comes close to being called mind-boggling.
For 10 days from October 2, village after Odisha village held palli sabhas. They discussed local problems, deliberated on government welfare schemes, listed works they want, and staked claims to various benefits under these schemes. These lists were then forwarded to respective gram sabhas, which met on October 17-18, deliberated and finalised five-year perspective plans and annual action plan for 2013-14.
The details were subsequently uploaded on their respective websites and forwarded to senior officials for necessary approval and funds.
All the meetings were photographed and videographed for evidence.
There sure there were glitches, as there were expected to be. Of 44,544 palli sabhas, for instance, meetings couldn’t be held in 300 due to Maoist threats (mainly in Malkangiri and Koraput districts), there were protests over land acquisition (in Sundargarh, Anugul and Jagatsinghpur districts), and there were local fights. As a result, meetings couldn’t be held in 161 out of 6,236 gram sabhas.
But they were minor irritants at best in the face of the massive crowd participation and “unprecedented success”, as Aparajita Sarangi, commissioner and secretary, panchayati raj department, who made it all possible, put it. “I am extremely satisfied. I never expected such a response,” she remarked at the end of it all.
Is it a fest? No, a palli sabha meet
One had to see the massive election-like, almost festive, atmosphere during this period to believe it. With the entire state machinery, social activists, local politicians and, most importantly, the villagers, participating, banners were put up in villages even as vehicles made the rounds, exhorting people to participate in palli and gram sabha meetings.
Each sarpanch issued a ‘chit’, inviting people to the meetings, while groups of drum-beaters took the message of welfare schemes to the villagers and asked them to decide their fate.
And the villagers responded just as enthusiastically.
At meetings, they fought with government officials, panchayat members and health (ASHA) and anganwadi workers, demanding their share of benefits and complaining against non-existing services.
At Sagarpalli village in Sheragada block of Ganjam district, villagers heckled the BDO during the palli sabha and sought to know why the Indira Aawas Yojna list of beneficiaries existed when no one got its assistance. The health worker was also questioned on missing services.
At Gopa Palli, in Bandhaguda panchayat of Ganjam, the panchayat executive officer had to face villagers’ wrath for not clearing pension and other claims. At Dhavalapur gram sabha, the anganwadi worker was grilled by residents for not giving ‘chatua’ (the local name for ‘sattu’, made as national delicacy by Lalu Prasad) to children for a month, ostensibly because the contractor faced some problem.
Nearly all 1,000 households demanded toilets. To demonstrate that they are keen to stop defecating in the open, as is typical in Ganjam and parts of adjoining Gajapati district (What stinks so bad in Orissa CM’s constituency?), one village elder explained how they washed state highway-36, which skirts their village, a day before chief minister Naveen Patnaik was to travel. All in an effort to save the CM from the sight of the stain and taking in the stink.
Similarly, 200 people demanded toilets under the individual household latrine (IHHL) scheme at Krushna Sahi gram sabha.
How the revolution was shaped
While villagers, panchayat members and government officials said it was the first time they witnessed, and celebrated, democracy seeping to the grassroots level, sarpanches and other panchayat functionaries of all these areas in Ganjam earlier admitted that till date development plans and beneficiary lists were prepared at panchayat offices, and involved a handful of people.
There never was a true gram sabha, or a palli sabha, they said — a fact evident from the proceedings, as villagers had little knowledge of the eligibility criteria or what their rights and privileges.
According Sarangi, who took over at the panchayati raj department on August 1, she decided to formulate a structured plan, christened Grama Sabha Sashaktikaran Karjyakrama (GSSK), after seeking feedback from department officials and villagers.
GSSK set out a four-hour plan of action for each palli sabha and two gram sabha meetings — one to spread awareness about all welfare schemes and the other to finalise the action plan and claims.
After listing priorities and schemes of the pachayati raj department, it recorded schemes run by all other departments: SC and ST, women and child development, rural development, agriculture, health and family welfare, school and mass education, and tourism and culture. The focus on each head was as much on dissemination of information and sensitisation as on actually planning for the future and making a list of works and beneficiaries.
“For holistic development of a village it is essential for people to (a) know and understand all government schemes and their benefits and (b) know their entitlements, how to access them and who to approach,” said Sarangi.
She also made it mandatory for panchayat proceedings to be both photographed and videographed. Work at the state, district, block and panchayat levels were distributed, with clear instructions about the role of various government officials, including the collector, who does not report to her.
Sarangi said she sought and received full cooperation of all government departments.
Going by the response and participation of the villagers, at least in Sheragada block of Ganjam, there is little to doubt that a welcome change has begun. Once the necessary clearances come and funds are released, which Sarangi says will be done in due time, the panchayati raj department would be able to get work orders for the next financial year issued on the very first day, April 1, Sarangi said.
Going by the development so far, that doesn’t seem highly unlikely.

Indira Awaas Yojana: Plagued by a long and defective list

Until the panchayats are empowered, a diffused arrangement of power and responsibility will continue to make the scheme vulnerable to manipulation

Prasanna Mohanty | Sheragada, Ganjam | January 16 2013

View of a typical house in Ganjam – narrow and linear arrangement of rooms that extend from the front to the rear. This house belongs to Pushpanjali Panda, an Anganwadi worker of Pitala gram panchayat in Sheragada block.

 Image Gallery

On October 18, the scheduled gram sabha meeting at Dhavalapur panchyat in Sheragada block of Ganjam district began about three hours late because most villagers were busy getting their Aadhaar cards made at a local school. The woman sarpanch, Sunita Swain, was at her home, waiting for her husband, the ‘sarpanch pati’, Ramesh Swain (found loitering around everywhere else except the gram sabha venue). She wouldn’t come out of the house without her husband leading her. “That is the custom”, the villagers explained, and her ghunghat made an affirmative nod.

Late start meant an excellent opportunity for me to talk to the panchayat functionaries and examine their record on the Indira Awaas Yojana (IAY). The revelations that followed were quite revealing.

