Poverty alleviation matters, not the numbers

Planning commission seems to confuse the two


Prasanna Mohanty | March 30, 2012

The silly season is upon us, again. Policy makers and experts have taken their positions debating threadbare whether the planning commission’s recent report claiming that poverty has fallen on the basis of NSSO data for consumption expenditure between 2004-5 and 2009-10 in consonance with the Tendulakar committee’s poverty line prescription – Rs 28 per capita per day in urban areas and Rs 22 per capita per day in rural areas (that is, at 2009-10 price level). But all the sound and fury is focused on the statistics, rather than the incidence of poverty and poverty alleviation programmes so crucial to take improve people's lives. The statistics is useful in its own ways but it is absolutely critical to know why poverty prevails and how it can be addressed. If nobody is paying attention to the latter it is because the planning commission has no appetite for that. It is more comfortable with mere statistics.

A good example of this is its draft paper for the 12th five-year plan. The plan panel had claimed to have made radical changes in its approach by drafting in all stakeholders, including the civil society groups working at the ground level. When the draft was finally presented, it turned out to be a repeat of the old approach – primarily guided by and borrowing ideas from a World Bank paper! (see Governance Now issue of November 1-15, 2011.) If this seems to be an isolated case, check out the Integrated Action Plan (IAP) worked out with great fanfare last year to tackle the Maoist menace. After a massive brainstorming exercise, the panel produced a document which merely provided for putting Rs 25 crore a year at the disposal of the collector of each of the 60 Maoist-affected districts to quickly address problems relating to healthcare, drinking water, education and roads not provided for in any plan or programme.

The plan panel’s continued focus on keeping the poverty estimate and poverty line low (it came for severe criticism last year for claiming that anyone surviving on Rs 32 a day in urban and Rs 26 per day in rural areas is not poor in its affidavit before the supreme court) can be best explained by deputy chairman Montek Singh Ahluwalia’s obsession to keep the subsidies for the poor in check, but not the 'subsidies' to the rich (revenue foregone by way of corporate tax alone amounts to Rs 50,000 crore in this year’s budget) to tame deficit. CPM member of parliament Sitaram Yechuri beautifully explained the mindset of Ahluwalia and others like him in a signed article: “The philosophy of neo-liberalism, of course, dictates that the burden of deficit should be brought down not by disbanding such concessions (revenue foregone) to the rich. These, after all, are ‘incentives’ for growth. This deficit has to be brought down by disbanding the subsidies for the poor which, after all, are ‘burdens’ on the economy”. See, how this mindset was reflected in the latest budget which slashed fuel and fertilizer subsidies. If the food subsidy went up it is because the UPA wants to launch its food security programme in time for the next general election, with a hope that it will do what NREGA did in 2009 elections.

How has our economist-turned prime minister responded to silly debates on poverty numbers? Well, he announced appointment of another technical committee to come up with “new methodology to capture poverty” (the plan panel had mandated the Abhijit Sen committee with the precise task following the uproar over its affidavit to the supreme court). Add that to the Tendulkar committee, Arjun Sengupta committee, Hashmi committee and so on and you have a long list of committees devoted to poverty estimate and poverty line. Can anyone please name one committee which has looked at how badly our poverty alleviation programmes are designed and how poor is our implantation mechanism?



Other News

Making sense of facts – and alternative facts

The Art of Conjuring Alternate Realities: How Information Warfare Shapes Your World By Shivam Shankar Singh and Anand Venkatanarayanan HarperCollins / 284 pages / Rs 599 Professor Noam Chomsky, linguist and public intellectual, has often spoken of &ls

The Manali Trance: Economics of Abandoning Caution in the Time of Coronavirus

The brutal second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in India has left a significant death toll in its wake. Health experts advise that the imminent third wave can be delayed by following simple measures like wearing a mask and engaging in social distancing. However, near the end of the second wave, we witnesse

Govt considers fixing driving hrs of commercial vehicles

Union Minister of Road Transport and Highways Nitin Gadkari has emphasised deciding driving hours for truck drivers of commercial vehicles, similar to pilots, to reduce fatigue-induced road accidents. In a Na

Telecom department simplifies KYC processes for mobile users

In a step towards Telecom Reforms which aim to provide internet and tele connectivity for the marginalised section, the Department of Telecommunications, Ministry of Communica

Mumbai think tank calls for climate action

Raising concerns over rising seawater levels and climate change, Mumbai First, a 25-year-old public-private partnership policy think tank, has written letters to Maharashtra chief minister Uddhav Thackeray, minister for environment and climate change, tourism and protocol, Aditya Thackeray and Mumbai munic

Creation of ‘good bank’ as important as ‘bad bank’ for NPA management

After the recent announcement of the government guarantee for Security Receipts (SRs) to be issued by a public sector-owned National Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd (NARCL), there is a surge of interest around this desi version of a super bad bank. The entity will acquire around ₹2 trillion bad debts fr

Visionary Talk: Gurcharan Das, Author, Commentator & Public Intellectual on key governance issues


Current Issue


Facebook    Twitter    Google Plus    Linkedin    Subscribe Newsletter