We need a politics of the poor: Nikhil Dey

The interview came in Infochange India in April 2012.

Web Link: http://www.infochangeindia.org/governance/analysis/politics-for-the-poor.html

By Pradeep Baisakh

Social activist Nikhil Dey discusses the flaws in the Lokpal, Grievance Redressal, Food Security and other bills

Nikhi Dey

Nikhil Dey, key member of the National Campaign for People’s Right to Information (NCPRI) and founder of the Rajasthan-based people’s organisation MKSS (Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan), was in Orissa recently on invitation from the state government to guide social audits in the MGNREGA. In this interview with Infochange, he discusses the essence of the Grievance Redressal Bill, loopholes in the Food Security Bill, dangers in the Lokpal Bill, which is currently in Parliament, and the need for structural arrangements for social audit in the MGNREGA. 

Q: You have been advocating the Grievance Redressal Bill. Can you tell us what stage the bill is at now? And how it is going to help citizens? 

The bill is necessary, as in India there is no proper institution where one’s complaint is heard in an appropriate manner. We now have a number of rights-based legislations and even in those we have a very poor grievance redressal mechanism. Instead of having different kinds of mechanisms to redress grievances in each piece of legislation, you need one standard minimum formulation across the country that anyone who has a complaint can register under, get a dated receipt for, have his complaint heard within a certain timeframe, and get an action taken report within that time schedule. That is the only way to ensure that citizens get some level of accountability.

This is complementary to the state’s Public Service Guarantee Bill; it is not duplication. It ensures that complaints are heard and sorted out. It has been tabled in the Lok Sabha and is now lying with the standing committee.

There are some shortcomings in the bill. We hope they will be sorted out in due course.

Q: Are you happy with the Right to Food Bill as it has been presented in parliament?

We are happy only with the fact that right to food legislation is coming in. But there are many shortcomings. It is in fact wrong to call it a Right to Food Bill. It should be called either a Ration Entitlement Bill or a Foodgrain Entitlement Bill. Even with that limited view, there are many in-built implementation problems. There are so many categories in it that identifying them will be problematic. It has been seen from experience that such experiments have been successful only through universalisation.

The quantum of entitlement provided in the bill is too little, and the debate is whether India has enough foodgrain. Even if you do not have enough foodgrain in the country, you cannot have people starving.

The attempt to bring in a cash transfer system is very dangerous. It will absolve the state of responsibility and become just a dole.

Q: But the government defends the bill citing huge financial implications amounting to Rs 1 lakh crore a year… 

All through, activists have been saying that the government can provide corporate subsidies to the tune of Rs 5 lakh crore a year. Why can it not provide subsidy on a basic service like supplying food? The government cannot cite the financial implications argument with food.

On the availability of foodgrain, the government has to find a way out. Even if some affluent people get (the foodgrain meant for the poor), it does not matter, they are only getting food. You are finally maintaining a basic level of consumption among the populace.

Q: The Anna movement gave leadership to the people on the issue of corruption. You have your differences with them. While some say that the Anna movement had a rightist bias, some also allege that you played into the hands of the Congress with the intent of keeping the BJP at bay. How do you respond to these allegations? 

We have no intentions in the course of the campaign of trying to keep the BJP at bay. A strong and powerful policing agency against corruption will not provide any fundamental benefit to the people. It is true that high-level corruption needs a powerful police agency at the top. But extending that to all branches of government and democratic institutions and having the same agency deal with it right down to the bottom, including grievances, is to our mind impossible, and a threat to democracy. The National Campaign on People’s Right to Information (NCPRI) believes that a combination of bills would be much stronger. This is not something that the Congress Party advocates at all. So the idea that we have done it to save the Congress is not true at all.

We do not believe that legislation is the only way to fight corruption. It’s much more important for activists to fight against corruption within the movement. Every party in power including the Congress, the BJP and others, have charges of corruption levelled against them.

Q: Was the timing of your press meet appropriate? The NCPRI held a press meet just after Digvijay Singh and Manish Tiwari stopped speaking to the press. This breeds suspicion in people’s minds…

If you see the government dealing with Anna Hazare’s movement: sometimes it was very accommodating and sometimes it was very hostile. After all, the Anna team sat with the government in the joint drafting committee; none of us sat.

In the joint drafting committee there were only Team Anna members and representatives from government. Others will have to speak from somewhere. We do not agree with many provisions in the Jan Lokpal, and we agree with many.

Wherever government did anything anti-democratic, we have come out strongly. We do not agree with Ramdev at all. But when the attack took place on his dharna, by the government, we came out with a statement saying it was anti-democratic. When Anna Hazare was not given permission to sit in dharna, we said he must be given permission.

Democracy should have space for expression of different voices. If that voice is trampled by saying that you are pro-government, then it’s sad for democracy.

About the timing of the press meet, in fact that was not the first time we spoke out. We have spoken many times before that.

Q: How do you see the current Lokpal Bill? Has the government done justice to the bill? 

It’s a mix of two things. It’s a powerful structure, not a weak structure. But it is a dangerous structure because the government will select the people who will man it as majority government representatives in the selection committee. Removal will be recommended by the President, which is, in fact, the government’s recommendations. The other problem is not having an independent investigating agency. On the positive side, sanction for investigations and prosecution has been done away with. Confiscation of disproportionate assets has been brought in. But the amendment that it will not be applied to the states is a big loss. The common people will have very limited benefit from it. Despite the federalism debate, the Prevention of Corruption Act is an all-India act. Think: If RTIA had not applied to the states, how limited its use would have been…

Q: People have been surprised at the difference of opinion between the Annas, Arunas, Kejriwals or Nikhils on this issue; they compare this disagreement in civil society to that of politicians...

It is important to understand that civil society is also a political class in a way. Change will come only through politics. Some may sit in parliament, some may use the democratic polity of agitation and pressure, some may do constructive work in the village. These are different aspects of how political decisions are taken. In civil society too you will have differences, you will have very poor performing social activists, and you will have corruption there also.