The IAY waiting list was last prepared in 2005 and was meant for five years. This meant the list should have been updated in 2010, but wasn’t. The list had two segments, one for the general category BPL families and the other for the SCs/STs among the BPL families.

In the general category, the list carried 358 names. Of that 33 were found ineligible because they had pucca houses (during a recent survey in the block the findings of which are yet to be compiled) but nobody seemingly knew whether these houses existed at the time of preparing the list or were built later. Twenty-nine had already received money. The rest 296 were waiting for their turn.

This meant the last man in the list would have to wait for 60 years to get the fund. Here is how.

This panchayat has about 800 households. Its annual share of IAY beneficiaries stands at 8 – 5 for general category and 3 for SCs/STs. (The state’s share of annual IAY beneficiaries is 1.5 lakh, which gets divided by districts, blocks and panchayats. Thus, this panchayat’s share came to 8. The beneficiaries are entitled to get Rs 48,500 in 8 gram panchayats of this district, including Dhavalpur, because these are declared Maoist-hit. Normal areas get Rs 45,000). At this rate, the list will get exhausted in 60 years (296/5).

The other category, for SCs/STs, had its own tale to tell. The list had 192 names. Exactly 100 of them had been found to be having pucca houses (again, without any idea about when they were built) and hence marked ineligible. The rest, 92, had received their money.

This meant that all the eligible SC/ST families had received IAY assistance. But this also meant that this panchayat’s SCs/STs quota of 3 had been reverted back to the block, as these can’t be passed on to the general category claimants.

The BDO, Manoj Swain, said he had reverted back 171 in all from the block, out of 255 allotted to the SCs/STs, to the district.

It turned out that at the previous day’s gram sabha (this time gram sabha was spread over two days), 50 villagers had made fresh claims for IAY and would soon be added to the list. These 50 were unverified claims. When asked why, the official handling the matter, gram panchaya extension officer (GPEO), Bhagwan Behera, said: “Who will verify? We have orders only to hold palli sabha and gram sabha.” The seeds of the mistakes committed in the 2005 list have, thus, been planted.

In the neighbouring Krushna Sahi panchayat, all the SC/ST beneficiaries have got money but the general category list still had 80 names waiting for their turn. Since this panchayat’s annual quota for the general category is 2 (and 2 for SCs/STs, which were returned), the last person will have to wait for 40 years.

At the October 18 gram sabha, 200 more people staked and listed their claims. Assuming that their claims are genuine, the waiting period will spread to 140 years if all of them belong to the general category.

It was this long waiting period that caused anxious moments at Sagar Palli village’s palli sabha in Takarada panchayat on October 2. The BDO was heckled, forcing him to explain how the priorities of selecting the beneficiaries had been fixed: top priority was being given (in the existing list) to those with ‘zero’ score in the 2002 BPL survey by the state — which was based on a 13-point criterion, to exclude those having a house, agriculture land, motorized vehicle, TV etc. (Incidentally, this list was rejected by the union government for showing unreasonably high number of BPL families and hence, the state’s BPL list continues to be that of 1997 vintage.)

Next were those who figured in the 1997 BPL list. Then came the ones who scored ‘one’ in the 2002 survey. Those who had completed 100 days of MNREGS work were the last in priority. (Fresh claimants will be listed thereafter. Incidentally, since no gram sabha was held in all these years, no names had been added to the list earlier. It was for the first time that a regular gram sabha was held and fresh claims were listed this year, pending final approval from the higher-ups though.)

At the block level, the BDO said, a quota of 438 was fixed for the IAY beneficiaries for 2012-13. Of these, 267 eligible families (including general and SCs/STs) had already been issued work orders (which means they can start construction of their houses and the funds, linked to the stages of construction, will be released in phases). The rest, 171 (from among SCs/STs beneficiaries), had been reverted to the district.

Since the findings of a house-to-house survey, which the BDO got ordered on his own, have not been compiled, the total number of people in the waiting list or the ineligibles in the list, are not known. No such record exists at the district level either.

Additionally, this block is providing IAY house to FRA (Forest Rights Act) beneficiaries too, for the first time this year. Statistically speaking, there are 189 FRA beneficiaries, of which 151 have already got IAY money. Ten have pucca houses and are ineligible. Eight have been given work orders. Four have two claims each at two different places. The rest, 16, would be settled through the gram sabha.

An interesting nugget: the block sets aside 5 percent quota for the fire victims. The BDO explains why. He says fire causes extensive damages in this part of the state because of a unique arrangement and design of houses. The houses share common walls (of the rooms, not boundary walls which don’t exist) and are arranged in a row without a break until the last one in the row. So, once fire catches one house it spreads quickly to the others. That is why a fire station is coming up in this block, which is unique and unheard of for a rural setting.

This district and the neighbouring Gajapati, which also borders Andhra Pradesh, have very distinctly designed houses. Most of them are between 5-6ft to 12-14ft in width, and 30-40ft or more in length.

This means, rooms are built one after the other in a straight line.

When brothers divide their properties, they divide the house in the middle by erecting a wall. This reduces the width of rooms to a mere 5-6 ft. No house of this width is further divided.

The houses in a row may number 10, 20 or 30.

The rationale of this arrangement was explained by A Tripati Balaji Patra (mark the name), an entrepreneur and civil society activist from neighbouring Hinjlicut as he took me around his house: (a) Neighbours build houses around common walls (of rooms in a straight line) to prevent thieves from digging holes into a house from a side wall, called ‘sindhi’ all over Odisha, which used to be a common threat to all mud houses. Mud houses may have disappeared but the practice continues. People in this part of the state are known for their excessive fondness for and hoarding gold, and hence the threat. A common wall reduces the threat, unless the house is the last one in the row, and makes it easier for the neighbours to detect any disturbances, should an attempt be made to dig a hole. (b) It is economical because common wall of all rooms reduces the cost. (c) When brothers separate they erect a wall across the house (all rooms), reducing the width.

