A bill to banish hunger in India
Sixty-six years after Independence, India on Monday managed to clear the Food Security Bill in the Lok Sabha, that is aimed at securing two-thirds of the country (75 per cent of our rural population, and 50 per cent urban) from the pangs of hunger and rescue them from malnutrition.
Nearly 70 years is a long time. Hopefully in the next few days, before Parliament’s Monsoon Session ends, the Rajya Sabha too will clear the measure, and then we will have a law that protects people from hunger.
Many argued against the food security law, citing economic logic, especially at a time of lower growth and dimmer economic prospects. But it is just at such a time that the really needy look for succour. Economic grounds had also been invoked when the rural employment programme — NREGA — had been ushered in. But we saw how that scheme, although its implementation was faulty and it suffered from corruption, helped shore up consumer demand and the economy when the worst was feared at a time of international slump.
The food security law, too, has intrinsic virtues. A population that does not suffer from hunger will make for a better and sturdier labour force even in the medium term, especially if the banishing of hunger can be married to basic free schooling and skills development. Programmes in these sectors have already kicked in. But there is a moral argument as well. It would be a shame if a country whose economy grew at the exceedingly high rate of 7.9 per cent on average in the past 10 years (UPA-1 and UPA-2), and a slightly lower but still respectable rate in the preceding five years (NDA), could not free its people from the clutches of hunger.
The food security law might never have come about but for Sonia Gandhi’s initiative, and then her pushing. As leader of the ruling party, she gave no choice to the Manmohan Singh government, within which were a few sceptics ready with market economics arguments against the anti-hunger bill. Then Mrs Gandhi pushed for the measure in Parliament.
It is possible that the Congress chief played politics when she brought the food law less than a year before the next Lok Sabha election, hoping to impress the electorate with it. But consider this. The bill received backing across the board (minus the AIADMK) as the Opposition parties feared they might earn voters’ wrath if they openly opposed the measure months before a general election. This means the bill could have been taken to the cleaners on grounds of practicality (which non-Congress parties highlighted anyway during the Lok Sabha debate) if it had been brought two or three years earlier.
Post new comment