Regional level consultation on Food Security Bill 2013

I am attaching here the report of the Regional Consultation on Food Security Bill 2013.

With regards 

Saradindu 

 

Regional level consultation on Food Security Bill 2013

Barasat proggaloy 8th June 2013

Prelude

Despite 64 years of Independence, hunger remains a living and ever pressing problem in India. In the midst of godowns bursting with food-grains, every year there is a recurrence of farmers' suicides, deaths due to hunger and starvation in Amlashole-West Bengal, situations and in abandoned tea gardens. The UPA 2 has been planning to bring in a Food Security Bill for the past four years. A case on the Right to Food has been on-going on the Supreme Court for the past 12 years and is now heading for final orders.

As per the decision on the 5th of May, 2013, on holding regional meeting withcampaign constituents and other friends of Right To Food Campaign, the Easternand North Eastern Regions has organized the convention on 8^thof June 2013 at Proggaloy, Barasat in North 24 Parganas, West Bengal.

The right to food campaign is deeply concerned at the paradox of hunger and malnutrition preying on million of Indians, even as FCI (food corporation of India) store houses continue to overflow with grains. In this light the campaign is chagrined that the government's flagship initiative in the form of National Food Security Bill (NFSB) is yet to be passed. This betrays the inhuman apathy of our rulers and the system to the plight of hunger and mal nourished dying a slow death. The ruling congress party had promised a food security bill in its manifesto prior to the 2009 general elections and this was also announced as of the priorities of the UPA government in the president speech on 2nd June 2009.

The convention is being called with a threefold agenda as proposed by theRTFC.

♣ PUCL SC case 197/2001 on the right to food, relating to the constitutionalframework and International law to bring Right to food under the purview ofArticle 19, like in the Olga Tellis case.

♣ The campaign's strategy on ensuring amendments in the NFSB according tothe campaign's vision and lobbying with MPs and Parties in States and Nationally

♣ On how to strengthen the state and regional campaign working towards specific and general orders relating to the legal framework onthe Right to Food

Purpose of Consultation discussion: To give an opportunity for sharing practical experience, reviewing and discussing about present status of right to food security bill (RTF) among the participants who are directly or indirectly involved with facilitation to the people or beneficiaries in their locality. At the same time to prepare consultation cum feedback document from workshop in a participatory way, so that immediate future we can develop a strategy to know up to date status of the strategized planned implementation in their region and to seek positive alternatives to make the project fruitful towards enhancement of the livelihood security of rural people.

 

The objectives of the programme

·   A brief introduction on the bill how it emerged into the forefront over the two UPA government regimes.

·   The various articles that this act covers and the places it avoids the basic fundamental rights.

·   The standing committee report on the bill.

·   The present condition of the nation in relation to the problem it faces problem with malnourishment.

·   The positive and negative outcomes of the bill

·   The present flaws in the bill.

·   The movement and mass awareness that it needs to grow in state and central level for table these changes

·   Plan an action for the next two months in the process.

·   Make tentative plan for the upcoming monsoon session in relation to the bill.

 

Methodology applied: Common discussion,sharing working experiences, GroupDiscussion, Brain storming session, Presentation and Question answer session.

 

Tool used:Group Work and discussion, Power Point Presentation, Chart Paper Presentation, white board etc.

 

 

The programme plan

TIME	PROGRAMME
09.30am	Registration
10.00am	Introduction of participants and programme
10.30 - 11.15am	Supreme court order on RTF and progress by Harsh Mandar Supreme Court Chief Adviser.
12.30 – 01.00pm	Discussion and clarification
01.00 – 02.00pm	Lunch break
02.00 – 02.45pm	State wise group discussion on strategic planning.
02.45 – 03.15pm	Hearing from each other presentation and conference
05.00 pm	Meeting with journalist at the Kolkata press club and disclose the future plan of the meeting

Fr.Jothi introduced the session of The Regional level consultation on food security bill 2013 and Mr.Sardindu Biswas introduced with a motivational song followed by addressing the members and introducing them to each other.  This was followed by distribution of copies of Draft Food Security Bill 2011, copies of parliament discussion along with other right to food campaign (secretariat) plans. This was followed by a discussion and introduction of the bill by Fr.Jothi and introduction of the speakers in a formal manner.

Discussion Panel Members

• Mr. Harsh Mander, chief advisor to the Hon'ble Supreme Court

• Ms.KavitaSrivastav, Convener of National Campaign on RTF

• Ms. Anuradha Talwar, Advisor to Commissioner of Supreme Court (West Bengal)

• Mr.Balaram, Advisor to Commissioner of Supreme Court (Jharkhand)

• Mr.Rupesh Kumar, Advisor to Commissioner of Supreme Court (Bihar)

 

The first speaker for the day was Mr. Harsh Mander the Chief Advisor to the Supreme CourtCommissioner.