Q: Whatever way you define politics, what I meant is that people have lost faith in party-based politics…

That is the problem of our middle class tendency of rejecting everyone. Actually, people have not lost faith in political parties. When people voted for, say Mayawati in the earlier Uttar Pradesh elections, they voted with a strong commitment towards a particular party.

Q: Are electoral reforms the answer?

Electoral reform is only a technocratic solution. Politics cannot be done with technocratic solutions. We need to have a politics of the poor where state policies can be influenced in favour of the poor.

Q: You are here in Orissa to guide the government on the social audit process in the MGNREGA (Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act), wherein the government wants to bring a structural arrangement in line with Andhra Pradesh. There is so much talk about corruption in the MGNREGA in the state in the wake of the ongoing CBI inquiry. But the major issue here is delayed payments. And distress migration has increased in Orissa, post-MGNREGA.

Social audit is only one way, but an important, much more people-centric, way. Social audit is not only to fight corruption; it goes beyond that. The first phase of social audit is an entitlement audit: Getting job cards, timely work, timely payments, compensation for delayed payments, and whether improvements have taken place over time. These are the things that are scrutinised first. In the second phase, you see the corruption angle. The financial audit does not have that scope.

It’s true that in several parts of the country, social audits have been a sham. But we have examples in Andhra Pradesh and other pockets that show that if you give people a chance through social audits there can be dramatic results in delivery of the scheme.

To put in place such a structure that functions in a desirable way is not at all a simple task. We are here with a very limited mandate of searching for the right person to be social audit director.

The MGNREGA has had two impacts. The wage rate has gone up in many parts of the country and it has given people bargaining power. And I think it has reduced distress migration in many parts of the country, particularly of women. If the MGNREGA gives 100 days of work, at least the women stay back. So, entire family migration has been reduced to male migration. Women and children staying in the village means schooling and health are better taken care of. Therefore, there is a lot of rethinking about the kind of work to be provided under the MGNREGA.

Q: In coastal areas of Orissa, I find work is done by machines and people do not seem to be too needy for this kind of work. Is it not possible to reduce the quota in coastal areas and increase it in the interior tribal belts where people are needier?

Actually, there is no shortage of funds for the MGNREGA. This year, about half the available money has been spent. Rs 53,000 crore was available, and at the end of the year, I think only Rs 27,000-28,000 crore will be spent. In Sahariya tribes in Baran district in Rajasthan, we have seen bonded labourers freed and the state government putting 100 days more work for people there.

We should fight at both the central and state government level to increase employment in backward areas. Money is not a problem. Let the coastal areas have 100 days of guaranteed employment. For example, Kerala, Haryana, Punjab, etc, are states where it is felt that the MGNREGA is not required. Actually there we have seen women come to work and it helps their income and helps in village development. Roads are made; water harvesting structures are built… So, all the micro and sustainable development that we have been talking about is coming through the MGNREGA.

(Pradeep Baisakh is a freelance journalist based in Bhubaneswar, Orissa)

Infochange News & Features, April 2012

India: Time To Focus On Electoral Reforms

This article came in countercurrents.org on 20th February 2012

Web Link: http://www.countercurrents.org/baisakh200212.htm

India: Time To Focus On Electoral Reforms

By Pradeep Baisakh

20 February, 2012

Countercurrents.org

When the Parliament was scheduled to debate on the Lokpal (an anti-corruption institution in line of Ombudsman) bill on 27 th December 2011, Team Anna (Anti-corruption crusader Anna Hazare and his team have been leading a popular struggle for last one year for enactment of a strong Lokpal )) decided to go on a token fast to mount pressure on the elected representative to pass an effective law. The attitude of Anna Hazare and team for ‘dictating' and ‘blackmailing' the highest representative body of was criticised by some so called enlightened individuals and of course some leading electronic media of the country running the discussion 24x7. In just 12 hours, the debate in the Lok Sabha (Lower house of Parliament) was over with voting taking place on party lines. The major amendments moved by opposition parties e.g. giving the Lokpalan independent investigative agency and freeing the CBI (Central Bureau of investigation), the premier investigative agencies of the country, from administrative and financial control of the government were defeated. Minor amendments which were soothing to the government however were adopted. Eventually amidst high drama, the Rajya Sabha (Upper House) was adjourned without passing the bill. This is exactly what Team Anna was apprehending. It has been complaining from the beginning that the government of the day lacks will to bring a strong Lokpal . This was however negated by many experts airing their opinion in TV channels innocently reposing faith on the temple of India - the Parliament, apparently ignoring the fact that the majority party calls shot in this so called temple.

In a recent interview I asked Manish Sisodia, a key team Anna member on what's their learning in last one year of struggle ( http://www.orissadiary.com/CurrentNews.asp?id=31286  ). He said “The biggest learning is­­­ - aam admiki is desh me koi aukat nehin (Common people's voice has no weightage here)”. The demonstration by millions of people for last more than eight months ended with the Lokpal matter been made a mockery by the political parties tacitly joining hands together. The blame goes more to the ruling establishment, the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) lead by Indian National Congress popularly known as Congress party.

India has nearly $1500 billion black money stashed in foreign banks. This is the data provided by the Swiss Bank. India has the highest black money followed by Russia 470 Billion, UK $390 Billion and others like Ukraine $100 Billion and China with $96 Billion. The quantum of black money operating inside the country is not known. Many of the politicians, bureaucrats, corporate houses are the ones who own this money and the government, for the very obvious reasons, is not disclosing the names to the public despite insistence by the Supreme Court of India. Nor has it initiated any disciplinary action against the owners of this money. It's therefore not beyond anticipation to not have got any opposition from these powerful masses to the anti-corruption movement by Anna Hazare .

