The budget figures show that the revenue earnings of the government increased by 14.5 per cent while the expenditures grew only by 5.94 per cent. Instead of using these revenues for expanding economic activity, it has been used to reduce the fiscal deficit, to appease International Finance Capital, from 5.8 per cent to 4.9 per cent of the GDP.

The GDP calculations projected in the budget are yet another exercise in “data fudging” says the statement. Nominal GDP growth is projected at 10.5 per cent. Real GDP projected to grow 6.5 to 7 per cent is calculated by deflating the nominal growth by ‘core’ inflation rate of 3 per cent which excludes the high food inflation rate of 9.4 per cent, thus exaggerating real GDP growth.

Squeezing government expenditure further, subsides have been substantially cut. Fertilizer subsidy is cut by Rs. 24894 cores and food subsidy by Rs. 7082 crores. Expenditures on education, health and rural development as a percentage of GDP remain more or less unchanged. MGNREGS continues to be neglected further. Budgetary allocation is Rs.86,000 crores which was less than what was spent in FY ’23.  However, Rs.41,500 crores are already spent in the first four months of this Financial Year, leaving a mere Rs 44,500 crores for the remaining eight months. Clearly, this will be grossly inadequate to tackle the deep unemployment crisis in rural India.

In the name of addressing unemployment, the budget resorts to gimmickry. The
new scheme introduced as the Employment Linked Incentive offers a one-month
wage to new entrants in the formal sector earning less than Rs. 1 lakh. Eligible workers will receive a maximum of Rs. 5,000 in three monthly instalments. However, employers receive a benefit of Rs. 72,000 for each new employee hired with a monthly salary of up to Rs.1 lakh in 24 monthly instalments, for every additional job created in two years. This is yet another avenue of subsidising corporates in the name of generating new employment. Such gimmickry cannot generate employment. The huge profits made by corporate sector in the past have not resulted in investments in machinery and production due to persisting lack of demand in the economy which is the result of shrinking purchasing power among the people.

Budget 2024-2025 also highlights schemes to enhance skills among India’s youth. This
again is not going to solve the problem of high unemployment. During the period between 2016 and 2022 only 18 per cent of youth who attained training through skill promotion schemes got a placement. Once again, unless the economy expands job opportunities cannot grow.

Despite all talks of ‘cooperative federalism’, the state governments face a raw deal, apart from Andhra Pradesh and Bihar, under political compulsions. The survival of this ND Alliance government depends on the support of allies, particularly the Telugu Desam Party and Janata Dal (United).

However, the Finance Commission grants (apart from the tax devolution) to states has been reduced from Rs. 172760 crores in 2022-23 to Rs 140429 crores in 2023-24 and this budget reduced it further to Rs 132378 crores.

Overall, this budget is aimed at further enriching the rich and impoverishing the poor. It refused to consider any proposal of wealth or inheritance tax on the super-rich of India, neither any relief on indirect tax burden on people.

The Polit Bureau of the CPI(M) calls upon all Party units to protest against the failure of the budget to address the pressing issues of the people and the economy.

The post A regressive contractionary budget says CPI (M), “kursi bachao budget says Rahul Gandhi appeared first on SabrangIndia.

New Delhi: Farmers’ organisations on Wednesday said in the Union Budget 2023-24, the Centre has “literally taken revenge” on farmers for their historic movement that forced roll-back of the three farm laws, by reducing allocations in every major scheme, including Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme, PM Kisan Samman Nidhi Yojana and PM Fasal Bima Yojana.

Ashok Dhawale, president, All India Kisan Sabha (AIKS) told NewsClick that farmers expected the finance minister to announce something to assure them minimum support price (MSP) as per the Swaminathan Commission formula of providing them 1.5 times remuneration of the cost prices.

“The BJP government has refused to implement the MSP as per the M.S.Swaminathan Commission recommendations of C2+50 % nor has it ensured legal guarantee for MSP leading to increasing distress for farmers. This budget does nothing to mitigate the situation,” he said, adding that the government is “exacting a revenge from farmers for the humiliating defeat suffered by it at the hands of the historic united farmers’ movement which forced it to withdraw the three pro-corporate farm Acts.”

Dhawale said farmers were battling challenges like climate change, recession and rising input costs. Yet, the Centre chose to drastically cut allocation for agriculture sector from Rs 1,24,000 crore in 2022-23 to Rs 1,15,531.79 crore this year. Citing the example of PM Kisan Samman Nidhi Yojana, which provided monetary assistance to 12 crore farmers, Dhawale said that Rs 60,000 crore was not enough.

“Even on the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana, in comparison with the 2022-23 Budget Estimates of Rs.15,500 crore, this Budget only has proposed Rs.13,625 crore. The Green Revolution, which was earlier advertised as core scheme and had an allocation of Rs.6,747 crore in 2021-22, had no allocation in the last as well as this year’s budget.

There has also been a drastic cut in fertiliser subsidies from Rs.2,25,000 crore in 2022-23 Revised Estimates (RE) to Rs.1,75,000 crore in Budget Estimates (RE) of 2023-24, a 22% cut of Rs.50,000 crore. “Such a move could have an adverse impact on productivity and impact production of foodgrains,” he added.

Dhawale said the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana has been drastically cut from Rs.10,433 crore to Rs.7,150 crore. The allocation for Pradhan Mantri Kisan Sinchai Yojna has been cut from Rs.12,954 crore in 2022-23 BE to Rs.10,787 crore.

 “If we look at the allocation for rural employment, which was Rs.1,53,525.41 crore in the RE of 2022-23, it has has been drastically cut to Rs.1,01,474.51 crore in the 2023-24 BE. The allotment for MGNREGS has been cut from Rs.89,000 crore in RE of 2022-23 to only Rs.60,000 crore in the 2023-24 BE.