The distinctive nature of houses isn’t the only thing. Notice Patra’s name – A Tripati Balaji Patra – a unique mix of Telugu and Odia tradition of naming.

As for the benefits of IAY reaching people, there is little to doubt. Visits to villages show that people are actually getting benefit in large numbers. Enter any village in the block and you can easily find out houses built with IAY fund. In Subaliapalli village under Khirida panchayat, for example, there are at least 5 houses built under the scheme on either side of the main village road. There are several others on the northern end of the village. All built over the years. In Takarada village, Bhika Das got the work orders for Rs 45,000 in 2010 and spent about Rs 10,000 more from his pocket to build a small house for his family. Though Takarada village is supposed to have exhausted the list, the villagers said three or four people staked their claims at the recently held palli sabha.

Nevertheless, the problems are aplenty. It isn’t only about the long waiting list. It is also about bogus entries and ineligibles cornering the benefits. As lists of Dhavalapur and other panchayats showed, a very large number of people with pucca houses got in, which were detected during a house-to-house survey. An obvious flaw in the survey is that nobody knows quite how many of them had pucca houses when they got IAY funding. The panchayati raj (that manages the scheme) secretary, Aparajita Sarangi, told Governance Now that it was her gut feeling that 2 to 5 percent in the list could be bogus. Going by the experience, the bogus entries could be much higher. Since the recently held gram sabha listed names without verification, the threat continues.

Luckily Sarangi is alive to the possibility and has asked her officials to put the list in public domain and invite objections to “weed out” the ineligibles. Not less than an officer of sub-collector rank will hear the complaints, inquire into it, prepare a correct list by November 20 and get it uploaded in the official website by November 25. That is her orders.

Collector Dr Krishan Kumar has a different take on the issue. He says the solution lies in fixing a clear responsibility, which is not possible in the current arrangement. Who would you hold accountable for an ineligible person getting IAY benefit when a collector, a BDO, panchayats and its functionaries at various levels, separately or together, can decide who gets the IAY benefit? They become a party to the dispute and will more likely to cover up the lapses.

Fixing responsibility, he says, will require first, empowering the panchayats by giving them functions, functionaries and funds as envisaged in the 73rd amendment, so that at the panchayat level, a sarpanch gets complete control over all administration of all the schemes in his/her areas and the funds. A gram panchayat can then demand accountability from the sarpanch. The higher ups can act as both supervisors and arbitrators.

This handing over of the panchayat’s powers that the law envisages can’t be done by the bureaucrats. It has to be done by the political establishment, says the collector, rightly.

Thereby hangs the tale.

(Prasanna Mohanty was stationed in Sheragada block of Ganjam district late last year)

