In retrospect, it would seem the budget 2013-14 had to have some sops for women, given the spotlight on gender issues in the aftermath of the Delhi gangrape. Finance minister P Chidambaram has two specific proposals in this direction: a women-centric public sector bank with an initial fund of Rs 1,000 crore and a Rs 1,000 crore ‘Nirbhaya Fund’ for the safety of women.

What do these allocations mean for women? Do they really address the problem of women’s safety or the million other issues that they face every day? Is the government really serious about doing its bit for the safety of women?

“First of all, the Nirbhaya fund is a corpus, not a budgetary allocation. It is not even regular and there is no clarity on how it will be used and on what and who will pay the deficit,” Kavita Krishnan, secretary, All India Progressive Women's Association, told Governance Now.

According to Krishnan, who was at the forefront of the protests in Delhi after the December 16 gangrape, the government has not even done a simple calculation on how much is actually needed to address the issues of the women who face sexual harassment at home and at public places. “There should be an institutional mechanism through which the government should pay for the treatment of every rape and acid attack victim and it should be paid on demand. She does not have to make a petition for it every time,” she said.

The Nirbhaya fund can also be argued as redundant: it is only an admission of the failure of the state in providing basic protection to people. “Along the lines of Nirbhaya fund for public safety, we can have a Soni Sori fund for women victims of police torture, a Manorama fund against army excesses, a Suryanelli Girl fund for victims of rape by politicians and so on,” said Meena Kandasamy, a Chennai-based activist, mocking the concept itself.

Krishnan asked, “Will this money be spent on safe shelters for women who are victims of incest and domestic violence at home? What about malnutrition; who will address that?”

There needs to be more specific allocation for health and also for more judges and courts so that court cases, especially those of assault and rape, are disposed of faster, she added.

Surely, no one was thinking about the specific issues about women. The FM surely was not. As usual the government does what it does best – throwing some money and thinking its work is done. The catch here is, even the money thrown is not enough and does not cover enough ground!

A public sector bank for women is also not a solution as it merely constraints the women in the ‘ladies compartment’ sort of way. Also no one really knows how this proposed entity is going to function. Kandasamy said, “This women-only bank is a mockery of women's rights. We have fought so hard to find our space in the mainstream, our right to access public spaces and now the state behaves as if we were in medieval times, and these zanana-type banks serve no purpose.”

“We've not had a single complaint or request asking for a separate bank. Women want equality, not this eyewash,” she added.

“I do not know how these banks are going to function,” said Krishnan articulating what many people had in mind when FM made the proposal of a women-only bank. How will it benefit women? Will it be only a bank entirely run by women or have some other specific features which will make it women friendly?

“Women should be able to get cheap, institutional loans without reverting to self-help groups (SHGs) and other such mechanisms to obtain credit,” said Krishnan.

However, Siddharth Singh, Indian economy and international relations analyst, said that the bank for women was a welcome move. “Women prove to be more creditworthy and a women’s only pool will bring down the lending rate,” he said.

It would also improve the accessibility of banks for women in rural areas, he added.

The special spending on women's issues has been given a mere Rs 2,000 crore in the budget. The revenue foregone for 2012-13 has been put at Rs 12,033 crore which is essentially the amount of money the government gave away to the corporates in debts which could not be recovered. Surely, if this is the amount the government is ready to let go, should it not be spending a bit more for women? A bit more money, a bit more intelligently?