 

Mr.Mander started with the history of the issue which is 12 years old and how it emerged as a bill over the years. He started with a discussion to the housethat what is the basic difference between bill and programme??? To this Mr.Mander addressed that the programme of the Government is involuntary with a limited objective or willingness to carry it out,since a Bill or Act is a commitment of the Government to do particular activity towards the welfare of the people. The importance of the Bill in relation to the articles of Indian constitution was also pointed out in relation to the bills which were:-

 

     I.        Article 21 Right to life and personal liberty

   II.        Article 21 a  Right to education.

  III.        Article 29     Protection of interest of minorities

 IV.        Article 31aSaving of Laws providing for acquisition of estates, etc.

Mr.Mander also focused on article 21 which deals with Right to Life and personal liberty, and it is not only the positive approach of the State to protect an individual's life but in negative sense to take one's life by committing an unlawful activity. But the article is not followed in positive sense as he pointed out in relation to this bill. To this he quoted and let an open house question" if the government fails to provide the basic amenities of food and a person die without it who will take the responsibility". He also drew a relation between the UN declaration of human right and this article. Human as he pointed should be treated as same respective of caste, creed, sex, religion age and economic structure. Though the article provides that all individuals are entitled to receive such benefit but if seen one cannot validate the provisions under this article like Right to Food, clean water, clothes, sanitation, etc in the court thus making this law in active.

Mr.Mander also discussed that "if a poor person is asked to choose between food and independence "what" would he like to choose and "why"? Many of the participants present shared their view that food would be the priority out if food without dignity will not be accepted by many.  And this is another point that the bill focuses in the long run is "Right to food with Dignity". After the judgement of the supreme court in 2000 it was found out that" 60 lakhs metric tonnes" of grains are wasted in the godowns of India and people had no access to food.

 

The food security bill to him should be a holistic one that covers that all provisions of an individual from life to death. To make this plan a holistic one the Government duties and functions as he pointed out could be enumerated into four categories or phases:-

First phase: - Govt cannot stop the programmes but increase the programmes. Change the programmes to rights, and schemes to entitlements.

Second phase: - Expand the entitlements/ beneficiaries.

Third phase: - Universalise the entitlements (govt schools should be increased, more schemes of mid-day meals, ICDS facility etc).

Fourth phase: - Commissioner's offices should also be opened in the process so that the State and the Central government follow the court order. They want and take their advice and process of work. They would look into the budgetary allocations of each programme and also conduct monitoring mechanism through vigilance committee over these programmes.

The bill according to Mr.Mandarshould include 4-5 important points in it those are:

1.    Right to food production and distribution provided special emphasis on campaign.It is important that farmer related issues and views are to be included in this act.

2.    The provision of food and increase the quantity of food distribution from 25 kg to 35 kg.

3.    The provisions for the poor and rich should be analysed and considered.

4.    Special emphasis on pregnant mothers in the first 100 days before and after birth.

5.    Those people or children who are not part of any schools or ICDS centre provision of their food security are stressed. Special emphasis on these types of issues.

The next speaker was Ms.KavitaSrivastav, Convener of National Campaign on RTF.

Ms.Srivastav started with the mission and vision of the then Prime Minister of India Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru of independent India will be free from hunger and naked will have clothes, but why after sixty seven years of independence we are discussing on the same issues. She also spoke on the study of SEVA on direct cash transfer system in these days. The Right to Food bill should not include such components where the monetary and cash transfer is there. She also focused on the ICMR standards of food those includes adult should get 35 kg of food grains and child should get 7 kg of food grain. The provisions of the bill where the concept of contractors in the distribution of food in ICDS and schools are irrelevant in this draft bill. Schedule 2 of the bill and its relevance and benefits to unorganized sector in relation to maternity and other benefits to Rs. 1000 was discussed. Through this stage Ms.Srivastav made a public request to join in the action and help in making a strong and proactive food security bill.

This was followed by a slogan session by Mr.Saradindu Biswas and his group of colleagues "Tala Kholo Khabar dao" (Open the warehouse and give the food". This was to build up the momentum of the participants in the house. This was followed by a question and answer session. The questions asked are as follows:-

·         Mr Saradindu Biswas; why is it only the people from the SC/ST/OBC group suffer from hunger and malnutrition not the other classes?

·         Why minorities are seen as extremist in some cases? Would this bill remove such labels from them? (Odisha)

·         When constitution says about provision of food security through Midday Meal, PDS and other food security schemes and on its violation the same will be addressed through Right Based approached in form of Advocacy then why it is the need to make it an Act?

Mr.Kapileshwar Ram.

·         What about the quality of food? Only the quantity is discussed?