Where MNREGS takes a back seat

Villagers in Ganjam prefer to migrate for better wages and sustained employment

Prasanna Mohanty | Ganjam (Odisha) | December 07 2012

Prasanna

People feel MNREGS works are low paid and un-remunerative

On the condition of confidentiality, a sarpanch of Sheragada block in Odisha’s Ganjam district shared some secrets about the MNREGS works.
He said over a period of two months ending in June this year he got a pond renovated under the employment guarantee scheme which provided work to about 140 to 160 people. Most of those engaged for the job were from a neighbouring panchayat. But on paper, all the names were from his own panchayat. In all, Rs 2.40 lakh were paid to the workers on the spot, not by the government but by him. He drew money from the village fund (called ‘gaan kotha’) for the purpose. Not all the listed beneficiaries have received their official payment. As and when they do, the village fund is replenished.
The sarpanch was trying to impress how difficult it is to get MNREGS work done in his area because most people are just not interested in a low-paid job. When challenged, he pointed to a villager listening to the conversation and said, ask him. The villager (who too will remain unnamed for confidentiality) said: “Payment comes after three months. How will I, a daily wager, and my family survive for so long? Besides, I get Rs 150 a day doing other work. Why will I take MNREGS work for Rs 100?” (Though minimum wage under MNREGS is Rs 126 in Odisha, it is linked to the actual output and so could be less.)
The grama rozgar sevak (GRS), who supervises all MNREGS work in a panchayat, said he was forced to give Rs 150, instead of the minimum wage of Rs 126, because people were reluctant. “How do I adjust the difference except by making fake entries?” When asked how he could get away with it, he said those who received Rs 150 suggested the names of the job card holders for fake listing.
He had another issue. If less number of people showed up for a work, and they could all be given work only for 100 days each, what would happen if the work wasn’t completed in those many days? He would have to make them work for more days and make fake entries in the muster rolls.
Quite clearly, there is a conspiracy of silence at work that keeps the wrap on such wrong doings.
A special social audit conducted in this panchayat in June this year by Omega – a joint initiative between the state government and UK-based funding agency, DFID – confirmed that “people feel that MNREGS works are low paid and un-remunerative”. It, however, failed to detect the fake entries in the muster rolls.
The GRS said the root cause of corruption was fixing of a target for MNREGS works. He said the previous BDO (the current one took charge in May this year) had told him to carry out works worth Rs 16 lakh if he wanted the salaries of all five panchayat functionaries, which come to about Rs 35,000 a month, released in time. The salaries are paid out of six per cent administrative cost earmarked for the purpose. (Senior officials contacted later said the target could have been given to ensure adequate works were taken up.) The new BDO, Manoj Swain, had not given any such target, he said.
Inquiries in this panchayat had earlier revealed that a 72-year-old villager had received 77 days of work in 2011-12. But the old man said he had not gone for work in the last one-and-a-half year. When confronted with official documents by Governance Now, he said he didn’t know how his name got listed in the muster rolls.
There was another entry against a person whose family couldn’t be found in the village at the time but the villagers said he was a 10-year-old boy. He was shown to have got 100 days of work in the same year.
In fact, it was these findings and the official document that forced the self-indicting disclosures from the sarpanch and GRS.
A few more examples are in order, which show how the scheme is working at the ground level.
In Gopa Palli village of Bandhaguda panchayat, villagers assembled for the October 2 palli sabha said that there had been no MNREGS works for the second year in running. This was in response to a question. There was no demand. There was indifference. The panchayat officials said a pond was to be renovated (dug dipper and cleared of muck) this year but since it didn’t dry up, it wasn’t taken up. Then the mandatory period of stoppage of work (because of rains) set in – from June 15 to October 15.
Similarly, in Subaliapalli village in Dhanantara panchayat, no work was taken up after 2010-11 because there was simply no proposal. One proposal was made in February this year but it was rejected by the officials because it was too late in the day and the panchayat elections were due (held in February-March). In earlier two years, two projects had been taken up. A 12ft wide and 400m long road was laid over two years at a cost of Rs 5 lakh. It has now reduced to 2-3 ft wide ‘pagdandi’. A pond was also renovated and now holds sufficient water.
In Dhavalapur panchayat, there are 559 job card holders and yet there is no proposal for work even after the gram sabha meeting of October 17-18. A panchayat official said a lot of work needed to be done in the area, but there was little demand.
Low demand is reflected in the fact that of 4.4 lakh job card holders in the district, only 1.03 lakh have demanded and got the job this year, as on October 5.
It is also reflected in the panchayati raj (that runs MNREGS in the state) department’s letter of September 17 to all district project directors expressing concern that the “demand for employment and expenditure are not up to the (proposed) work”.
Low demand is primarily because of a tradition of migration for work. Most of the able-bodied individuals work in Surat, Mumbai, Bhubaneswar and elsewhere, where they get better wages – Rs 150 to 250 a day. They find regular work in textile, embroidery and diamond cutting units. Or at construction site.
Historically speaking, the origin of the phenomenon (in this southern and western part of Odisha) is traced to the devastating famine of 1866 – known to Odias as the ‘na anka durvikhya’ that wiped out a million lives, almost one-third of the state’s population at the time, and sparked a massive migration that has endured. Besides, farming is largely rain-fed. Land holdings are low, most of the people being small and marginal farmers or landless. All these add to the pressure to look for job elsewhere.
There are no official statistics but the collector, Dr Krishan Kumar, says anywhere between 2 and 3 lakh people (of 37 lakh in the district) move out in search of work. He concedes that MNREGS has not made substantial impact on migration, though the agriculture wage has tripled in a matter of few years – from about Rs 50-60 in 2009 to Rs 150 now.
The collector says the last financial year was particularly bad for the district because of a CBI inquiry. The apex court had ordered it following a petition by an NGO which alleged massive embezzlement of funds in the infamous KBK region (Kalahandi, Koraput and Balangir districts that now have been divided into eight). Though Ganjam didn’t figure, “there was a general decline in the MNREGS works in the state and Ganjam mirrored that”.
Besides, the panchayat elections were due in February 2012 and in this politically sensitive district (home to the chief minister, revenue minister and several MPs) both the sarpanchs and BDOs backed out. They were reluctant to take up new projects. Thus, as against a total expenditure of around Rs 90 crore in 2007-8 (at its peak), only Rs 55 crore were spent in 2011-12. He says things are looking up with Rs 50.09 crore already spent until October this year.
Costly land and insufficient government land are the other issues he listed to account for less work.
Infusing new life
The panchayati raj department is trying to stem the rot through a slew of new initiatives. The first is to energise the panchayats and get the villagers to do their planning. For this, for the first time in anywhere in the country, a state-wide campaign was launched to hold palli sabha and gram sabha to prepare five-year perspective plan and annual action plan between October 2 and 18. The officials expect to complete the rest of the formalities (Gram sabha’s proposal will be cleared by panchayat samiti and then the zila parishad) and issue the entire year’s work orders on April 1.
New panchayati raj secretary Aparajita Sarangi has taken several other measures too. She has made it almost impossible to take up road connectivity projects that cause much of the wasteful expenditure. She told Governance Now: “We received a lot of complaints that machines are being used for road constructions. There is possibility of siphoning off funds in this. Besides, durable roads can be made under other schemes. Somewhere down the line, mud roads are a waste of money.” Durable roads with higher material component can be built under the cement-concrete road and gram poanchayat road schemes of the state, MPLAD, MLALAD, BRGF (backward region grant fund), PMGSY, Integrated Action Plan for Maoist-hit districts etc.
A mud road can still be built but only with a district collector’s special permission.
Digging up and renovation of ponds, the other major cause of wasteful expenditure, haven’t been stopped though. She explained that the state was focusing more on “mo pokhari” (‘my pond’ scheme started in 2009) – a state government scheme that promotes integrated development by providing additional fund and resources for pisciculture in those ponds and plantation of fruit trees on the banks. Under this scheme, a grant of up to Rs 2 lakh is provided to an individual. All small and marginal farmers are eligible for the grant.
Incidentally, renovation of ponds accounts for a maximum of Rs 22.6 crore of Rs 50 crore spent on MNREGS this year in the district. Water conservation/harvesting and rural connectivity come second and third with Rs 11.75 crore and Rs 9.5 crore of expenditure respectively.
Another significant initiative is to identify “potential pockets” where MNREGS works could be taken up on a massive scale. The criteria for identifying such panchayats are: poverty, SC/ST population, non-availability of works, less payment of wages, non-industrial area, non-irrigated area and away from urban area. These have been spelt out in her directive to the districts. So far, 3,500 gram panchayats, out of a total 6,236 in the state, have been identified for the purpose.
As for Sheragada block, the BDO, Manoj Swain, has identified 14 of 22 panchayats as potential ones in which, he says, maximum importance will be given to soil and water conservation and water harvesting and individual projects. Besides, at least two community projects would be taken up every year in every village.
Sheragada seems to have taken to building check dams in a big way. There is one to be found anywhere there is a stream or water flow. Such is the administration’s enthusiasm that in Krushna Sahi panchayat for example, the gram sabha had proposed four mud roads and renovation of four ponds for this financial year but five check dams were built instead (roads are out in any case). Pond renovation is quite common too. Emphasis on water harvesting is quite keeping with the need of this rain-fed area.
Interestingly, Sheragada is the first block to take up e-muster rolls and e-payment (through electronic fund management system), which started last year to prevent leakages and ensure timely payment. The BDO says the block is the first one in the country to do so. But the problem remains. The BDO says that is because there were some glitches with the SBI’s business correspondent model, called Zero Mass, which held up payments. Now the state has now banned Zero Mass and the SBI has been directed to transfer the money directly to the beneficiaries’ accounts. When MNREGS work resume, after the annual break for rains, he assures, payment will be quick. He also says that following the example of Sheragada, the entire state will now be following e-muster and e-payment from now onwards. That surely will be good news for those who would like to stay put and work in their villages but don’t because of delayed payment and other issues. “MNREGS can provide work only for 100 days. Thereafter what will we do?” That question remains unanswered for now.