With a phase of anti corruption crusade being over, what's the next course of action for Team Anna ? Campaigning against the candidate of Congress party in Hisar (a place in Haryana, a state of India where an by-election was held for the state Assembly), though non-conventional, was a strategy to pressurise the party to fall in line for an brining an effective Lokpal bill. Now time has come to understand the basic problem lying with the electoral system of the country. The prevailing system, where money is raised by the political parties in dubious means to fund elections and political parties dominated by criminal and corrupt elements, people at large are the passive participants in the democratic process limited to ‘electing' representatives once in five years. Therefore, there is a felt need of creating an atmosphere for brining in key electoral reforms in the country in order to cleanse the political system of rot. Once this root cause is addressed, the quantum of corruption is most likely to come down. Team Anna , which once proposed electoral reforms, must now focus its movement in this direction. Some of the proposals are a discussed here.

Negative Voting

The concept of negative voting provides the choice to a voter to reject a candidate s/he does not find them suitable. In the current practice of adult suffrage in India , the voter in fact adopts a process of elimination than selection. Suppose when a voter is faced with a situation where he finds none in the list to be suitable enough to represent him/her, what does s/he do? He either votes for the one s/he ‘dislikes the least' of s/he just skips voting. In both these circumstances the freedom of the citizen to elect his or her representative is only partially met, which may not be called as a free will but a forced will.

No wonder that in last Lok Sabha (Lower house of parliament) election held in 2009 the number of Members of Parliament (MPs) with criminal background is 162 out of the information available for 543 MPs (Total strength of Lok Sabha is 552). And ironically this is a 34% increase to the last election held in 2004. MPs with serious criminal cases pending against them are 76 in numbers this time. A compilation made by National Election Watch (NEC) and Association of Democratic Reforms (ADR) provides further details on the criminal cases and the numbers of Crorepatis (owner of Crores of money ) ( 1crore is 10 million) (http://www.adrindia.org/   ) . The website reveals that in case of 304 MPs in the 2004 Lok Sabha who also contested the 2009 election, their assets have gone up by 289% on an average. Their average assets was 1.92 crore rupees then but has gone up to an average of 4.8 crore rupees in just five years! Where have these money come from, wonder the common people. And the Crorepati MPs in the 2009 Lok Sabha are 315. All these show that a common person has a rare chance to enter into these so called temples of India namely the legislatures.

Given the above fact, it is not ironic that the kinds of governments the Indians have been getting are the ones which hardly listen to the real need of people.

System of negative voting operates in two forms. In the first form, the voter is given two options, one is ‘for' and the other is ‘against'. He can vote for the candidate he finds most suitable and against he considers highly undeserving. During the counting of votes all the ‘for' and ‘against' votes are added separately and then added to each other to get the sum total of it for a particular candidate. The candidate getting the highest number of ‘for' votes (or least number of ‘against' votes as the case may be) is declared elected. This suggestion is a radical one. In the other form, which is also known as neutral voting, simply one more option indicating ‘none of the above' is added to the ballot paper. Here the voter will have the option of rejecting all the candidates if s/he finds them unfit to represent him/her.

Under the current dispensation, there is option for ‘not to cast his/her vote' by letting the reason recorded near the presiding officer under r ule 49 O of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961. Though this provides the scope for ‘rejecting all candidates', it violates the secrecy of voting. The Election Commission of India (EC) recommended in 2001 and again in 2004 that “Rules 22 and 49 B of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 may be suitably amended adding a proviso that in the ballot paper … there shall be a column ‘None of the above', to enable a voter to reject all the candidates, if he chooses so.”

This recommendation has fallen into deaf ear of successive governments. The Election Commission of India has also not attempted to bring in such a provision on its own despite it having the power to do so. (In Mohinder Singh Gill case of 1978 and A.C. Jose case of 1984, the Supreme Court held that the EC has power to bring in such reforms on its own). The Supreme Court also played safe hand and called for a larger political consensus when it has been approached by concerned citizen for acting proactive to bringing in this provision. In 2007 hearing to a PIL filed by Ashok Agarwal, a resident of Noida, the apex court suggested the petitioner to wait till the government takes a decision on negative voting.

The system of negative voting operates in countries like Nevada State ( United States ), in Massachusetts ( United States ), Spain , Switzerland etc in various forms.

Likely impact of negative voting

This reform will in all likelihood bring back the disaffected voters back to the election process as s/he now has option to vent out his/her displeasure toward the candidates. If the numbers of negative voting in an election is too large, it shall bring moral impact on the political parties to redefine their criteria for candidate selection. And if the numbers of negative votes are more than the highest votes got by a candidate, re-polling should be ordered in the constituency. This however may need the backing of necessary legislation by the Parliament. The parties will be very cautious onwards to ensure that the criteria to choose the candidate are quality and acceptability of the candidates by the public, not on basis of money, muscle power and family affinity. This may usher good people entering politics breaking the wider perception that ‘politics is not everybody's cup of tea'. It might thus revolutionise the political system with people at large having voice in influencing the internal functioning of the political parties.

The other suggestion for electoral reforms to be discussed is State Funding of Elections.

State funding of elections

In May 2001, the then Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) party president Bangaru Laxman was shown in a clandestine video to have received one lakh rupees ‘bribe' to favour a defence deal. The BJP however defended terming it as receiving the donation for party. The lesson learn is that there is no difference between taking bribe and receiving raising funds for parties and elections as in most of cases the money raised for party is not accounted and come from dubious means.

The debate on the desirability and feasibility of state funding of elections has been in air for last some decades. But owing to lack of consensus among the political parties, the matter could not take any concrete shape. Recently while the debate for a strong Lokpal was going on, the Group of Ministers (GoM) formed to suggest measures to tackle corruption in the country asked the Law Ministry in October 2011 to formulate concrete proposals on constitutional and statutory amendments required to introduce state funding of elections of the Parliamentary and Assembly pools. Gandhi Scion Rahul Gandhi has reportedly supported the idea.

