ET2011 ⁽¹²⁾

Subsidised grain, which can be readily converted into cash in the open market, will do precious little to alter the consumption pattern of the beneficiaries.Read full article While some may view the food security Bill as the instrument of combating poverty, this distinction belongs to the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme, the flagship anti-poverty programme of the United Progressive Alliance government. The proponents of the food security Bill at the National Advisory Council have promoted it as the instrument of fighting widespread and rising hunger, instead. But what is the empirical basis of the claims of widespread and rising hunger in India? Surely, we cannot go by the claims of the Food and Agricultural Organization, World Bank and many NGOs who themselves prosper from propagating the view that India and Africa suffer from ever-rising hunger and poverty.

Miscommunication has led to people not realising that new poverty estimates count more Indians as poor.Read full article Watching the recent debate on the poverty line has been a depressing experience. As the debate unfolded, we witnessed self-righteous commentators engaged in a game of one-upmanship to prove that no one was more concerned for the poor than they, electronic media failing in its responsibility to inform the public simple facts and the Planning Commission proving itself incapable of communicating in simple terms the rationale behind its proposal either the public or the Supreme Court. To understand what was so wrong with the debate, it is important to note at the outset that the revised poverty line, which became the punching bag of all and sundry, had been recommended by the late Professor Suresh Tendulkar, an economist with impeccable knowledge of both the history and economics of poverty and poverty lines in India. He had also been known and uniformly admired for his integrity and forthrightness. Therefore, contrary to the picture the activists and media painted, the revised poverty line was not…

Only in India does redistribution, which keeps the poor and marginalised out of the mainstream of the economy, pass for inclusive growth. Read full article Only in India does redistribution, which keeps the poor and marginalised out of the mainstream of the economy, pass for inclusive growth. In much of the rest of the world, inclusive growth would mean giving the poor and marginalised a direct stake in the economy with fast-growing industries and services absorbing them into gainful employment and, thus, making them true participants and partners in the growth process. But in India, we go by an altogether different paradigm: we tell the marginalised to stay where they are. Indeed, we do everything to bolt them down to their rural location offering employment and free health and education if they would stay where they are. "Why bother moving," we tell them, "when we are bringing the fruits of rapid growth elsewhere right to your doorstep."

To be sure, mere presence of members who may turn out to be criminals once the judiciary rules on cases pending against them is a blot.Read full article If you think the presence in Parliament of a sizable number of members with pending criminal charges against them has something to do with the recent high-profile corruptions scandals, think again. None of the members recently charged with bribery and corruption - A Raja, Suresh Kalmadi and Kanimozhi - had a single pre-existing criminal charge against them. Nor do some well-known perpetrators of corruption in the Cabinet have such charges pending against them. Several candidates facing serious criminal charges, including Mohammad Shahabuddin, currently serving a life sentence for kidnapping with intent to murder and awaiting trial for eight murders and 20 attempted murders, have managed to enter Parliament. But unlike at the level of the state, such members have rarely headed the ministries at the Centre. Thus, other than a minister of state, no minister belonging to the current Lok Sabha has pending criminal charges that the Association for Democratic Reform (ADR) classifies…

The story of India's march to socialism between 1969 and 1976 under Prime Minister Indira Gandhi offers an interesting parallel to the last seven years.Read full article The story of India's march to socialism between 1969 and 1976 under Prime Minister Indira Gandhi offers an interesting parallel (and contrast) to the last seven years. Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri, who succeeded Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru in 1964, unexpectedly died in January 1966. The Congress party bosses, known as the Syndicate, chose lightweight Mrs Gandhi over rival Morarji Desai in the hope of continuing to rule the country by proxy. In the February 1967 elections, the Congress fared poorly, winning just 283 out of 516 seats in the Lok Sabha. Morarji Desai won his seat with substantial following in the new Parliament. This forced the Syndicate and Mrs Gandhi to accept a compromise whereby Desai became deputy prime minister and finance minister.