In open defecation area, village says hello to own loo

Success story: Ganjam NGO makes toilets, bathroom for Subaliapalli village in Dhanantara panchayat. Now eyeing second village

Prasanna Mohanty | Ganjam (Odisha) | November 07 2012

Prasanna Mohanty

The model village. Entry point to Subaliapalli village in Sheragada block of Ganjam district. All 108 households not only have individual toilets, they actually use it. No other village has such distinction in the block.

 

 Image Gallery

Every evening, between 6 and 7, the entire population of Sheragada block in Ganjam district is out on the streets — young and old, men and women. No, it isn’t because earthquake strikes the block every evening at that hour. It’s just that they are all out to defecate on the streets — a daily ritual.
Long ago, nobody really knows exactly when, all of them fell in love with metalled roads, especially the 14-km State Highway 36 that connects the block headquarters with NH 217. They simply squat on either side of the road, relieving themselves in small groups as you drive by. It helps that there are no streetlights on this state highway.
Also read more Reports from Other India
Odisha’s date with grassroots democracy
Bleak board: a ‘scam’ to build ghost schools
MNREGS: Guaranteed work, really?
Nalanda’s entrepreneur who spawned a revolution
What stinks so bad in Orissa CM’s constituency?
The two halves of Abu Road block

Except for people of Subaliapalli village in Dhanantara panchayat.
These villagers don’t need to go out to the streets because all 108 households in the village have their own toilets in their backyards. Thanks to a programme of total sanitation carried out by Ganjam-based NGO Gram Vikas, they are a happy lot, having washed away the stigma and leading a clean and healthy life. Pradeep Badatiya, a small farmer, says his family is much relieved since water supply to the toilets started in 2008. “The toilets are convenient.
We don’t have go to dirty places to dirty them further, and are saved from the shame of having to defecate in the open,” he says.

There is no fear of wild animals either, especially for women who get up and go for morning ablutions at 4 am.
Same is the case with P Raju Patra and the other villagers. The ‘revolution’ began in 2005 when Gram Vikas approached villagers and persuaded them to build their own toilets – a set of two pucca rooms with roof, one for relieving and the other for bathing. Once each villager had such structures ready in their backyards in a couple of years, a water tank was built and three borewells dug just outside the village.
Each household was then given three 24x7 piped water connections — one each in the toilet, bathroom and kitchen.On average, the cost of building each such toilet came to Rs 16,000, of which Rs 3,500 was given by Gram Vikas. The cost would have been higher had villagers themselves not offered free labour.
The water tank and borewells were funded by Gram Vikas and cost about Rs 10 lakh. There were additional expenses on laying out the pipelines. While these villagers are not any more prosperous than their neighbours — most are small and marginal farmers — it was their collective decision-making, unity and a sense of shame that goaded them to change their lifestyle. Sojan K Thomas, who heads Gram Vikas’s rural health and environment programme under which the Subaliapalli experiment was carried out, says they took care of three aspects while working on the project: providing “usable and decent” toilets, water connection to these toilets, and ensuring 100 percent participation of villagers. “We made it a precondition that we wouldn’t start work until there is 100 percent participation and contribution from villagers,” he says.
To ensure this, each household was asked to pay Rs 1,000, which went into building a corpus.
Once the system was put in place, each household was asked to pays a monthly Rs 30 for maintenance and a person was  hired for a monthly pay of Rs 1,000 to ensure that the system works without glitches. The going, thus far, has been smooth.
Gram Vikas has moved on but not out.
It still keeps a close eye. It has set up a village committee headed by a president, P Ravindra Kumar Patra, which meets regularly to ensure that the locals do not return to their old habits. Thomas says next on their agenda is Nuabali village: with its 70 households under Khirida panchayat, it will soon join Subaliapalli. The toilets, water tank and connections are ready and electricity supply snags will be sorted out soon.
Sheragada block will then have two villages where people don’t defecate in the open.

What stinks so bad in Odisha CM’s constituency?

Wonder what open defecation in its most bizarre form can do to a place? Come, visit Sheragada block of Ganjam district

Prasanna Mohanty | Sheragada, Ganjam (Orissa) | October 17 2012

Photo: Prasanna Mohanty

The road to Sheragada is covered by human faeces. The villagers come and defecate on the road despite having toilets. There is strong taboo against defecating anywhere near the home and the villagers choose the road instead

• 
• 
• 

« previous | next »

View

 