The purpose of it is to check the dirty money funding the operation of political parties and then influence the policies. Ideally, even though India is a Sovereign, Democratic and Republic where the people are said to be source of power, in reality those who fund the parties- legally or secretly, set the agenda of governance for the nation.

Indrajit Gupta Committee recommended for state funding of elections way back in 1998. It recommended for partial state funding of elections to the candidates and parties recognised by the Election Commission where the support may be given in kind than in cash. The Law Commission report in 1999 also agreed to Gupta commission's idea of partial state funding of elections for reducing scope for raising funds by the political parties from illegitimate sources. There is desirability for complete state funding provided that the political parties are debarred from raising fund from any external sources, opined both the committees. Second Administrative Commission report ‘Ethics in Governance', 2007 reiterates the position. Law Commission recommends for regulation of the internal democracy and structure of the political parties and proper maintenance of accounts and submission of audit to the Election Commission as pre-conditions for introducing state funding. While the National Commission of Review of Working of Constitution (NCWRC), 2001 have been cautious on the issue, the Election Commission of India is not in favour of it as it feels that state funding of elections will not solve problems of black money. However, given the condition of role of dirty money in elections and the rising quantum of black money, presumably, with the connivance and active participation of the politicians and political parties, there is case for state finding of elections.

Currently the limit of expenditure for a candidate contesting Parliamentary elections has been pegged by the Election Commission of India at 40 lakh rupees (or $0.8 million. 1 dollar is considered equivalent to 50 rupees here, which is the prevailing exchange rate) and that for Assembly pools is 16 lakh rupees (or $0.32 million). While it may be difficult to quantify the money required to be borne upon by the state if a complete state funding of election is considered, it will certainly be less than the money bungled in the recent series of scams exposed in the country e.g. the 2G spectrum scam (of $25.4 billion or 1. 27 lakh crore rupees; 1 dollar is considered approximately equal to 50 rupees) (presumptive loss as quantified by Comptroller and Auditor General of India), Commonwealth game scam, Adarsh Society scam ( $200 million or 1000 crore rupees scam), Mining scam in Karnataka (India state, mining scam in Odisha (an India state) ($60 billion or 3 lakh crore rupees as quantified by CNN-IBN-a leading electronic media of the country) so on and so forth.

Time has come for the people and concerned citizen to raise the pitch for these electoral reforms which will go a long way in brining the electoral system to the control of people and drive out the elements illegitimately funding elections and shape government policies in their favour. It will also reduce the scope of accruing black money by the corporate, politicians, bureaucrats, criminals so on and so forth.

Pradeep Baisakh is a Freelance Journalist based in Odisha state and a National Foundation of India Media Fellow (2012). He can be reached through e mail: 2006pradeep@gmail.com

Common people’s voice has no value: Manish Sisodia (Team Anna member)

This piece came in Orissa Diary on 9th January 2012.

Web Link: http://www.orissadiary.com/CurrentNews.asp?id=31286

Manish Sisodia, a key member in Anna Hazare’s team was in Odisha recently to attend a three day programme on Lokpal issue and interacted with the youth. Speaking toPradeep Baisakh, Senior Editor, OrissaDiary.com he laments the irresponsiveness of politicians toward the sentiments of common citizenry of the country, who have been fighting for a strong anti-corruption law for last more than eight months; clears the air on the controversies surrounding his team members like Kiran Bedi and Prashant Bhushan and discusses various provisions of Jan Lokpal bill.

Orissa Diary: Why do we need a strong Lokpal in India?

Manish Sisodia: In name of anti corruption system, we have very weak laws in our country. Under Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA), there is no such mechanism to implement its provisions. So we need a mechanism to execute the PCA. The poor in the villages suffer from hunger and starve due to corruption. The ration that is released from the godown is siphoned off on the way. This is due to corruption.

Price rise is an issue. In 2G spectrum 1.76 lakh rupees have been bungled. Had it not happened we would give less tax, the price of petroleum would have been less. So corruption in a way is one of the responsible factors for the rise in prices of basic products.

So corruption is responsible for poverty and price rise.

Orissa Diary: Above $1400 billion of black (Indian) money is parked in foreign banks. Many of the politicians, possibly including ones from the ruling establishment, may be owning such money. Are you little over-optimistic? Do you think the political class is fool to give you an instrument which you will use to put them behind bars?

Manish Sisodia: I think the politicians I power are not interested for a strong Lokpal. It’s been one year to demand and demonstrate, but the Lokpal is yet to come. You are right. The politicians holding power at the centre will not like to create the institution that hit at their feet.

But, when there will be danger to their position and existence, they will be forced to pass a strong law. We have to create such environment where they will realise that if they do not bring a strong Lokpal, they will be voted out.

Orissa Diary: When the people will see a strong Lokpal? This is an imaginary question, but people are interest to know it.

Manish Sisodia: Difficult to say. But it seems there is enough pressure on the government. If it does not act with this much pressure, then we have to bring in more pressure on it

Now this movement is not limited to Lokpal only. It has gone beyond it. What we have learnt in last 8 months is that the common people are nothing in this country. The ‘Aam Admi’ in lakhs cannot make a law which one US or Europe based company can do. If they want the government can pass a law in a single day.  We have to take our system to a stage where the people of this country should have the power to make law and the power to influence and make laws in our country by the foreign forces should be withdrawn.

Orissa Diary: Now your strategy has been changed from that of fasting to campaigning against Congress in different elections. Do you think the earlier strategy has failed?

Manish Sisodia: Strategies in a movement evolve. Initially we wrote letters, then pressure was created through discussions; and then fasting was undertaken. The government did not accept our demands, so we went for another fast. Still the government did not accept so we adopted the strategy of campaigning against the ruling party. It means you add new strategies as you go ahead with the movement.