“This is at a time when an estimated 2.72 lakh crores are required if the government intends to provide the legally guaranteed 100 days of employment,” he added.
 
Dharmendra Malik, spokesman, Bharatiya Kisan Union (Apolitical) said that the budget seems like a routine exercise which has very little to offer to farmers. “We are very disappointed that there has been no increase in monetary allocation for buying grains under the Central pool. The Centre has been focusing on encouraging consumption of cereals but how will it happen unless there is no money to buy them,” he said.

Samyukta Kisan Morcha, a collective of farmers unions which spearheaded historic farmers struggle to repeal farm laws, too criticised the budget for “concealing data” about farmers’ incomes.

An SKM statement read: “Union Budget 2023 is silent on Doubling Farmers Income. There were no figures given in the Budget. It may be recalled that according to the Govt., it was Rs.8000 per month in 2016 (the year of announcement) and was to be increased to Rs.21,000 per month in 2022, so that the grand announcement of doubling income becomes reality. After 3 years, it was found to have been Rs.10,200 and perhaps now it is a maximum of Rs.12,400. Thus, out of the targeted increase in income of Rs.13,000, only Rs.4,400 has been achieved, that is only one-third of the target. In any case, the Govt has dishonestly stopped giving data on this and has hoodwinked the farmers.”

The SKM leaders said while the Govt has irrationally resisted the demands of farmers for MSP and its guarantee, this budget has removed “even the fig-leaf” with which the government was trying to cover its meagre efforts to ensure that farmers get MSP.

Flagship schemes like PM Annadata Aay Sangrakshan Abhiyan (AASHA) have seen a steady decline in allocation. Two years ago, it was Rs.1,500 crore. In 2022, this was reduced to Rs.1 crore. Only Rs.1 crore to secure 150 million farming households!

Similarly, the Price Support Scheme (PSS) and MIS (Market Intervention Scheme) was reduced from Rs.3,000 crore to Rs.1,500 crore in 2022, and this year it is an “unimaginable” Rs.10 lakh, it said. In effect, the government has buried AASHA, PSS and MIS and with that the fate of farmers getting MSP has been buried, the SKM added.

Courtesy: Newsclick

The post Union Budget a Statement of ‘Sheer Hopelessness’, say Farmer Leaders appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In the suo motu matter titled In Re: Distribution of Essential Supplies and Services During Pandemic, the Supreme Court has asked the Centre, “The Union Budget for Financial Year 2021-2022 had earmarked Rs. 35,000 crores for procuring vaccines. In light of the Liberalized Vaccination Policy, the Central Government is directed to clarify how these funds have been spent so far and why they cannot be utilized for vaccinating persons aged 18-44 years.”

With different prices of the vaccine for the Centre and States/UTs, the Centre informed the court that this policy has been adopted to instill a competitive market which would drive the market towards affordability and attract offshore vaccine manufacturers. It had also clarified that all persons of all age groups will get free vaccination throughout the country since all State/UT Governments have announced free vaccination for persons aged 18-44 years, in addition to the Central Government vaccinating persons over 45 years for free.

The Court thus, questioned the justification given by the Centre in its affidavit that the pricing policy has been framed to enable competitive pricing to incentivise more private manufacturers. When there are only two manufacturers to negotiate with pre-fixed prices, the Court wondered how this justification was tenable.

The current Liberalized Vaccination Policy enables State/UT Governments and private hospitals to procure 50 percent of the monthly CDL (Central Drugs Laboratory) approved doses in the country at a pre-fixed price. The justification for this Policy has been adduced in a bid to spur competition which would attract more private manufacturers that could eventually drive down prices, opined the court.

“Prima facie, the only room for negotiation with the two vaccine manufacturers was on price and quantity, both of which have been pre-fixed by the Central Government. This casts serious doubts on UoI’s justification for enabling higher prices as a competitive measure”, read the judgment.

The court further pointed out that the Central Government justifying its lower prices on account of its ability to place large purchase orders for vaccines “raises the issue as to why this rationale is not being employed for acquiring 100% of the monthly CDL doses.”

The Central Government in its affidavit stated that the eventual beneficiary of the vaccine would not be affected by the Liberalized Vaccination Policy since every State/UT has promised to vaccinate its residents free of cost. But the Supreme Court was not convinced and recorded in the judgment, that the UoI should consider utilising its position as the “monopolistic buyer in the market” and pass down the benefit to all persons.

“Even if the States/UTs were to fund the higher-priced vaccines, a burden they were not discharging before the Liberalized Vaccination Policy was introduced and potentially may not have planned in advance for, these funds are expended at the behest of the public exchequer”, said the court.

The three-judge Bench reiterated that if the Central Government’s unique monopolistic buyer position is the only reason for it receiving vaccines at a much lower rate from manufacturers, “it is important for us to examine the rationality of the existing Liberalized Vaccination Policy against Article 14 of the Constitution, since it could place severe burdens, particularly on States/UTs suffering from financial distress.”

On the pricing issue of the two vaccines in India, the court has asked the Union Government to state the comparison between the prices of vaccines being made available in India, to their prices internationally. The court also wants to know the manner in which the pricing of vaccines has been arrived at, with the Central Government refusing to intervene statutorily. “The justification for intervening in pre-fixing procurement prices and quantities for States/UTs and private hospitals, but not imposing statutory price ceilings”, is another point that the court has sought clarification.

The Central Government’s fresh affidavit is to be filed within 2 weeks, and the matter will be taken up on June 30. The court has also directed the Centre to ensure that copies of all the relevant documents and file noting reflecting its thinking and culminating in the vaccination policy are annexed to the affidavit on the vaccination policy.