 Image Gallery

It will be prudent of Odisha’s tourism department to carry a warning along with its catchy invitation to the tourists that describes the state as ‘The Soul of Incredible India!’ – keep away from chief minister Naveen Patnaik’s home district Ganjam, especially his home constituency Hinjlicut in the district.
If, by sheer misfortune, you step into Sheragada, one of the two blocks that constitute the Hinjlicut assembly segment, you will be overpowered by a strong stink that can make you pass out instantly. Escaping hospitalisation can only be a stroke of luck. Impossible to visualise unless you have seen it and a truly bizarre sight to behold, the entire block is actually an open public toilet. Recall VS Naipaul describing India of the 1960s in An Area of Darkness: “Indians defecate everywhere. They defecate, mostly, beside the railway tracks. But they also defecate on the beaches; they defecate on the streets; they never look for cover…” He never visited Sheragada. Had he been, his description would have been more savaging.
Sheragada is at the centre of Ganjam, a coastal district in south bordering Andhra Pradesh, with a pronounced influence of Telugu culture and lifestyle. To reach it (which we wouldn’t advise) you will have to take NH 217, connecting Gopalpur (known for its quaint beach) in Ganjam with Raipur in Chhattisgarh. Forty kilometres down the highway, at Syamalai Chowk, a two-lane metalled road going left (State Highway No 36) connects the highway with the Sheragada block headquarters. A signboard says the distance is 14 km. The road is fine, flanked on either side by green paddy fields. By the time you have taken a full glance at the rural setting, the stink hits you. If you survive the first blast, you will notice the source of the stink – human faeces covering much of the road. Not the road sides, mind you, which are covered with grass. Not even the fields that are spread out on either side and green with standing crops of paddy and sugarcane. Only the metalled road is a public toilet. Don’t ever take the smaller roads that connect or lead to villages. Those are completely covered with faeces. (The taxiwalla will not agree in any case.) The gain from MNREGS can be debated, what can’t is the usefulness of roads and check dams, especially its cemented parts, that have been built under it. They provide excellent perch for defecation.

Good on paper
Officially, almost every house has a toilet. A survey by the district water and sanitation mission (DWSM), which is in the process of being compiled, shows that of 10,015 BPL households in the block, 9,988 have got toilets built by the government. Of 8,967 APL households, 5,286 have their own toilets. The block has 140 schools, of which 137 have toilets. The record is not so good for anganwadi centres (AWC) with just 19 of 192 having toilets and 40 more in the process of being added.
The data is difficult to disapprove of. Random checks in several villages show that toilets have indeed been provided to most of the BPL families. Villagers and social activists don’t dispute it either. The problem is hardly anybody uses those toilets. The tradition of defecating in the open, and in groups, is so strong that almost all the toilets the government has provided under total sanitation campaign (TSC) since early 2000 are simply lying unused and wasted. In Sarangi Palli village in Bandhaguda panchayat for example, Duryodhan Nayak got a toilet built a few yards away from his house along the village road about a year-and-half ago. A look at it suggests that it was never used. His wife, Pramila Nayak, explains why: “It is getting dirty and is located close to the house.” Ask her how is the road she is using as toilet any better and she will just lower her gaze and keep quiet.
Sarpanch of Takarada panchayat Jyotish Nayak says people don’t want to defecate at a place close to their homes. That is why the roads used for defecation are always far away from houses. More honest villagers will tell you that it is sheer “habit” and “tradition” of the community, used to as they are to defecate in the open for centuries. Those familiar with the village life will vouch that defecation, especially in the evening hours, is as much a social function. Men and women, boys and girls move out in groups, catching up with day’s gossips and sharing their daily grind even as they walk away from the village to relieve themselves. They defecate and move to the nearby water source to clean themselves. Flushing is not part of the ritual, which is what is stopping them now from using low-cost toilets provided to them. Only in late night hours some may be found carrying buckets to clean themselves, but not flush. And none bothers to look for cover or cover himself/herself when vehicles pass by with their headlights on.
But a wind of change is blowing. There is a growing realisation that defecating on the roads is not something to be proud of. Police have put up signboards warning that defecating on the road is “illegal and banned”. These signboards came up after the chief minister visited the area.
Two local social activists, Arun Tripathy and Siddharth Sahu, tell Governance Now that one day in October 2011, Naveen Patnaik was being driven down to Sheragada. (Sheragada block was added to Hinjlicut assembly segment during the delimitation of 2009). This was unusual as Patnaik normally uses choppers for travel. After returning to Bhubaneswar, he called the district collector and asked him how 30-ft-wide roads have got reduced to 10-feet ones. The collector got into the act and started a campaign to keep the roads clean. Public meetings and rallies followed. Schoolchildren, anganwadi and health workers, civil society groups and panchayat members were roped in. The administration promised individual toilets, community toilets and government land on the outskirts of villages for defecation. More enlightened villagers and NGOs picketed even as police took evening rounds to dissuade people from defecating on the roads. But everything fizzled out in a few months. When rains came and paddy and sugarcane were sown in July, people were back on the main roads.

Fresh initiatives
So now once all efforts have come to naught, how does the administration plan to overcome the problem? Block development officer Manoj Kumar Swain says the administration has worked out two strategies: (a) to extend toilets to such APL families as small and marginal farmers who are not included in BPL list but are now eligible along with disabled and women-headed families (as per the central government’s directive) and (b) build community latrines. The community latrines will have 10 toilets each for men and women, on the village outskirts for which the village will have to contribute 10 percent cost (the rest will be paid by DWSM) and also pay a user fee of Rs 10 per month per family – the funds thus accumulated would be used to employ people to keep the toilets clean. These community toilets will have five-ft high walls but no roof. The district administration had built community toilets elsewhere outside Sheragada block but they too failed because nobody bothered to keep them clean. There was no water supply to these toilets either. Therefore, this time, there will be a tank with every community toilet and someone to keep it clean, Swain says.
To this rural development department has added a third strategy. In order to increase public participation, it has directed that construction of toilets under the individual household latrine (IHHL) scheme – under which now individual beneficiaries will be given Rs 9,100, of which MNREGS will contribute Rs 4,500 and the beneficiary will add Rs 900, taking the total cost to Rs 10,000 – will be the beneficiaries’ responsibility. Twenty beneficiaries will form a group and select a leader to do the running around. The state has been engaging NGOs and contractors to built toilets since early 2000 with little gain.
SN Tripathy, secretary, rural development, who looks after rural water and sanitation drive, says the focus will now shift to two activities – (a) launch a campaign to mobilise people to cover up faeces with earth after defecation, as per the central government’s directive and (b) launch education/awareness campaign to change the toilet habits of people through various means.