Orissa Diary: You seem to be overwhelmed with the support of BJP and L K Advani. For your information, when Advani ji recently visited Odisha as part of his anti-corruption Rathyatra, he did not utter a word against the Naveen government which is neck dip in corruption like mining scam, coal scam, Dal scam etc. That’s because, Naveen Patnaik is a possible ally in the coming general election. Do not you think that opposition is just using your movement to fish in the dirty water?

Manish Sisodia: Opposition party cannot use us. The fact is that the people are disgusted with the current government. Due to the great mistakes of the congress party, the opposition is getting space. Otherwise, if the current government provides good governance, then how opposition will get any space?

None is pious. Anna therefore says that if one is graduate, other is post graduate and the third is doctorate in corruption. Many BJB ruled states are not brining Lokayktas except one i.e. Uttarakhand. States ruled by other parties are also not brining Lokayuktas despite our persuasion.

But strategically we have to decide who to pressurise and how to create mechanisms to check corruption. Now the ruling party in the centre is in a position to do something, therefore pressure should be on it.

Orissa Diary: What’s your answer to the recent allegations of manipulation by Kiran Bedi in her own organisation and the controversial remarks on Kashmir by Prashant Bhushan?

Manish Sisodia: What Prashant ji told on Kashmir is his own view. Team has nothing to do with it and we have repeatedly told that the team does not subscribe such view. Purposefully such issues are raised so that the attention from Lokpal is diverted. And the allegations which have been made against Kiran ji, it’s clear that the government machineries are misused. The government agencies selectively picked up files and misinterpreted them and leaked to media. This is also the government’s diversionary technique. 

And all such allegations are baseless.  First thing is that these are non issues purposefully to divert attention. If there is any strength in these allegations, please put us in jail. If we are corrupt and you are corrupt, put everyone in jail. But do not refrain from bringing the strong Lokpal.

To elaborate it further, when we say bring lower bureaucracy under Lokpal, they say what we have to say on Kashmir; when we say bring CBI under Lokpal, they say what is your view on reservation; when we say how Lokpal will be appointed, they say we are corrupt…so when we raise debate on various provisions of Lokpal, they raise irrelevant issues.

Orissa Diary: A Jan Sampark Yatra has been undertaken by your Odisha group. What impact it would create on people?

Manish Sisodia: It has a strong impact in terms of brining all people through out the state, who had campaigned coming out of their political boundaries, together. All those who had voluntarily led the movement in their areas came under one roof and ready to go with the nation’s campaign on a strong Lokpal. Our movement is decentralised one. We only declare a date for the movement and people who have trust on Anna take up call and start movement in their respective areas. As you know people have come in lakhs.

Orissa Diary: Fight against corruption is an ongoing process. Is team Anna attempting is to create a structure which will act as a panacea against corruption? Are you trying to create a super structure though one law and address all issues of corruption?  In a democracy inter-institutional accountability is very important. In Jan lokpal bill, the accountability provisions are very complex. Aruna Roy suggested five laws to tackle corruption, of which you accepted some at a later stage.

Manish Sisodia: Different groups are giving different opinions, and we are not adamant on our opinion. If we are, we would have stuck to the initial version of Jan Lokpal bill. We have revised our bill thirteen times.

Operational aspects in dealing with corruption are what we have to discuss. In the current set up, in same case of corruption, if a clerk is involved complaint is to be made near one agency and for a senior bureaucrat, different agency will deal with and for an elected person it different. So a common person cannot get any benefit out of it. So some proposals have come from some CSOs which suggest multiple structures. There are operational difficulties involved with it. In maximum cases of corruption, you can see that senior bureaucracy, junior bureaucracy and politicians are involved in it.

In Jan Lokpal bill, a common person can file a complaint against Lokpal in the Supreme Court. This is a direct process of accountability.

Orissa Diary: CBI has been used in many occasions as a weapon by the ruling establishment to settle scores with the opposition political party or anyone who challenges it. Do you think your demand for brining it under Lokpal, which may take away from political control over CBI, will be accepted?

Manish Sisodia: Corruption is mostly done by the party when in power. Therefore the anti-corruption agency should never be under the control of the ruling party or coalition. “Choron ke Sardar ke haat me Thanedar ke gardan hona nehin chaiye!” Such an institution should be made accountable to a panel which is selected in a democratic and transparent process. Therefore we demand it to be brought under Lokpal. It should not be under a Minister or a IAS officer.

Orissa Diary: In the current arrangement the CVC oversees the functioning of the CBI as per the Supreme Court’s direction. Despite that it is not independent, why?

Manish Sisodia: CVC has supervisory power with the CVC which means nothing. The administrative control like transfers and postings etc are under the government. So CBI is more controlled by the government.

Orissa Diary: The mining scam in Odisha is of 3 lakh crores (CNN-IBN has quantified). Should such cases be handed over to the CBI?

Manish Sisodia: In such big scams there is every possibility that both the centre and the state collude. Various political parties get benefits from such scams. Therefore we demand that the CBI be made free from political control.  The difference and antagonism among various political parties is only in name sake. When it comes to loot the public resources, all loot it tougher. So a CBI independent of the government is the answer.

Orissa Diary: What’s your position on suggestions like electoral reforms like State Funding of Elections? Will this address the evasive ways the political parties are collecting funds for the parties?

Manish Sisodia: Even though we proposed for electoral reforms, we have not deliberated much on it. We have political parties which have no internal democracy. All the political parties run under the direction of the party high command. To fight election, one has to work, not spend money, or employ goons to win election. In this country people have won election without spending huge money. They have won campaigning by cycles. Trust of people is primary requirement to win election which the leaders have lost. Therefore they are now depending on money and muscle power.

Pradeep Baisakh can be reached through e mail: 2006pradeep@gamil.com

Let BJD be called as Pyari Janata Dal, says Dr. Damodar Rout

This interview came in Orissa Diary on 25th December 2011. 