The judgment may be read here:

Related:

Centre’s paid vaccination policy for 18 to 44 years, prima facie arbitrary and irrational: SC
Can’t say you’re the Centre and you know what’s right: SC questions Centre’s vaccine strategy
SC sets up National Task Force for oxygen allocation across all States, UTs

The post Why can’t allocated budget of Rs.35,000 crores be used for vaccinating 18-44 year olds: SC asks Centre appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In the Union Budget 2020, Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman earmarked Rs. 99,311 crore for the education sector in 2020 – 21 and around Rs. 3,000 crore on skill development.  In the 2020 – 21 budget, the major chunk – Rs. 59,845 crore has gone to the school education and literacy department, the fledgling higher education department has received a paltry Rs. 39,466 crore.  While Rs. 99,311 crore does look like a whopping statistic, on closer look it reveals only a 5 percent increase from the previous year’s allocation which was Rs. 94,800 crore. Digging deeper, it also shows that the amount dedicated to boost higher education just does not fulfil the requirements of the sector.

Budgetary allocation

This year, in the budget announced by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, there was a proposed 3 percent increase for education, a figure that is lesser than inflation which stood at 7.35 percent, reported The Telegraph. The FM also said that steps to allow 100 percent foreign direct investment to ensure high quality education would be taken soon. Sitharaman also announced the establishment of hospitals and medical colleges in every district through the public-private-partnership model.

A sum of Rs 500 crore has been allocated for the Prime Minister’s dream “world-class institutions” project, against Rs 400 crore last year. The scheme aims to provide 10 government institutions with Rs 1,000 crore each over five years.

For higher education, the budget allocated for 2020-21 Rs. 39,466 against Rs. 38,317 in 2019-20. The budget allocated for scholarships fell to Rs. 141 crore in 2020 – 21 from Rs. 356 crore in the current fiscal. This after the University Grants Commission trying to abolish the non-National Eligibility Test (NET) fellowship citing shortage of funds which was rolled back after a student protest. The non-NET fellowship granted every PhD scholar Rs. 8,000 a month and MPhil student Rs. 5,000 a month, a boon for students from poor families. In 2018, out of the total education budget of Rs. 81,868 crore, Rs. 35,010 was allocated for higher education which was 46% percent of the total budget as compared to 39.4 percent of the current budget. In 2017, this number stood at 41 percent and in 2016 it was 39.83 percent. 

The 2020 budget also emphasized the need for quality teacher education, but the reduced budgetary outlay for the same from Rs. 870 crores in 2018-19, to Rs. 125 crore in 2019-20 and now to Rs. 110 crore for 2020-21, just goes to suggest that the government has not made this a priority.

Experts speak on why the higher education is still set to suffer

The decision of the government to attract FDI only goes to indicate that government funding towards education would decline in the future. This would lead to higher privatisation and higher fees, a move that all higher education institutes, especially the Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs) and Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) have been fighting for so long.

Through the proposed PPP model, the shift of the government in financing medical education is also apparent. It has not allocated any budget to establishing new medical colleges and adding seats to government medical colleges in the current budget.

Girish Shahane a writer on politics, history and art expressed his opinion on Livemint saying, “As the Centre curtails provisions, universities have sought to bolster other sources of income. A sharp increase in room rents and mess charges in late October sparked an agitation in Delhi’s JNU which culminated in a ghastly attack on the campus by masked activists on January 5. Opponents of the fee hike pointed out that nearly 40% of students admitted to JNU had a monthly family income below ₹12,000, and would find it difficult, if not impossible, to pay the rates enumerated in the new hostel manual, especially a new monthly service charge of ₹1,700.”

Already the Union budget of 2018-19 scrapped grants for creating new infrastructure within institutions like Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs), Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs) and Central Universities. In its place, the Higher Education Financing Agency (Hefa), a joint venture between the human resources ministry and Canara Bank, would provide loans to approved projects, which would be “serviced through internal accruals”. The Centre was to pay the interest on the loans, but the principal amounts were to be paid by the institutions through research and consultancy – revenue amounts no university could generated on its own and had to borrow.

Universities could launch endowment funds to attract donations, but were less likely to garner generous support from philanthropic organizations to fill the huge void left by the government.

Former vice-chancellor of Ambedkar University, Prof. Shyam Menon, told The Telegraph that without subsidised higher education of acceptable quality, the poor and marginalised would have no way to transcend their social and economic obstacles and aspire to claim their legitimate share of India’s economic growth. He said, “They will be the first ones to be affected by any kind of reduction in subsidy. It is so unfair that the state is rolling back its commitment to support public higher education just when the first-generation school graduates from the margins attempt to access it. This is their only chance for any kind of social mobility.” Menon also said that in the past two decades, ignoring the recommendations of the Kothari Commission 1966, the government had sought to shift from liberal to technical and professional streams after being influenced by the Ambani-Birla report of 2000.

The Kothari Commission 1966 and the Niti Aayog had recommended that India should increase its education expenditure to nearly 6 percent of its GDP over the next four years. However, that number currently stands at just a little above 3 percent.

Speaking to The Telegraph, Professor Amitabh Kundu, a distinguished fellow at the government think tank Research and Information System, also disapproved of the recent practice of the government to ask institutions to raise funds internally to manage their expenditure. “Education should be a part of the superstructure which should guide the creation of the economic and social structure rather than being subservient to the latter. The institutions thereby will fail to build an environment and culture of independent thinking on larger issues of societal change and inclusive development,” he said.

From the Film and Television Institute of India (FTII) to JNU to the students of MTech, higher education institutes have been continuously protesting against the fee hikes imposed on the students. The government’s budget cuts have forced the institutions to ramp up their fees, thus forcing the ones for socio-economically weak backgrounds to be left out of the fold of education.

The post Budget 2020 shows the bleak future of higher education in India appeared first on SabrangIndia.

New Delhi: The Delhi police are India’s best in terms of staffing, infrastructure and use of budget, followed by Kerala and Maharashtra, a new study has revealed. Uttar Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Bihar are the worst and most overworked among the 22 states analysed. 

These findings are based on a Police Adequacy Index, derived from national data, part of the ‘Status of Policing in India Report 2019’, released on August 27, 2019 by Common Cause and Lokniti–Centre for the Study Developing Societies, a nonprofit and a think tank, respectively, based in New Delhi. 

The study of 11,000 personnel in 22 states used available government data to analyse and rank the performance of state police on parameters of staffing, infrastructure and budget. Researchers also interviewed 11,834 police personnel across 105 locations in 21 states between February and April 2019. The survey covered the personnel’s opinions over adequacy of police infrastructure, their duties and their perception over several types of crimes and different sections of the society. You can IndiaSpend’s full coverage of the study, here and here.

The index

To derive indices, researchers used data from the Bureau of Police Research and Development and the National Crime Records Bureau for the following parameters:
 

1. Strength:
   1. Police strength as a percentage of sanctioned strength (2012-16 average)
2. Infrastructure
   1. Police stations having vehicles (2012-16 average)
   2. Police stations having telephones and wireless (2012-2016 average)
   3. Computers per police station (2012-2016 average)
3. Budget
   1. Police expenditure as a percentage of budget (2014-16 average)

These indicators are then used to derive index scores on each of the three heads: An index score of zero indicates the worst performing state and a score of one indicates the best performing state.

Overall, as of 2016, Indian police forces were working at 77.4% of their sanctioned capacity, the study said, leading to personnel being overworked. 

The study also pointed out the lack of diversity in the India police. About 86% states (19 of 22) did not fulfil their Scheduled Castes (SC) quota, 73% (16 of 22) did not fulfill their Scheduled Tribes (ST) quotas while 59% (13 of 22) failed to fulfil their Other Backward Classes (OBC) quotas, it said.

None of the states achieved the mandated 33% representation of women in the police force. Further, while 14.3% of all police personnel were officers in 2016–up from 11.6% in 2007, the proportion of officers among policewomen has declined from 11.4% in 2007 to 10.2% in 2016. 

While 41% personnel think women lack the “physical strength and aggressive behaviour” required for the job, 32% think “women police are incapable of handling high intensity crimes and cases”, and 51% think that, due to “inflexible working hours, it is not alright for women to work in the police force as they cannot attend to homely duties”, as IndiaSpend reported on August 29, 2019.

Further, 267 police stations across India had no telephones and 129 had no wireless communication devices as of January 2017, as IndiaSpend reported on August 24, 2019, citing the latest available data from the Bureau of Police Research and Development (BPRD).

There were eight vehicles for every 100 police personnel for responding to distress calls, patrolling and maintaining law and order in their jurisdictions.

Across the 22 states analysed in the study, police stations had, on average, six computers each. Delhi had the highest (16.5 computers per police station) and Bihar had the lowest (0.6). 

The utilisation of police forces’ modernisation budget was less than half (48%) of the funding available, according to an IndiaSpend analysis (cited above) of government data.

Nagaland, Kerala had best staffing, Delhi best infrastructure, Tamil Nadu spent best

Delhi police performs well on both infrastructure (1.03) and strength (0.70) parameters. 

Uttar Pradesh, the worst performer in the country, scored poorly on both the police strength (0.10) and the budget utilisation (0.05).
However, it scored well in Infrastructure indicators with an index value of 0.79. The overall index value of the state remained at 0.31, lower than the national overall index value of 0.42. 

Nagaland had the best score on police strength (0.80), followed by Kerala (0.71) and Delhi (0.70). Delhi had the best infrastructure (1.03), followed by Haryana (0.94) and Kerala (0.89). Tamil Nadu scored the highest on budget utilisation (0.09), followed by Maharashtra, Odisha, Rajasthan and Haryana (0.08).

Telangana (0.41), Andhra Pradesh (0.41), Jharkhand (0.41), West Bengal (0.40), Gujarat (0.40), Bihar (0.35) and Chhattisgarh (0.34) also scored below the national average on the Index.

In general, states performed better on infrastructure indicators than on budget utilisation, the study said. The inadequacy of police infrastructure can hardly be attributed to the inadequacy of budget, said the study, adding that most states by a margin underutilised their budget resources.

“Gujarat and Andhra Pradesh, despite using comparatively marginal proportion of the allocated budget, boast of a better infrastructure than many other states. Yet, both States land in the absolute bottom of ranking,” the study said. 

Uttarakhand is the exact contrary to these two States, the study pointed out. The state uses much lesser proportion of the allocated budget but boasts better infrastructure and better proportionate strength and hence a better overall ranking.

These inadequacies affect the working conditions of police personnel, with many of them being overworked, as the survey’s findings show:
 

• Police personnel work for 14 hours a day on an average, with about 80% personnel working for more than 8 hours a day
• Nearly half the personnel work overtime regularly, while 80% do not get paid for overtime work
• One half the personnel do not get any weekly off days
• About 75% believe that their workload is affecting their physical and mental health
• A quarter reported that senior police personnel ask their juniors to do their household/personal jobs even though they are not meant to do it. Personnel from the SC, ST and OBC are more likely to report this than other caste groups
• 40% personnel report the use of bad language by senior officers
• 37% personnel are willing to give up their jobs for another profession, if the perks and salaries remain the same.

Political pressure biggest hindrance in investigations

About 28% police personnel believe that “pressure from politicians” is the “biggest hindrance” in crime investigations, found the survey.

When asked about the frequency of such pressure, one in three personnel reported facing such pressure “many times” in the course of a crime investigation. A similar percentage reported that unwilling witnesses were a hindrance “many times”.

The question posed was: “Considering the past 2-3 years of your work experience, how often have you encountered political pressure during investigation of a crime?” They were asked to choose one of these responses: many times, sometimes, rarely or never.

Further, 38% personnel reported always facing pressure from politicians in cases of crime involving influential persons, the study said.

