Yatra Parcha

Yatra parcha(final)

Posted in Right to food | Leave a comment

Route plan of Rozi Roti Adhikar Abhiyan, Delhi’s yatra from 6-24 September 2011

S.No

Date

District

Area Name

1

06-09-2011

Central Delhi

Takiya Kale Khan, Sarai Meer Dard Basti, Jama Masjid

2

07-09-2011

East District

Trilok Puri, Kalayan Puri

3

08-09-2011

Noth East District

Seema Puri, New S. Puri Sun light Coloney, Tahir Pur , Sunder Nagri, Nand Nagri

4

09-09-2011

North East District

Bhajan Pura, Shadat Pur, Sri Ram Puri, Mandoli, Karwal Nager Soniya Vihar,

5

10-09-2011

North Delhi

Burari, Mukund Pur, Balswa, Jahangir Puri

6

11-09-2011

North West District

Bawana, Holmbi kalan, Narela, Shabad Dairy

7

12-09-2011

North West District

Sultan Puri, Mangol Puri, Mangai Ram Park, Budh Vihar

8

13/9/2011

West  Delhi

Madi Pur, Pachim Puri,Peera Gadi,

9

14/9/2011

West  Delhi

Karm Puri, Hari Nager, Uttam Nager, Raghubir Nager

10

15/9/2011

South West District

Sager Pur, Palam, Kiribi Place

11

16/9/2011

South West District

Kusum Pur Pahari , Rangpuri Pahari, Vasant Kunj, Mahroli

12

17/9/2011

South Delhi

Malviya Nager, Chirag Delhi

13

18/9/2011

South Delhi

Munirika

14

19/9/2011

South Delhi

Ambedkar Nager, Sangam Vihar

15

20/9/2011

South District

Moldbad, Madan Pur Khadar

16

21/9/2011

South District

Sukhdev Vihar, Sri Niwas Puri, Okhla

17

22/9/2011

South District

Govind Puri, Tahkhand, Kalka Ji

18

23/9/2011

South District

Nizamudin, basti behind WHO, Yamuna Bazar

19

24/9/2011

Shadi Pur Depot, Baleet Nager, Karol Bagh, G Point,Raja Bazar

Posted in Right to food | Leave a comment

दिल्ली के ग़रीबों की राय…. उन्हें राशन व्यवस्था में सुधर चाहिए पैसा नहीं

दिल्ली के ग़रीबों की राय…. उन्हें राशन व्यवस्था में सुधर चाहिए पैसा नहीं

Posted in Right to food | Leave a comment

Delhi’s Poor Say NO to Cash Transfers in lieu of PDS!

Delhi’s Poor Say NO to Cash Transfers in lieu of PDS!

Give us Food Security! Strengthen the PDS!

There is a growing debate within the media and amongst policy circles on replacing the Public Distribution System (PDS) through which subsidised food grains are made available to people, with direct cash subsidies. The Government made the first move towards this by announcing in the recent budget that fertiliser and kerosene subsidies will be replaced by cash transfers. The draft food security act approved by the Empowered Group of Ministers (EGoM) also makes a mention of cash transfers as one of the steps to be taken for improvement of PDS. A committee headed by Nandan Nilekani has been asked to look into the methodology for replacing transfer of food grains through PDS with direct subsidies.

In recent times, the Delhi government has been suggesting the dismantling of the Public Distribution System (PDS) in favour of a system of direct cash transfers. Through this, eligible citizens would get fixed amounts of money monthly in their bank accounts, to be used as they wish. The government argues this will reduce leakages in the system and also reduce its fiscal burden. The Delhi Government in partnership with SEWA and India Development Foundation has been conducting a pilot study funded by the UNDP, with 100 families in Raghubir Nagar to test the feasibility and effectiveness of such a programme. Each of these 100 families is being provided Rs. 1000 per month in lieu of their PDS entitlements. Another 400 families are also being surveyed as a ‘control’ group. While the results of the pilot are still awaited, there are already some concerns with the nature of this study.

Raghubir Nagar is not representative of the poorer localities of Delhi. Further the study is being conducted among 100 families who expressed ‘willingness’ to part with their PDS entitlements in lieu of a cash transfer. Therefore, opinion of those who are already against such a move is not being considered. The sample size is too small to form the basis of a policy change across the State. Further, given identification errors, it is not clear whether those who have BPL cards and are a part of the pilot study are indeed poor. According to NSS data of 2004-05, only 27.5% of those who are below the poverty line (based on consumption expenditure) in Delhi have BPL cards.

The Rozi Roti Adhikar Abhiyan has been opposing this move towards dismantling the PDS in Delhi. We strongly believe that given the high levels of hunger and malnutrition in the country, and in Delhi, there is a need for a strong Public Distribution System that guarantees at least a minimum amount foodgrains at subsidised prices. Cash transfers by themselves do not solve the problems of inclusion/exclusion errors in identification of the poor, can hurt the poor in times of rising inflation, are prone to leakages and many other problems that exist with the PDS (enclosed a note that details out some of our concerns with replacing PDS with cash transfers).

Survey Findings

To understand the poor’s preferences Rozi Roti Adhikar Abhiyan, Delhi conducted a survey of 4005 households covering slums, resettlement colonies and homeless persons of different parts of Delhi (enclosed a summary report). In this survey, 91.4% of all respondents said that they preferred a reformed PDS over cash transfers. