Quota politics in food

Not with my share you don’t. That seemed to be the message that the middle classes of this country have sent, a message that was faithfully conveyed to the Centre by various state chief ministers and officials at the recent conference to review the targeted public distribution system. As a result, populism seems to have won out once again. When the vocal middle classes in the country squeal, the country’s politicians have no recourse but to listen, it seems. The issue has got so terribly politicised that Chief Ministers like Gujarat’s Shankersinh Vaghela can actually suggest that state governments be handed over these subsidies on a platter and be given the freedom to distribute the foodgrains as they see fit. Such a move would benefit, not the poor, but traders and politicians who are certainly in no need of poverty-alleviation measures.

Things have become so topsy-turvy. The public distribution system (PDS) set up to underline, administratively speaking, the government’s commitment to ensure a decent life to every Indian, has remained seriously flawed. It has just not benefited those groups of people who need it most. Otherwise why would Bihar, which ranks the lowest by every human development criterion among Indian states, also account for the lowest withdrawal of rationed foodgrains? Economists have also pointed out that between 1991 and 1995, the PDS issue prices of foodgrains were increased by 75 per cent. This, in turn, led to a substantial reduction in purchases from the PDS, since the poor were effectively priced out. Not surprisingly, the total withdrawals from the PDS declined from 19.7 million tonnes in 1991-’92 to 10.6 million tonnes in 1995-’96. True, the poor could not benefit from the scheme but that did not mean that others did not. For the middlemen and traders, it provided a great opportunity to make money by selling rationed stocks in the open market.

The idea of a targeted public distribution system was to ensure that the subsidised foodgrain would be made available only to those communities below or on the poverty line, at a rate that they can afford. It was criticised on two grounds. One, that it would be so narrowly targeted, that many who are genuinely poor would not benefit from it. Two, that the middle classes who had utilised the scheme all these years would suddenly be deprived of such a facility. While there is merit in the first argument, there is none in the second. For too long has the country’s privileged classes benefited from their little white or red booklets. In fact, ration books have come to be repositories of the identities of individuals and their families. The time has come to delink ration entitlements from identity requirements. The country needs to evolve a proper national identity card that is easy to administer. Seshan’s voter card went some way in this direction but was stymied by political bungling and apathy. A new beginning has to be made in this direction, if only to ensure that there are certain categories of citizens who are not eligible for government-subsidised foodgrain, sugar and kerosene.