Three out of five police personnel surveyed reported transfer as the most common consequence of not complying with external pressures, the study said.

(Tripathi is an IndiaSpend reporting fellow.)

Courtesy: India Spend

The post ‘Delhi Police India’s Best On Numbers, Infrastructure & Money Use, UP Police Worst’ appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Union budget presented on July 4, seems to have disappointed many communities including fisherworkers. The Kerala SwatantaraMatsyathozhilali Federation, a body of fisherworkerssaid that the Union Budget has let the fishers down. The Federation’s president Kackson Pollayil said that the budget neglected them, denying their pleas for subsidy on kerosene and diesel and a waiver of their debts. The request for a cut in the GST levied on fishing equipment and compensation to those affected by natural disasters was also neglected, reportedly.

Pollayil called for steps to prevent foreign fishing vessels from fishing in Indian waters. He also asked for a ban on pair and bull trawling. Pair trawling has been reportedly been the reason for low catch in the Malabar coast. National Fish Workers’ Forum general secretary blamed unscientific construction of breakwaters for sea erosion.

While presenting the budget, Finance Minister NirmalaSitharaman announced a new scheme which will promote processing in the fishery sector and allocated an estimated Rs. 3737 crore for a new ministry namely Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Although, the emphasis of the schemes appears to be to “address critical gaps in the value chain, including infrastructure, modernisation, traceability, production, productivity, post-harvest management, and quality control”, however there hardly seems any emphasis on protecting the lives and livelihood of traditional fisherfolks who are impacted by large scale fishing and climate change.

The scheme will be known as PradhanMantriMatsyaSampadaYojana (PMMSY) and has been established under the Department of Fisheries. Of the total budget allocated to the new ministry, Rs 2,932.25 crore is estimated to be spent on various schemes to promote animal husbandry and dairying, while Rs 804.75 crore for the fisheries sector in the current fiscal.

However, fisherfolks have different concerns. A fisherman from Chaliyam, whose fishing boat was destroyed during the Kerala floods, reportedly incurred a loss of over Rs. 1 lakh, but the compensation sanctioned to him was only Rs. 9000. Federation secretary Abdul Rasik said the compensation for boats damaged during the rescue operations were sanctioned only two weeks ago. The leaders of the two organisations plan to meet the Union Fisheries Minister to highlight the issues faced by the traditional fishing community.

Earlier, in 2018, in a Dangerous Setback to Coastal Planning and Safeguards in India, the Union Cabinet had approved Coastal Regulation Zone Notification 2018.

In a press release issued by the press information bureau, it was confirmed that the Coastal Regulation Zone Notification 2018 has been approved by the union cabinet. This executive legislature will replace the CRZ 2011.

The draft CRZ 2018 put out for public comments was opposed strongly by fisher groups on grounds that commercial interests like industries, tourism and real estate were prioritised over coastal ecology and livelihoods. The current development indicates that none of the feedback offered by fisherfolk and civil society has been incorporated.

Major Dilutions included –

• De-freezing of FSI in coastal areas, making way for high rises.
• No Development Zones reduced.
• Special considerations for tourism, defence and strategic projects.
• Decentralising CRZ clearance procedures.
• Opening up rural coastal areas for buildout.  

The post Where are India’s Fisherworkers for the Govt in its Budget ? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

We compared finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman’s speech from July 5, 2019, with former finance minister Arun Jaitley’s speech when the party came to power in 2014. 

Jaitley’s speech was 16,489 words long and lasted 2 hours, 7 minutes and 42 seconds. Sitharaman’s speech was 20,223 words lasting 2 hours, 9 minutes and 13 seconds. In places, the pace of the speech differed. So, we analysed the word-count as well.

We calculated the ratio of words spent on each topic to the full word-count of the speech. We derived the words used on each issue largely from the sections into which the speech itself is divided, barring cases such as agriculture that did not have a separate section in 2019 unlike in 2014.

Here’s how the two finance ministers chose to use their time announcing the Union budget: 

Agriculture:
Nirmala Sitharaman spent around 3 minutes, 1.11% of the duration of her speech, on agriculture, discussing the potential of agricultural produce to generate revenue from “allied activities” such as the generation of renewable energy and sale of timber and bamboo.

In 2014, Arun Jaitley had spent 8 minutes, 7.22% of his budget speech, on agriculture, outlining the government’s plan to improve the agriculture industry technologically, set up universities and research centres for the same, and create substantial programmes for the extension of long- and short-term agricultural credit.

Sitharaman spent around 16 minutes, 6.16% of her speech, talking about rural development, two-thirds of which focused on affirming the success of the government’s schemes over the past five years and outlining the current government’s goals for the future. She announced one allocation: Rs 80,250 crore to the Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana, as part of her speech on rural development.

In comparison, Jaitley spent 3.5 minutes, 2.63% of his speech, on rural development, speaking about the National Livelihood Mission, Rural Housing and the Backward Region Grant Fund to develop basic infrastructure in backward areas.

Taxes, Business and Finance:
Sitharaman spoke for 36.5 minutes (60%) as compared to Jaitley (30%), who spoke for 36 minutes on taxes.

Apart from “announcing” a slew of tax sops that were previously announced by her predecessor finance minister Piyush Goyal in February 2019, Sitharaman also announced a 3% surcharge on income over Rs 2 crore per annum, and a 7% surcharge on income over Rs 5 crore per annum. She extended a 25% corporate tax to companies with a turnover of up to Rs 400 crore.

Aside from taxes, Sitharaman spent nearly 20 minutes, 6% of her speech, outlining the government’s policies for business, including the banking and financial sectors.

In comparison, Jaitley spent close to 5 minutes, 10.1% of his speech, describing programmes for the business class. 

This included talking about foreign direct investment, bank capitalisation, public sector units’ capital expenditure, instruments such as real estate investment trusts (REITs) and infrastructure investment trusts (InvITs), the eBiz platform (a business-to-business commerce platform), micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs), and the finance policy.

