NC Saxena, a highly influential member of the national advisory council (NAC), has criticised the planning commission for ignoring the issue of hunger in the draft approach paper of the 12th five year plan (2012-17).

“If you look, hunger does not exist in the draft approach paper, basically ignored by the planning commission for the next plan,” Saxena said at a national consultation on the 12th plan organised by the Centre for Budget and Government Accountability (CBGA), a New Delhi based think tank.

India can’t afford to ignore such things for long time, Saxena stressed. However, the draft approach paper underlines the need to achieve food security.

The NAC member also criticised the planning commission for ignoring small farmers’ plight, though they, according to him, are important players in ensuring food security. “The small farmers should lease out land to large farmers and should work as landless labourers on their field,” he said citing the plan paper. “The move will have great social implications,” he added that small farmers are more productive than large owners of the agriculture land.

The concept note prepared by the CBGA also criticised the planning commission approach paper on meagre spending on social sectors in the next five years. “The 12th plan might not steer the country towards any significant increase in its public investments on social sectors over the next five years; instead, it might witness a growing reliance by the government on private providers in such crucial sectors,” the note said. The note is a counter to the 12th plan approach paper.

Subrat Das, executive director of CBGA, says, “The 12th plan panel envisages the total magnitude of public spending on health to go up to 2.5 percent of GDP by 2016-17, whereas the UPA had made a promise in 2004 that this level of public spending on health would be attained by 2008-09.”

The CBGA indicated that the central assistance for the states in the approach paper has a small increase over the next five year plans. Das suggests it is critical for implementing social sector schemes. “Unless the states are able to invest a significantly higher magnitude of its own resources, the state-specific plan interventions in most states would continue to suffer from the acute problem of inadequate funds,” he said.