Half-hearted approach
Even a casual look at the toilets that have been built will show why they are wasting. Most of the toilets are without covers. Just a bare structure to sit and defecate. These are in front of the houses along the common village road and present an ugly sight. Villagers explain how some people descended one fine day, set up the structures and went away. In some cases, a separate structure has been erected on the “side”, roofless and open in the front. These are connected to pits but require flushing, something the villagers are not used to. Cleaning the faeces is not in their ritual. How can they let faeces collect in front or side of their houses to stink?
Besides, village-level “palli” sabhas, detailed discussions with block officials and panchayat functionaries show that sanitation is not in anybody’s priority list. The absence of awareness about hygiene and a proper sewage system have turned the villagers against the modern, low-cost and ugly toilets that are being “given” to them. They wonder how these toilets are any better. A toilet within the house may be comforting to the urban elites but a very repulsive thought to the villagers. So is defecating in front or near the house. Many APL families with toilets in their backyards are religiously avoided by the elders, though not by the new generation.
Unless villagers understand the benefits of good toilet practices and are convinced about the usefulness of the alternatives being provided, the sanitation mission is bound to fail. Sheragada block is a good example. Targets have been, more or less, met, but not the objective. After all, it is a fight against centuries old tradition and habit. n

Mr FM, name those 700 names

Don’t play footsie with likely criminals, even terrorists

Prasanna Mohanty | November 28 2011 http://www.governancenow.com/views/columns/mr-fm-name-those-700-names

The union government’s insistence on keeping the names of 700 entities holding secret accounts in HSBC Bank in Geneva close to its heart reflects how sincere it is about fighting the black money menace. Not only did it grudgingly admit to having received the information from the French government after the media went public, finance minister Pranab Mukherjee justified it saying that the government “will stop getting any further information” if it didn’t “honour international treaties and go public with the names”. He had said the same thing when the German government provided details of 18 Indians having ill-gotten wealth stashed in LGT Bank in Liechtenstein. He said the names would be disclosed only when prosecution starts and the matter comes to the court. Investigations are on, he assured.

There is every reason to disbelieve him and his government. For one, more than two years have passed since LGT Bank details were received. Nothing is known about the progress in investigation. Secondly, in the case of HSBC information has been leaked to suggest that about ` 100 crore have been “recovered” by way of tax dues. This would indicate that there would be no prosecution at least in some cases and that those cases have been closed. This would also suggest that the government is treating it merely as a matter of tax evasion. At least two persons holding high offices have said that this may not always be true. In 2007, the then national security advisor, MK Narayanan, confirmed that terror fund was being routed into the Indian stock market through dubious overseas accounts. Earlier this year, former CBDT chairman Sudhir Chandra told Governance Now, “There is a definite link between the illicit money and a wide range of criminal activities that impinge on the national security issues. In many cases we have come across huge stashes of money coming from dubious sources. These sources could be narcotics, smuggling and terrorism.”

Even if we were to assume that these are simple cases of tax evasion, prudence demands that the source of the money is traced since it is difficult to imagine someone taking such an extraordinary step as to operate a secret account abroad just to avoid tax on legitimate income. We have the Bofors case and more recently, the Madhu Koda episode, to guide us. As for the secrecy clause in international treaties, experts have pointed out that nothing stops public disclosure when the money in question involves criminal activities.

There are more reasons. The HSBC details were squirreled out by an ex-employee before the French government stepped in. In that sense the information may be available outside the official channels. Now there is a buzz in the power corridors that several other countries too have passed on details about many more secret accounts and that the HSBC list may includes the name of three MPs. In such a scenario, the least a responsible government is expected to do is to take people into confidence and assure them that nothing would be done that would jeopardise national security or financial health of the country. And the very first step in that direction would be to name the names. Investigation into the source of ill-gotten wealth and prosecution would then become the next logical steps.

Singhvi panel report deconstructed

Parliamentary panel shortchanges parliament, opposition

Prasanna Mohanty | December 13 2011 http://www.governancenow.com/views/columns/singhvi-panel-report-deconstructed

When Anna Hazare sat on a fast demanding a strong Lokpal in August this year, a big fuss was made about the ‘sanctity’ of parliament and its procedures by the parliamentarians, especially in view of the fact that the matter was pending with the parliamentary standing  committee then. Now that the standing committee has submitted its report we are wiser about that sentiment.

For one, it has shortchanged parliament itself by ignoring two of the three key elements of its ‘unanimous’ resolution adopted on August 27 envisioning the shape of Lokpal. The resolution read: “This House agrees ‘in principle’ on the following issues – (i) Citizen’s Charter, (ii) lower bureaucracy under Lokpal through an appropriate mechanism, and (iii) establishment of Lokayukta in the States”.
Also see:

Shouldn't the PM come within the ambit of Lokpal?
Team Anna explains the government's vision of Lokpal
Government's spin minister throws a no-ball at Lokpal

The standing committee report adopts the third - establishment of Lokayukta in States - but dumps the other two. Its report says, there should be separate mechanisms for the Citizen’s Charter and that the lower bureaucracy (Group C and D officers). Even ruling party members, Meenakshi Natrajan, PT Thomas and Deepa Dasmunshi, disagree on exclusion of the lower bureaucracy and give a dissenting note saying that Group C officers should be included. Interestingly, the panel changed its views after initially including lower bureaucracy in Lokpal’s ambit.

There are other key issues that render the Lokpal being envisaged by the standing committee ineffective. The selection panel for the Lokpal consists of nine members – prime minister, speaker of Lok Sabha, leaders of oppositions of two houses, a union minister nominated by the prime minister, a jurist nominated by government, a prominent public figure nominated by government, a sitting judge of supreme court and a chief justice of high court. As it is clear, the government has a majority say in the selection – five out nine members are controlled by it. This makes Lokpal a puppet in the hands of the government of the day.

Independence of the CBI, the premier investigating agency, has been compromised by retaining the current arrangement as per which the government retains administrative control over it, making it toothless and prone to political manipulation.