Healthcare:
Including the expenditure by states, India spends 1.4% of its gross domestic product (GDP) on health. This is still is still much below the 2.5% of GDP goal set by the National Health Policy of 2017, and even the 2010 target of 2% of GDP, as IndiaSpend reported in April 2017. Nepal spends 2.3% of its GDP on health while Sri Lanka spends 2%, data show, as IndiaSpend reported in January 2018.

The word ‘health’ appeared in Sitharaman’s speech thrice: first, while outlining the government’s vision for the coming decade; second, while praising the impact of the Swachh Bharat Abhiyan; and third, while describing tax incentives for individuals to spend on healthcare.

Jaitley had spent more than 3 minutes, 2.15% of his speech, describing the government’s healthcare programmes, including setting up new All India Institutes of Medical Sciences in various states, as well as government medical colleges and model rural healthcare research centres.

Education:
Sitharaman spent a larger proportion of her speech discussing education (5 minutes, 2.42%) than Jaitley did in 2014 (2 minutes, 1.46%).

Sitharaman’s speech focused on higher education, and the ‘Khelo India’ programme.

She called for the creation of a commission of higher education in India, and allocated Rs 400 crore for the formation of “World Class Institutions”. Cuts in education spending as a share of total expenditure, announced by Piyush Goyal in the interim budget, as IndiaSpend reported on February 5, 2019, were left unaddressed in her speech.

Jaitley’s speech focused more on primary and middle schooling, including the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and a teachers’ training programme. 

Renewable energy:
Sitharaman mentioned the word ‘renewable’ twice in her entire speech; neither reference dealt with any government programme. Towards greener energy alternatives, nearly 1% of her speech was devoted to electric vehicles, in which she expounded upon tax incentives and government investment to promote the use of electric vehicles.

Jaitley had spent close to a minute, 1.3% of his speech, outlining plans regarding renewable energy for the implementation of ultra mega solar power projects in five states, and the construction of a Green Energy Corridor. He mentioned ‘climate change’ on three occasions and the word ‘environment’ once in his speech.

Ganga rejuvenation:
The discussion about the Ganga has diverged between 2014 and 2019.

Sitharaman spent around a minute, 0.59% of her speech, on the Ganga, and did not mention the National Mission for Clean Ganga, launched in 2011. Instead, she predicted that with increased focus on developing the navigational capacity of the river, the movement of cargo would increase by four times in the next four years.

Jaitley spent around a minute as well, 1.19% of his speech, on the Ganga, outlining his plans for navigation projects on the river and a Ganga Conservation Mission, then budgeted at Rs 2,037 crore, including an non-resident Indian (NRI) fund.

Urban issues:
Jaitley spent nearly 4 minutes, 3.37% of his speech, introducing the government’s urban programmes, laying out a vision for increased shared investment, low-cost housing, slum development, the Atal Mission For Rejuvenation & Urban Transformation (AMRUT) and the Smart Cities Mission.

Sitharaman spent close to half that amount (3 minutes, 1.85%) focusing on urban matters. She congratulated the achievements of the urban housing scheme and called for more investment for transport infrastructure via public-private partnerships, including metro-lines and suburban railways. She did not mention either smart cities or the AMRUT programme.

Water:
Sitharaman spent around 1.5 minutes, 1.12% of her speech, on water, an issue that is critical in the face of consecutive drought and increased scarcity, as IndiaSpend reported (here and here). She announced the merger of the ministries of water resources, river development and Ganga rejuvenation into the Jal Shakti Mantralaya. The Har-Ghar-Jal and Jal Jeevan Mission will ensure piped water access to all households in India by 2024, she said. 

Jaitley had spent 37 seconds, 0.42% of his speech discussing water in 2014, describing projects as the National Rural Drinking Water Programme, including treatment of sewage and industrial effluents, and de-contamination from flouride, arsenic, etc. in both urban and rural areas.

(Mehta, a second-year political science undergraduate at the University of Chicago, is an intern at IndiaSpend.)

We welcome feedback. Please write to respond@indiaspend.org. We reserve the right to edit responses for language and grammar.

The post Sitharaman’s #Budget2019 Speech Sounded A Lot Like Jaitley’s 2014 Budget appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The post Budget 2019: As Tax Revenues Fall, Govt. Squeezes Expenditure appeared first on SabrangIndia.

New Delhi: The Union Budget looks like a “very glossed over budget” for Dalits and Adivasis with reduction in allocations for key schemes, said National Campaign on Dalit Human Rights (NCDHR).

File Photo

“Although there is an increase in the allocation, there are several key schemes where the allocation has been reduced, like the post matric scholarship where it has been reduced to Rs.2926 crore starving the one scheme which will directly benefit the youth of the community…the gloss is only a ‘dhikhawa’”, said N Paul Divakar, General Secretary, NCDHR.
 

It is important to point out that in 2017, there was a fundamental shift made towards a ‘welfare model of SC/ST’, revamping Scheduled Caste Sub Plan and Tribal Sub Plan to Scheduled Caste Component and Scheduled Tribe Component (henceforth, SCC-STC). Following this shift, new guidelines were issued by Niti Ayog in December 2017 for earmarking of funds for Development Action Plan for SC & ST (AWSC & AWST) which have shed light on how the funds for development schemes for the SCs & STs have to be allocated by the concerned Ministries. These guidelines were not incorporated in the Union Budget 2018-19.

“The projections of historical increase in the allocations for SC are at 35.6% and 28% for ST’s this year hide several harsh realities we have to deal in this election year. The biggest take-away from Budget Speech of Interim Finance Minister is that it ignored its own ministry’s formulated guidelines of December 2017 which had laid very important series of norms for allocating and implementing schemes for SCs and STs. Allocations under CSS and CS towards SC and ST development are to be a minimum, and not less than their proportionate population, which according to Census 2011 is 16.6% for SCs and 8.6% for STs,” NCDHR said.