·         How could the food be secured by government when FDI is running in this country? Can both run simultaneously? CASA  Kolkata

·         What about the PDS system for those living as slum dwellers in city? CASA  Kolkata

·         What is the relation between agriculture and food security? How can it be secured? Ambedkar Bhawan, Simurali, Nadia.

·         Cash transfer and what strategies to stop corruption? Mr Chandra Bhushan

·         What is to be done to stop people from getting divided into APL, BPL and Antodaya? Mr Kal Bhadari

·         Materialization of life to livelihood... how to rectify the BPL list? (MASUM) Mr. Subhapratim.

To these questions answers were as follows:-

·         Food should be available in larger quantity

·         Food sovereignty should be there. People should be there to monitor these programmes.

·         It is not only food that is to be looked upon by the government for combating hunger of the marginalised community but alternative facilities such as clean water, sanitation, housing etc along with provision of food.

·         Ifother related issues are not solved or addressed like hunger, malnourishment, food for pregnant mothers under the right to food security bill it would not be a success.

·         The campaigning should be done to cover the whole group neither a portion of the group.

·         63% of our tribal population is without food.

·         Minimum wages for the works should be hiked so that these schemes and alternatives schemes do not make people grow dependent on them.

·         Formation of vigilance committees to monitor the provision.

·         Duties of Gram Sarpanch should be made to conduct vigilance on the activity implemented.

·         The problem of BPL is different in Bengal compared to other states. This state has two types of BPL list. One with the rural development department and the second with the food department. The later list is not valid and when asked from the department it fails toproduce it to the people neither.The whole concept is vague as pointed out by Ms. Anuradha Talwar, Advisor to Commissioner of Supreme Court (West Bengal).

 

·         It was also shared that the provisions although are being addressed with discrepancies but in case of complete denial of the rights as a mode of protest will ultimately fall upon the community surviving with the little benefits. Therefore as long as it is implemented it needs to be borough in forefront with the recommendations rather than deletion of the provisions.

 

·          The mass should be made more aware of the rights so that the level of corruption could be minimized.

This was followed by a lunch session from 1.15 pm to 2.00pm. The session continued after that with the focus mainly based on state wise group discussion and strategic planning.

 

The topics of this group discussion was divided into three main contexts

1.   Legal Cause: -

                      I.        What are the issues related to the right to food that could be addressed through court in the context of non–implementation of Supreme Court order.

                    II.        What order would beformulated by the court at this stage?

                  III.        Any suggestions on the legal framework on the right to food that isto be passed through the Supreme Court?

 

2.   National food security bill 2011:-

                     I.    Taking the analytical part of the NFSB 2011 to the people of the state.

                   II.    Meeting the MP's of the state.

                  III.    Meeting all political party leaders.

                 IV.    Holding a State Convention on NFSB.

                   V.    Public action at State and National level.

 

3.   Strengthening the campaign:-

How to increase participation?

The major points out of this discussion were as follows:-

·         Socio Economic Caste Census would end and the bill will include all the beneficiaries eligible under this category

·         NSS the real people do not get the BPL card due to party politics.

·         According to Mr. Saradindu Biswas the bill would be to focus on how the common people will influence the vigilance committee throughout the process.

·         The allotment and procurement is not known to the people that should be made known to them.

·         Mr. Meher Engineer commented to build a plan of action for the next two months as how the process would go on.

·         Ms. Anuradha Talwar commented the government would not hold its decision so long if the bill is not passed during this session.

·         There should be a Dharna at New Delhi, a convention and meet in the upcoming months.

·         The convention should bring in likeminded bodies from the respective states.

·         CASA West Bengal State Secretariat will prepare a questionnaire and forwarding it to the networking members so that their views could be obtained.

This was followed by a state wise discussion on the matter

For West Bengal the decision was:-

·         Preparatory meeting on 28^th of June 2013 at KhadayaBhawan.

·         A Dharna/ rally at Delhiwill be organized and more participants are requested to join the Dharna.

·         20^th July State Convention on RTF will be organized.

For Odisha the decision was:-

·         First 3 Regional convention between 20-30^th June 2013 including three regions of Odisha South, West and Coastal

·         State level convention on 1^st July 2013.

·         Followed by a rally and submission of memorandum.

·         Meeting with MP's and MLA's by various NGO and civil society organizations.

For Assam and Chhattisgarhdecision was:-

·         Chhattisgarh will conduct a meeting

·         Social audit training to monitor.

·         Participate in the rally at Delhi.

·         Oppose the system of cash transfer.

·         For Assam they would filed a case and an inquiry as to why these programme IGNOAPS, Annapurna etc is defunct in the state.

For Bihar the decision was:-

·         To build a time frame

·         Revisit and decide the APL and BPL list and act as pressure group.