Web Link: http://orissadiary.com/inerview/Damodar-Rout.asp

Let BJD be called as Pyari Janata Dal, says Dr. Damodar Rout

Dr. Damodar Rout is a veteran politician and prominent face in Biju Janata Dal (BJD), the ruling party in Odisha. He was a Panchayati Raj minister during Biju Patnaik’s regime. Under Naveen Patnaik government, he first served as Panchayati Raj minister and then Agriculture minister. But he has been recently dumped by the party owing to internal squabbles among the top leaders. After resigning as a minister, he has launched Biju Bichar Manch to keep himself going. Speaking exclusively to Pradeep Baisakh and Pratichi Hota he laments the deviation of his party from the ideology of Biju Patnaik, comments on his arch rival Pyarai Mohan Patnaik and criticizes the opponents of POSCO project.

 Orissadiary: You have launched Biju Bichar Manch. What is it exactly? Is it just an intellectual forum or anything beyond that?

Damodar Rout: Biju Bichar Manch is basically a forum to discuss and propagate the ideology, life, work and visions of Late Biju Patnaik. He was a true Odia and dedicated himself for the cause of Odisha. Before he came to politics he was a big industrialist. But he was quite aggrieved to see the poverty stricken people of Odisha. Odisha was poor despite being rich in natural resources as there was not enough scope for industrialization, which could reduce poverty. He therefore tried very hard and lay down the plan for development of Odisha for next ten years. He brought about visible development like Paradip port, many engineering and medical colleges, Agriculture University etc to the state during his tenure as Chief Minister. He became a popular person among Odias and called as a ‘Kimbadanti Purush’.

He passed away in 1997 and was succeeded by his son Naveen Patnaik. People accepted him as he was son of a great leader. In the mean time, 14 years have passed. Some people who opposed his ideology are now enjoying power in Biju Janata Dal (BJD). Somehow I feel that the party and the government are not following the path shown by Biju Patnaik. Therefore this manch is for discussing the vision of the legendary Biju babu, sensitize the younger generation about Biju’s real ideology so that the state follows his ideology and prosper.

  Orissadiary: You are saying that BJD is deviating from the ideals of Late Biju Pattnaik? Can you give some examples to substantiate your claim?

Damodar Rout: With help of N Khosla, one of the then prominent engineers of India, Biju Patnaik prepared a blue print called decade of destiny for industrial development of Odisha. Considering the availability of mineral resources, water resources, the forest and sea coast, he cited how many industries of different type could be built while maintaining the sustainability of natural resources. He wanted a second steel plant. He invited Swaraj pal to put up a steel plant at Duburi and then called it Kalinga Nagar. Duburi is very ideally located in terms of communication and availability of iron ore.

But what is happening now? We have signed MoU for more than 48 steel plants, half a dozen of Aluminum plants, about 20 power plants, more than 54 sponge iron factories so on and so forth. If all plants come into being how much ore would be consumed, what would be the quantum of emission to the air, and what is the likely impact on environment? Therefore appropriate discussion on how much mineral resource could be utilized should be done.

When the bill on naming the technical university was discussed, I pushed for it to be named after Biju Patnaik. So now we have Biju Patnaik University of technology (BPUT). But now the government is announcing schemes after schemes in name of Biju Patnaik e.g. Biju setu, Biju KBK yojana, Biju Krishak Yojana etc. As enough care is taken for their proper implementation, they bring bad name to Biju Patnaik. The process the government is adopting is not in line of Biju Patnaik’s ideology. I have no grudge against the government though.

 Orissadiary: Does not sound it contradictory where you are a great supporter of POSCO project and on the other criticizing the ‘indiscriminate’ industrialization process of the state government?

Damodar Rout: As far as POSCO steel plant is concerned, we are going to set up it at the sea shore. There is no question of land acquisition as they are mostly government land. Since it is on the sea shore, there is least possibility of pollution. They are also brining the modern technology where the pollution level will be less. Again, that is an underdeveloped area. The land is of low productivity due to salinity. If the south Asian company comes with 12 billion dollar investment, there will be development in the area. It will generate a lot of employment and create ancillary industries. So I welcome the project. But the state government should provide needed infrastructure like electricity and port along with land, water, and mineral. But the government is not able to provide them. So the project is basically not bad, but the implementation is. And there are many politicians who oppose it as they do not understand the benefits of such industries.

 Orissadiary: Your government is allegedly crushing the democratic voice of the people there who oppose the POSCO project. What you have to say on this?

Damodar Rout:It is not a fact.

 Orissadiary: Television channels showed how your police force attack and intimidate people.

Damodar Rout:: It is unfortunate that my dear media friends, without going deep into the matter, are interested to propagate something that will draw attention of the people. I am a man of that area. I represented that area for 35 years as a Legislator. There are 22,000 people staying in the three Panchayats (Dhinkia, Gada Kujanga and Nuagaon). There is dearth of ground water there. Once this water is exhausted what will be the fate of people there? None has examined this aspect.

Only a handful number of people will be displaced and that too willfully. No one is forcing them.

 Orissadiary: Your Chief Minister had promised to go to the area to speak to the people. But he did not keep his promise. Why?

Damodar Rout: The Chief Minister did not promise to go there. It is some communist party people who are opposing POSCO project, have been forcing the CM to go there. One outsider is helped financially and politically in many ways to oppose POSCO project there.

 Orissadiary: you are hinting at Abhaya Sahoo of Posco Pratirodha Sangram Samiti (PPSS). I also asked him that Damodar Rout alleges that he is an outsider. He said you also do not belong to that area!

Damodar Rout: But I have many relatives there. I represented that constituency earlier.

 Orissadiary: You could have launched the Biju Bichar Manch while you were a minister, but you preferred to launch it only after you resigned. Do you want your political ambitions fulfilled by this platform?

Damodar Rout: When Biju Patnaik was Chief Minister in 1961, he first started the Panchayati Raj (PR) system in Odisha. In 1964, Jawaharlal Nehru remarked in AICC session in Odisha that Biju’s panchayat system is more progressive than others.