In the current year, Rs. 76,801 crore i.e. 8.16 % of the total eligible Central Sector Scheme & Centrally Sponsored Schemes is allocated for the SCs and Rs. 50,086 crore i.e. 5.34 % for the STs.
 

“The due share of the Scheduled Castes in SCC this year amounts to Rs. 1, 39,660 crore and for Scheduled Castes in STC is Rs. 75,987 crore. There are 9 new ministries / departments for SC’s and 3 for ST’s which are set to implement new programmes along with the existing ones. The share of Dalit & Adivasi women in the gender budget statement amounts to Rs. 6851.48 crore which constitutes 5.2 % of the total gender budget statement which is proposed to be of Rs. 1,31,699.5 crore,” NCDHR added.

The NCDHR analysis of last five-year trend of the Scheduled Caste Component plan shows that out of total allocation of Rs. 5,05,015 crore which is the mandate as per guidelines, only Rs. 2,29,243 crore has been allocated. And only Rs. 81,155 crore is a direct allocation, meaning directly benefiting the Dalits. A huge amount of Rs. 1, 48,088 crore has been allocated for non-targeted schemes which can hardly be of any direct benefit to the community.

Pointing out this trend, NCDHR said in the current year, “targeted or direct allocation under SCC amounts to Rs. 41391.41 crore out of Rs. 76,801 crore and Rs. 20167 crore out of Rs. 50,086 crore under STC. The trend of non-targeted allocations both in statement 10A and 10B continues unabatedly. Good schemes are getting punished and irrelevant schemes keep increasing. This year, out of 315 schemes for SC, 226 schemes are non-direct and without any strategy to give benefits to the community. Similarly, only 21 out of 324 schemes for scheduled tribes have potential to give direct benefits, while rest of them are general in nature. Huge amount of fund has been allocated under irrelevant schemes which amount to Rs. 35409.48 crore for SCC and Rs.29919 crore for STC. This means, under STC, 60% allocation is irrelevant and under SCC 47% allocation is irrelevant.”

Take for example the fact that Rs. 2,200 crore has been allocated towards Swacch Bharat Abhiyan from SCC and Rs. 1,000 crore from STC but less than proportionate allocation has been allocated towards ensuring alternative employment opportunity to the community engaged in manual scavenging. Similarly, an allocation of Rs. 30 crore has been done under the Self Employment Scheme for Rehabilitation of Manual Scavengers and allocation of Rs. 35 crore has been done for the National Safai Karamcharis Finance & Development Corporation.

But more worryingly, massive amount of allocation amounting to Rs.1823.32 crore has been allocated under the Department of Telecommunications and Rs. 3,166 crore has been allocated under the Department of Higher Education which involves major diversion of funds towards setting up and supporting IIT’s, IIM’s, IISER,NIT and others.

The following demands were made by NCDHR during its press conference:

• National Legislation: The policy of allocation of funds is hanging loose post-merger of Plan-Non Plan scenario. This must be legislated and machinery established not only to bridging the gap but for ensuring financial inclusion.
• Manual Scavenging: Increase allocation for manual scavenging to ensure that this practice is totally eliminated and adequate mechanisms should be in place to monitor and track the effective use of the funds.
• Gender Justice: A special component for the Dalit women should be allocated within the scheduled caste component and Scheduled Tribe Component. Innovative schemes like the Nirbhaya Fund for the survivors of sexual assault, schemes for the socio-economic rehabilitation of the survivor of atrocities and their families should be ensured, by providing housing, livelihood support, education facilities and safety including free legal aid to survivors of atrocities.
• Planning with Community: For the new ministries which will now earmark allocations under the sub-plans, there need to be new schemes planned and designed for providing direct benefits for the SC & ST communities.
• Access to Justice: Adequate budgetary allocations to ensure that both punitive and pecuniary measures are in place to prevent the high incidences of violence and atrocities that are taking place on Dalits and Adivasis. Special Courts for speedy trial of cases related to Dalit & Adivasi community. Increased compensation amount to be given to victims of caste and ethnicity-based atrocities. Schemes for the socio-economic rehabilitation of the survivor of atrocities and their families should be ensured, by providing housing, livelihood support, education facilities and safety including free legal aid to survivors of atrocities.
• Appoint teachers in the government schools, specific /special schools for ST and SC such as the Eklavya Model Schools, Kasturba Gandhi Vidyalaya;
• Legislate and Implement the Bill – Prevention of All Forms of Discrimination and Violence against Children in Educational Institutions.
• ensure prevention of all forms of discrimination and violence in primary, secondary, senior secondary schools, anganwadis and hostels
• Empowered Nodal Ministries: Though Nodal
• Ministries for SC funds – MSJE (Ministry for Social Justice Empowerment) and for ST funds (Ministry of Tribal Affairs) are appointed, there needs to be sufficient resources allocated for an efficient machinery capable of implementing the plans for SC ST welfare and development. Nodal ministries should be empowered to take strict penal measures against the defaulting Ministries and Departments.

Courtesy: Two Circles

The post Union Budget continues to ignore real issues of Dalits and Adivasis: NCDHR appeared first on SabrangIndia.

New Delhi: Budget 2019-20 was announced on Friday and with regards to farmers, the farmer scheme called PM-Kisan, was widely anticipated to calm their anger ahead of the national elections.
 
The government announced that small and marginal farmers, who own less than two acres of land, will receive direct annual handouts of around Rs. 6,000 rupees, at a cost of Rs. 75,000 crore to the government. It was announced that the money would be deposited directly to their bank accounts in instalments of Rs. 2,000.
 
Dr. Ashish Mital, General Secretary, All India Kisan Mazdoor Sabha (AIKMS) in a statement said, “For the first time this government has presented a budget for the country without revealing its assessment of the economy. This speaks volumes for what it wishes to hide. The budget is deceitful and based on untruths.”
 
“It has announced income support of Rs 6000 per family to small and marginal farmers owning up to 5 acres land which is much, much below the benefit of Rs 10 and 8 thousand per acre announced by Odisha govt and Telangana govts. For an owner of 2-hectare land, this is Rs. 1200 per acre per year, 1/8th to 1/6th of the state schemes. Of this Rs. 2000 will flow to beneficiaries as an election bribe with no guarantee of future payments,” he said.

 
“Moreover, around 55% of all peasants are landless and work as sharecroppers or on a lease. The govt scheme does not even touch this section. Peasant distress has resulted from a very steep rise in the cost of production, particularly diesel, fertilizers, insecticides and seeds, poor maintenance of irrigation, meagre rise in MSP and no assurance of govt. procurement, resulting in distress sales, increasing debts and continuing suicides. On these, the budget falsely claims that it has announced MSP for 22 crops at 1.5 times the cost of production. It has announced no steps for debt relief, procurement of crops and reduction of input costs,” he added.
 

He mentioned that the government has simply pushed the costly and cumbersome drip irrigation scheme again and it is beneficial only for corporate houses.
 
“Welfare measures, including for health, MNREGA, PDS, pensions, etc have been continued as cash transfer schemes even as corrupt officials repeatedly delete names of beneficiaries, extract their pound of flesh and then restart it. Social welfare cutbacks go right up to the top and provide welfare to the corrupt. Yet the govt has failed to provide for good quality and affordable education, health care, transport, employment avenues and proper food security,” he said.
 
He said that the budget betrays a stamp of a crisis-ridden economy and the govt displayed no vision to revive it. It has simply disowned the agrarian crisis and reduction of jobs under its 4.5 year rule, claiming to be on course to ‘doubling farmers income by 2022’.
 
It also ignores its own report on rising unemployment (National Statistical Commission) and takes refuge under a lofty Vision for 2030. Convention called for only a statement of account, but it has declared prospects for 2030, which is its sinister design to postpone matters of concern to a distant future, to avoid accountability, he said.
 
Full text of his statement:
 
Press Note: Budget 2019-20 – Election Gimmick – Virtually No relief for Agriculture/Unemployment.
 
For the first time, this govt has presented a budget for the country without revealing its assessment of the economy. This speaks volumes for what it wishes to hide. The budget is deceitful and based on untruths.
 
It has announced income support of Rs 6000 per family to small and marginal farmers owning up to 5 acres land which is much, much below the benefit of Rs 10 and 8 thousand per acre announced by Odisha govt and Telangana govts. For an owner of 2-hectare land, this is Rs 1200 per acre per year, 1/8th to 1/6th of the state schemes. Of this Rs. 2000 will flow to beneficiaries as an election bribe with no guarantee of future payments.
 
Moreover, around 55% of all peasants are landless and work as sharecroppers or on a lease. The govt scheme does not even touch this section.
 
Peasant distress has resulted from a very steep rise in the cost of production, particularly diesel, fertilizers, insecticides and seeds, poor maintenance of irrigation, meagre rise in MSP and no assurance of govt. procurement, resulting in distress sales, increasing debts and continuing suicides. On these, the budget falsely claims that it has announced MSP for 22 crops at 1.5 times the cost of production. It has announced no steps for debt relief, procurement of crops and reduction of input costs. 
 
On irrigation, it has simply pushed again the extremely costly and cumbersome drip irrigation scheme beneficial to corporate houses.
 
Welfare measures, including for health, MNREGA, PDS, pensions, etc have been continued as cash transfer schemes even as corrupt officials repeatedly delete names of beneficiaries, extract their pound of flesh and then restart it. Social welfare cutbacks go right up to the top and provide welfare to the corrupt. Yet the govt. has failed to provide for good quality and affordable education, health care, transport, employment avenues and proper food security. Its food subsidy bill was Rs 1,69,000 crores in 2018 and has been raised to Rs 1,70,000 crores this year, the FM making a comparison with the 2014 food subsidy and claiming he has doubled it. 

Vision 2030 has nothing for the poor and hardworking peasants and workers and is meant to decorate the country for the MNCs, corporate, the rich and powerful big landlords, mafia, etc.
 
The pension scheme for 42 crore workers of the unorganized sector has no budgetary meaning as it is a participatory scheme.

 It highlights that almost one-third of India’s population today is without any stable means of employment, income and security. Data quoted from the EPFO to claim improvement in employment is completely bogus as this data is never updated properly.
 
The measure of income tax relief to the lower income groups, is but a very small and long overdue measure, as is apparent from the meagre reduction of Rs. 18,500 crores it imposes on the national income, i.e. only about 0.67% of the budget expenditure.

Reliefs announced on taxes from the sale of properties also reflect the deep crisis in the housing industry where sales are falling behind constructions.
 
The budget betrays a stamp of a crisis-ridden economy and the govt displayed no vision to revive it. It has simply disowned the agrarian crisis and reduction of jobs under its 4.5-year rule, claiming to be on course to ‘doubling farmers income by 2022’.
 
It also ignores its own report on rising unemployment (National Statistical Commission) and takes refuge under a lofty Vision for 2030. 

Convention called for only a statement of account, but it has declared prospects for 2030, which is its sinister design to postpone matters of concern to a distant future, to avoid accountability.
 
Peasants and youth must realize that the government works only to profit corporates and landlords. It cannot and will not improve the income and living of peasants and they must rise in the struggle for meaningful, relief for agriculture and employment.
 
(Dr. Ashish Mital)
General Secretary
All India Kisan Mazdoor Sabha, AIKMS
 

The post Budget 2019 is eyewash for farmers and unemployed appeared first on SabrangIndia.