·         Conduct a meeting on 28^th of July 2013.

·         Select 3 people for participation in the rally at New Delhi.

For Jharkhand the decision was:-

·         28^thJuly a state level meeting.

·         The need of the vigilance committee should be focused in the RTF bill  

·         3^rd and 4^th July conduct programme on awareness and rejection of cash transfer bill.

·         Public interest litigation (PIL) would be submitted to the high court regarding this issue.

·         Meeting also to involve the issue of disaster and the implication of RTF bills during this period.

This was followed by an hour long Press Conference at Kolkata Press club where Ms. Anuradha Talwar,Ms.KavitaSrivastav, Mr. Harsh Mandarand representatives from all the state like Bihar, Jharkhand, Odisha, West Bengal, Assam & Chattishgarhshared the details discussed during the convention and the recommendations from the different States and an overview on the issues that were covered in the meeting. The future plan of the body in the next few weeks was also focused uponalong with Statewise plans and preparation. Few questions that were raised in the press meet were:

Ø  Amendments that the body wants to make in participation with the civil society organization.

Ø  What are the food ingredients mentioned in the bill that would be supplied as food grain? Why there is no mention of milk?

Ø  Is there any price allocation mechanism of the state for wheat, rice and millets?

Ø  What is the present condition of government in relation to the food storage and distribution?

To these questions the answers were as follows:-

Ø  The Bill does not specify any time frame for the rolling out of the entitlements in the law. 

Ø  It continues with a Targeted PDS, excluding 33 % of the population from accessing the PDS as a right, giving scope to large exclusion errors of the poor in the country as a whole. The improved framework of single pricing in the present bill over the dual pricing under the existing APL-BPL system is undermined by the exclusion of a third of the country.

Ø  While the ICMR norms recommend that an adult requires 14kgs of food grains per month and children 7kgs; the Bill provides for reduced entitlements to 5kgs per person per month, thus ensuring only 166 gms of cereal per person per day, which is barely enough for two rotis a day.

Ø  The Bill provides only for cereals with no entitlements to basic food necessities such as pulses and edible oil required to combat malnutrition.

Ø  The Bill continues to allow for the entry of private contractors and commercial interests in the supply of food in the ICDS, especially by insisting on specific norms related to Food Safety Acts and micronutrient norms (Note in Schedule 2).

Ø  This bill is still ambiguous regarding universal maternal entitlements by continuing with the conditionality in the scheme of the two child norm, which will penalise children of higher order as well as deny the mother of her basic rights.

Ø  The Bill does not have a strong grievance redress mechanism. For the Bill to be effective there needs to be in place a strong, decentralized and independent grievance redress mechanism that includes Panchayat or block level grievance redress officers with powers to impose penalties on erring officials.

Ø  The Bill does not provide any agriculture and production-related entitlements for farmers in spite of the fact that more than 60% of the people in this country are dependent on agriculture for their livelihoods. A revived and vibrant agriculture sector forms the backbone of food security.

Ø  It allows for the back door entry of cash transfers instead of food grains by allowing for a food security allowance when food is not available, and by allowing cash transfers as a part of PDS reforms.

Ø  It has no provisions like old age pensions for the support of senior citizens, or for feeding through community kitchens or other measures of the homeless, destitute and other sections that are most often the victims of starvation.

Ø  The factor of milk would be looked into for that breast feeding is an important component. The bill though the bodies effort tries to see that every unorganized sector of people should get 6 months of leave with pay of 1000.

Ø  The pricing for the grains were done at Rs3Rice,Rs2Wheat  and Millets at 1 rupee per kg.

The press meet was concuded at 06.15pm with a positive approach to pass the Bill in in truest sence to be propoor in nature.

 

 

What is needed

 

1.    Universalization of PDS entitlements (along with expansion in quantity and introduction of other commodities such as pulses and oil).

2.    Provisions to intensify food production and for decentralised procurement and storage.

3.    Provisions for strengthening the PDS delivery system based on the experience of many successful initiatives by states such as Tamil Nadu, Chhattisgarh, Himachal Pradesh, Orissa etc.

4.    Comprehensive measures for addressing child malnutrition that include school mid-day meals, Universalization with quality of the ICDS and maternity entitlements along with provisions for treatment of severely malnourished children.

5.    Clearly defined entitlements for vulnerable groups such as the aged, disabled, widows, migrants and destitute including monthly pensions, community kitchens and destitute feeding programmes.

6.    Effective measures for grievance redress mechanism, transparency and accountability.

7.    Safeguards against commercial interference in any of the food/nutrition related schemes and against the introduction of cash transfers in place food commodities under PDS.

With Regards

Saradindu Biswas

State Convener

Right to Food and Work Campaign