In 1991 Biju Patnaik said me to amend the state Panchayati Raj law to introduce 33% reservation for women in it and I did so. This was first of this kind in the country. I was very much appreciated all over the country as the Panchayati Raj Minister. In Naveen Patnaik’s government I was again made the Panchayati Raj minister. Odisha got national award twice for the success in its PR system. Manishankar Iyar, the Panchayati Raj minister at the centre took me abroad as the ambassador for PR system. Then I became the agriculture minister. In 2010-11 Odisha got first prize and two crore rupees cash award for better agriculture production in Odisha. I was following the path of Biju Patnaik so was getting success.

Has anyone blamed me? Then why I was dropped as a Minister? As I am not a minister now, so I started Biju Bichar Manch. I will propagate the ideas of Biju Patnaik and not allow hypocrisy in name of Biju Patnaik. 

 Orissadiary: It is believed in political circle that Damodar Rout is used by party to silence the opposition. That’s the reason¬ why you were brought in as a spokesperson during the election or even after. With BJD coming to power for the third time and opposition being silenced, do you think your utility for the party has diminished and therefore you were dumped?

Damodar Rout: When Naveen Patnaik came to politics, people voted him not for his political ability but as the son of Biju Patnaik. He should therefore try to reciprocate the gesture to the people. For last ten years I tried to protect the leadership of Naveen Patnaik. But now I got this reward. I have been thrown away from the cabinet.

Who are the ministers now? Do they know the ideology of Biju Patnaik? In the hankering for power many people have deviated from Biju’s path. To enjoy opportunity and power and to accumulate wealth they should not use the name of Biju Patnaik.

Let them call the party as Pyarai Janata Dal. I do not mind.

 Orissadiary: Tell us frankly what’s the harm if Pyari Mohan becomes close to Naveen Patnaik and enjoys a lot of power? In every political party that happens. Some group of party cadres close to the party supremo enjoys a lot of power. Why do you object to this?

Damodar Rout: I don’t agree to this. Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru had some people with him who would help raise fund for party and help him selecting candidates for elections. Indira Gandhi had also some advisors. Now Sonia Gandhi has also advisors to advice her on political matters. They are political people.

But here senior politicians are available to Naveen for advice, which is not taken. Pyari Mohan was a bureaucrat. He was critical of Biju Pattnaik branding him as communist. Now he takes decisions. There is no internal democracy in the party now. 

 Orissadiary: During your stint as the Agricultural Minister, you laid down road maps for increasing agri-production, milk and egg production in the state. That is a welcome step. But on BT cotton seeds, which are proved to be fatal in AP and Maharastra, have made inroads to Balangir and Bargarh like districts during your tenure. How can you allow such killer seed to Odisha? Are the companies like Monsato and others who produce such seeds more important for you than your own farmers?

Damodar Rout: First Kerala government and then me, we opposed BT cotton. I wanted to form a group with the minister of agriculture of Madhya Pradesh and Chhatisgarh and to meet the PM on the issue. Odisha government has refused BT cotton in principle. BT cotton available now has been introduced by the private firms. There is no backing of the government for it.

 Orissadiary: Now Damodar Rout has become a tech savvy person. You have created a facebook account to propagate the ideas of Biju Bichar Manch. Why did you choose to do this?

Damodar Rout:I have taken help of some young friends to operate facebook account of Biju Bichar Manch. As now social media has become useful in reaching out to many people, I felt it important to make use of it.

NAC Opposed Cash Transfer Replacing PDS

The interview came in Counter Currents on 28th November 2011. 

Web Link: http://www.countercurrents.org/baisakh281111.htm

NAC Opposed Cash Transfer Replacing PDS

 By Pradeep Baisakh & Aruna Roy

28 November, 2011

Countercurrents.org

Magsaysay award winner Ms Aruna Roy has been the member of National Advisory Council (NAC) headed by the UPA Chairperson Ms Sonia Gandhi in both of its Avtars and has influenced several social policies of the country. Ms Roy, also the founder member of Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS), a people's organisation in Rajasthan recently visited to the proposed POSCO area in Jagatsingpur district in Odisha to observe the protest of people against the land acquisition there. Speaking to Pradeep Baisakh , she shares her observation on POSCO issue, on Land Acquisition Bill, on National Food security Bill and on the performance of MGNREGA in Odisha.

You recently visited proposed POSCO area in Jagatsingpur district of Odisha. Please share with us your observation.

Aruna Roy: The villagers in Dhinkia are completely opposed to the project, and are unwilling to give up any of their personal, or community land. Attempts by the state government for land acquisition are being made in a legal vacuum, as the MoU of the government with POSCO has been lapsed. This makes this forcible land acquisition morally and legally unjustified.

People's democratic voices shouldn't be crushed. People's consent is a must for establishing any industrial project. This is even more important in the context of the proposed new Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation legislation.

Thousands of trees are being felled by the district administration when the project does not legally exist (MoU is yet to be renewed). How far is this defensible?

Aruna Roy: Exactly that we have to say that now there is no legal ground. Reportedly, several thousand trees approximately 40-50,000 trees have already been chopped by the administration. The government is planning to cut lakhs trees like Casurina casuarinas, Jackfruit, Cashew nut and Mangroves. This tree cutting activities will leave the area exposed to cyclones and other environmental disasters in an area with a very sensitive ecology. Felling of trees is completely unacceptable.

We also have observed that people there want to work but there is no Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) in the area. MGNREGA has to function as this is the right of every individual. No matter what for the people of Dhinkia have protested, it's still a part of India and people of the Panchayat are citizen of this country.

The Panchayat premises occupied by the police should be vacated. We also have said that the Sarpanch of Dhinkia panchayat, who has been suspended by the state government, should be reinstated. He cannot be suspended for what law requires him to do i.e. for holding Palli Sabhas (General body of the village). This is not a constitutional violation of any sort and this is not corruption.

