Opinion Lalgarh violence
Without naming the Trinamool Congress,the lead editorial in the latest issue of CPI(M) mouthpiece Peoples Democracy...
Without naming the Trinamool Congress,the lead editorial in the latest issue of CPI(M) mouthpiece Peoples Democracy alleges that union ministers are leading and participating in the violence in Lalgarh in West Bengal in gross violation of the Constitution. It is a gross abuse of Indian parliamentary democracy that those who have taken oath under the constitution to serve as ministers in the central government are,themselves,leading and participating in the most unconstitutional and illegal orgy of violence resulting in large-scale loss of human life and destruction of property. The Congress party heading the central government,far from being uncomfortable,is an accomplice in this gross violation of the Indian constitution. The earlier violence unleashed by this anti-Communist alliance in Singur and Nandigram helped the Maoists to entrench themselves. However,unlike in Nandigram,where the Maoists were operating behind the Trinamool banner,now in Lalgarh,it is the Trinamool Congress that is openly aiding and abetting the Maoists to unleash such violence, it claims.
It says for the past few years,the Maoists had been accumulating arms through raids on ordinance factories and police outposts. The article quotes a defence journal report about seizure of a massive cache of arms by the Indian Army in Bengal in 2006 and subsequent media reports which said the arms were meant for Maoist rebels.
The West Bengal state government has asked for central assistance in dealing with this situation. The central and state governments must urgently act in unison,in the interests of the country and its constitutional scheme of things,to immediately restore normalcy in both East and West Midnapore districts of West Bengal and reestablish the rule of law and civic administration, it says.
Food security
An article by Brinda Karat on the proposed food security law criticises the government for limiting the benefits only for BPL families and seeks delinking of food allocations to the broad poverty estimates done by the Planning Commission. At a time when India has the largest population who suffer hunger and food deprivation in the world,to limit a food security law to only BPL families is a cruel example of the rhetoric of inclusive growth actually concealing a policy that reduces entitlements. As is well known and documented,a large section of the poor are excluded from the BPL category, she says.
The article argues for a revision in the definition of poverty and a review of the methodologies for poverty estimation. It is a national scandal and shame that whereas in the last five years the number of dollar billionaires has increased from nine to fifty three and where inequalities have grown,the poverty line in monetary terms is calculated at just 11.80 rupees for an adult in rural India and 17.80 rupees for urban India and any one with an income above that is considered above the poverty line and ineligible for government subsidies, it says. The article also wonders whether the specific proposals to provide 25 kilos of foodgrains at three rupees a kilo to all BPL families under the proposed act will actually benefit the hungry? Today around six crore families,identified as BPL,are eligible for subsidised foodgrains. 2.5 crore of these families are further categorised as Antodaya families considered the poorest among the poor and are entitled to get 35 kilos of wheat at two rupees a kilo per month. The day the act,as outlined by the president,comes into force,their entitlement will be cut by 10 kilos. Secondly they will have to pay one rupee more per kilo of wheat.
Compiled by Manoj C.G.
Share
