By Phrangsngi Pyrtuh
The Planning Commission (PC) is at it again. In July the PC released its estimates of Poverty which has reduced to only 21.9% in 2011-12 from 29.8% in 2009-10. What caused a furore (similar to the last two years) is the PC’s benchmark of identifying a poor person based on daily consumer expenditure. For the year 2013 it fixed Rs. 27.20 (Rural) and Rs. 33.33 (Urban) per day/person as non-poor which was a shade better than the Rs. 22.40 (Rural) and 28.65 (Urban) fixed in 2012 which the Commission no doubt upgraded after the stringent opposition last year.
In the last few years the most respected organization has been embroiled in unnecessary controversy and invite the wrath of not only political parties that do not belong to the ruling dispensation but also from experts, civil societies et al. These controversies seem to stem for the desperation of the ruling parties to divert the shortcomings and incompetence of the present UPA government and its inability to stop the carnage of corruption which is mushrooming from all front. These failures however are not stopping the Government from tweaking facts and figures to highlight its achievements. The political euphemism to construe something which is not through the PC is leading credence to the phrase of turning multiple lies as the only truth and the UPA government is remarkably good at this.
The PC is no longer guided by broad guidelines/ideologies of Governments prior to 1991 which was to remove Poverty (Garibi Hatoa) . The kind of manipulation and abrupt changes brought about to measure poverty ratio of this country post 1991 makes one believe that the PC and the ruling dispensation is busy manufacturing poverty instead (Garibi Banoa).
A quintessentially delicate issue- poverty, which merits a discourse far above what is currently being made from it, is the natural lifeline of the Indian political class. Policy prognosis was recognized as a stumbling block to eradicate its scourge which dawned on the then Prime Minister of the country Mrs Indira Gandhi to propagate the famous Garibi Hatoa slogan which resulted in a thumping majority for the Congress in the 1977 general elections hardly a few years after it was routed because of the 1975 National Emergency. A new theory why she chose to impose the Emergency was her conviction that the Westminster-style democracy and the multi-party system which India adopted soon after Independence is becoming a liability to various government policies such as parliamentary disruptions etc which hinders the government from address pressing issues like Poverty and Unemployment effectively. She mistakenly resorted to using the Emergency to move towards a U.S style legislative system (according to a leaked diplomatic cable obtained by WiKileaks of a conversation between Mrs Gandhi principal secretary P.N Dhar and American Ambassador William B Saxbe). Had Mrs Gandhi’s initiative to move towards the U.S style democracy been perused further, we may perhaps see India evolve differently.
Policy making and formulation is no longer attuned to the real problems of the country which Mrs Gandhi recognized as arising from the peculiar form of Democracy which she felt was no longer relevant to remove problems such as Poverty (as revealed through the leaked conversation). Since the clarion call by Mrs Gandhi, poverty has become a politically sensitive issue which could either make or break the political fortunes of a party. To remain aloof to the ground reality is suicidal as the NDA government realized during its Shining India re-election campaign during a time when close to 40 % of the people were suffering penury. The UPA government has unveiled a slew of measures which it hopes will break the poverty cycle such as the MGNREGS etc. These policies were mostly short term remedial measures as they do not focus on empowerment and creating social capital.
The 1991 liberalization programme was basically aimed at restructuring the economy and removing poverty and unemployment- two complementary problems that India is yet to permanently get rid of and a lot of this has to do with fumbling policies that aim at perpetuating rather than annihilating poverty. There is extensive debate comparing poverty before and after the liberalization programme. Soon after liberalization a new poverty methodology based on the Tendulkar estimates was employed which deviated remarkably from the previous methodology based on calorie intake which the PC abandoned inexplicably. Skeptics on the new poverty claims interprets it as the Government’s effort to prove that economic liberalization is working (According to the Tendulkar estimates poverty ratio was 45.3% in 1993-94) apart from the fact that it is preparing for elections in 2014 by claiming the largest percentage reduction of independent India (more specifically after 1991) which is why the PC this year hurriedly updated the poverty estimates for the year 2011-12 based on the Tendulkar methodology even though the PC constituted an “expert group” to critically review the Tendulkar methodology of poverty estimates in June 2012. Following severe opposition the PM last week joined the chorus on the desirability of a new methodology to estimate poverty.
Nowhere in the world has poverty ratio/estimates been the subject of such criticism in public domain. On the contrary different countries realizing the difficult times with recession et al have become more pragmatic when dealing with poverty. For instance China in 2011 has raised the poverty threshold under a new definition to offset an ill-suited/outdated definition of poverty whereby around 100 million more would be identified as poor (despite China’s spectacular booming economy for the last few decades). The fact that India as the largest democracy needs to vindicate the failure of the system (which the British before leaving India felt is inappropriate) into achievements is a cruel joke on those who swear by the system which majorly comprises the very poor and marginalized people for which the system was painstakingly set up. Poverty needs redemption not renovation. Sadly the PC is thinking otherwise.