National Food Security bill does not say about universal PDS. Even the draft recommended by the NAC does not guarantee universal food security despite the people like you, Jean Dreze (Now is no more a member of NAC) and Harsh Mander being the members of NAC?

Aruna Roy: The NAC draft says about 90% coverage. Actually universal PDS is something we all demanded, but somehow in the process of negotiation with the GoI, it got whittled down. This was one of the most painful processes and it has been very difficult to convince government.

The government actually did not look it as the right to food and health issue of people but from the point of view of problems in storage and procurement and from financial point of views. The government bill is quite disappointing and has taken away some of the vital recommendations of NAC e.g. the grievance redressal mechanism. They are for putting in UID and cash transfer in it, two things that NAC totally opposed because they are very dangerous. Recently Jean Dreze and Reetika Khera did a survey and came out with the fact that PDS is doing very well in Odisha and shown signs of revival in other states too. This shows that the system as it is can function.

What's your position on introduction of fortified food? Does not it lead to corporatisation of PDS?

Aruna Roy: It is totally unacceptable. What may be the fortified food and its new definition; you have enough nutritious food in the villages which will cater to the needs of the malnourished children. What's necessary is cooking is done and hot meal is provided. And that is the most important thing.

How do you react to the Supreme Court observation that the current Land Acquisition Law should rather be thrown away?

Aruna Roy: A new land acquisition law is coming which will replace the existing law. We have suggested that the first test of the land acquisition bill and the discussion should take place in Dhinkia Panchayat, because people have been displaced from there. All that is suggesting should now be tested in action. We suggest that there should be public hearing in Dhinkia itself on the project.

You have favoured a direct negotiation by the private corporate with people and acquire land in the new land acquisition law. Do not you think there is risk of people being intimidated and cheated in the process?

Aruna Roy: Now there are so much of private investments coming, if government acquires land for them, then it will go into that business. By effect something like Singur and Nadigram will be repeated. It should limit itself acquiring land for projects which serve public purpose e.g. for government offices, schools, hospitals.

If the government acquires land for the privates, then there will be creation of land bank like in Tamil Nadu and in Karnataka. And when the land bank is traded off, the person who is dispossessed of the land gets very little money than what profits are made there after. So it becomes a business. At one level it's much more difficult for people to oppose the government than to the private industries. The government should rather play the role of a regulator in such cases. It should regulate that no land is acquired below some market price, that anyone displaced in this process should get all rights covered by the Resettlement & Rehabilitation policies or laws.

You must be aware that CBI inquiry is going on in six districts of Odisha on the allegations of corruption in MGNREGA. So much of money is flushed under MGNREA to the state which is siphoned off and distressed migration in the KBK region and beyond is actually on the rise. Is it not wastage of public money when the state government is apathetic toward its implementation?

Aruna Roy: You cannot extrapolate the Odisha experience to the whole country. I think it's the administrative failure that people are not applying for work, people are not getting jobs in time. And if you do not receive application in time and you do not give wages in time, then people will go out looking for work. I really do think that there is a conspiracy in the government in general against NREGA because you cannot siphon off money as easily as you can do in other welfare works. If you look at other rural development work those have come to us, you cannot know where and how crores of money is being siphoned off. MGNREGA is the first programme that tells that the money is siphoned off. It is because NRGEA has made mandatory that the transparency and accountability is put into system.

Especially in the areas where there are Maoist influences or suspected Maoist influences it is more than necessary that this programme functions properly to bring in basic needs to the people and ensure that there is peace. Right to food and right to 100 days employment are guarantees against starvation and deaths.

What suggestion do you have for the Odisha government to improve the performance of MGNREGA?

Aruna Roy: I met the Chief Minister about three years ago. I made a presentation on the operation of NREGA in Rajsthan. I said if you paint the basic information of NREGA on walls, like how many job cards issued, and how many people have been given how much money –so translating the MIS to what we call it as JIS-Janata Information System. So you put it on wall, people will take care of it.

Secondly, work must be given in fifteen days time and give unemployment allowance in case of default. For making this work you need political will from the Chief Minister and bureaucratic will from the Chief Secretary and the Secretary from Principal Secretary, Rural Development. Unless you have a trigger of a dated acknowledgement receipt, followed by work and payment, things will not happen. It also means improving your MIS system, whether it means improving the system of payment, it must be done.

And I think any government that neglects NREGA that does with its own risk. So much money that comes in and this money it will provide even political benefit. But to neglect it, in my opinion, is not only a tragedy for the people but also it is dangerous for both administrative and political system.

Do you basically tell that political and administrative will in the state is lacking on issues relating to implementation of MGNREGA?

Aruna Roy: Well, It seems so.

You are the member of NAC in both of its avtars . Do you think that Ms Gandhi and the central government are using NAC as a ‘safety valve' to manage the rising discontent of people owing to the kind of public (economic) policies being pursued which has widened the gap between the haves and the have-nots?

Aruna Roy: I do not believe in horoscopes. So I cannot predict nor can I read. As an activist we ask and demand for many things. If in the first NAC there had been no common minimum programme which made the commitment to the people of India and for the first time after 25 years poor and issues of poor surfaced in the political discourse. Now, whatever may be the reason for their putting on this, for people like us its important to grab whatever space we have, catch them on their commitment and make them implement it. The NREGA, the RTI, the forest rights bill and the domestic violence bill all came out of it.

There is some polarity on what the government wants and what social policies demands. It which case, it should be boosted by our public demand. Ultimately if we believe violent revolution, then it's different matter. But if people want peaceful change, then we are also limited in the arenas in which we can get it. We have to make wider push as much as we can in whatever space we get. So those of us who have worked in this space that is provided have tried to push the system.

Pradeep Baisakh is a Freelance Journalist based in Bhubaneswar . He has extensively written on transparency law, right to work and food, environment issues, industrialisation and development, women, tribal rights etc. He can be contacted through e mail: 2006pradeep@gmail.com .