The standing committee is non-committal on inclusion of the prime minister in Lokpal’s ambit in spite of popular sentiments and contrarian views of the person occupying the august office himself and the members of the panel belonging to the opposition parties. The panel merely lists various options without taking a position. This evoked a maximum of five dissenting notes from the members belonging to the opposition parties.

On the other contentious issue, jurisdiction over the MPs themselves, the panel is in favour of maintaining existing arrangement which provides them immunity for anything they do inside parliament, notwithstanding two cash-for-votes scams and a cash-for-question scam. This attracts two dissenting notes.

With such a blatant act of sabotaging public sentiments, parliament’s unanimous resolution in some aspects and without empowering the toothless anti-corruption mechanism that exist today, the standing committee fails to do justice with the onerous task that it was dealing with. In fact, it is quite in keeping with parliament’s inglorious track record of the past 43 years - the period over which parliament has been deliberating the Lokpal issue without making any headway.

Anna ko gussa kyon aata hai

And why our politicians do not get angry when they should

 

Prasanna Mohanty | December 15 2011 http://www.governancenow.com/views/columns/anna-ko-gussa-kyon-aata-hai

Something extraordinary happened on November 25. Our democratically elected representatives actually conducted some parliamentary business, only for a little while though, without bringing the houses down – something that hadn’t happened before and wouldn’t for the next five days of the winter session.
That day the presiding officers began the day’s proceedings by ‘condemning’ the assault on agriculture minister Sharad Pawar. This was followed by more of the same from leading members of the houses who were livid at the development. The prime minister, his cabinet colleagues and all major political parties had expressed their anguish the previous day itself, minutes after a youth slapped Pawar at a public function not far away from the parliament house saying, “This is my answer to corrupt politicians.” One veteran minister wondered aloud: “Don’t know where this country is going.”
For once, politicians of all hues buried their differences and united in venting their anger. This done, they proceeded to bring the houses down, that is, until December 7 when the government managed to cool the frayed tempers on FDI in retail.
One man is angry at this. He was then too when he was told about Pawar being slapped and asked his informants, the TV reporters: “Just one slap?” That was Anna Hazare. He did subsequently express remorse at his ‘non-Gandhian’ comment and does so again in his latest blog posting but this time he asks the politicians to think why Pawar was slapped.
Here is the link to Anna's blog: annahazaresays.indiaagainstcorruption.org
Why was Pawar slapped? Because there is public anger against unbridled corruption and runaway inflation, he writes. Then he proceeds to list some of Pawar’s contributions to public life. He says Pawar and his ministerial colleagues never bothered to redress Maharashtra farmers’ problems he has been raising for the past 22 years. As agriculture minister, Pawar imported wheat worth several crore of rupees, which was found unfit for human consumption and dumped. Pawar promoted corrupt ministers, and corrupt officials, against whom Anna had provided evidence and which led to the sacking of some of them but never prosecuted for their crimes. On the other hand, he and his colleagues have been hounded for years through inane inquiries and false cases for exposing the corrupt around Pawar.

Why a slap to Pawar evokes so much anger in our politicians who are perfectly at peace with Pawar’s many misdemeanours? Why they never lose cool when distressed farmers commit suicide across the country and for several years in running? Or when the farmers are killed in police firing for peacefully demanding their rights?

“Ek thappad ka gussa kai logon ko aaya, lekin pura jeevan samaj or desh ke liye arpan karte hue itni takleef di jati hai uska gussa kisi ko nahin aata. Yeh durbhagya ki baat hai.” (One slap evokes so much anger in so many but no one is angry when somebody who has dedicated his entire life to people’s welfare is being constantly persecuted.) The last reference is to Anna himself.

Food security, Lokpal and lessons in policymaking

Politics vs public welfare: No prize for guessing the winner

Prasanna Mohanty | December 20 2011 http://www.governancenow.com/views/columns/food-security-lokpal-and-lessons-policymaking

Nothing, it seems, moves our elected government as political expediency. Note the alacrity with which the government moved to clear the food security bill and induct RLD leader Ajit Singh into the cabinet on Sunday in sharp contrast with its vacillation over the Lokpal bill.

Amid reports of rotting stocks in the FCI godowns even while a large chunk of population faced starvation, the apex court last year asked the government to distribute food grains free to the needy. The government refused, saying that it would require Rs 5,000 crore to honour the court’s wishes. The same government, however, had no hesitation in clearing the food security bill on Sunday that would require additional resources of Rs 30,000 crore. Worse, some of the valid concerns about the leaking PDS and difficulties in identifying beneficiaries and complying with the provisions like taking food to75 percent of population in rural and 50 percent in urban areas, which would defeat the very purpose of the bill, were overlooked.

What has changed between then and now? The forthcoming elections in UP and other states that would follow. The Congress-led government wants to go to people saying that it cares for them before the election commission’s code of conduct comes into effect.

Similar motive forced the government to induct RLD leader Ajit Singh and handover the civil aviation portfolio to him, knowing very well that this sector is facing an unprecedented crisis. The national career, Air India, is in a big mess and so are some private airlines like Kingfisher. But Ajit Singh said not a word about this after being sworn in. On the contrary, he said his attention was firmly focused on the UP elections. This wasn’t unexpected, for he wasn’t brought in because of his understanding of the civil aviation industry in the first place. He was brought in because of the Jat votes he will bring to the table during the elections in UP. He was more keen on the agriculture ministry which Sharad Pawar was unwilling to relinquish.

Contrast this with the government’s dithering over the Lokpal bill. For the past 43 years, successive governments and parliament have been debating and discussing the anti-corruption mechanism threadbare. For close to six months, Anna Hazare has mobilized a strong public opinion for an effective Lokpal. There have been several all-party meetings and several standing committee reports, but all these were clearly inadequate in convincing the same government to move ahead. The cabinet again deferred a decision on it last week.

The disconnect between people and their representatives running the government on their behalf couldn’t be sharper.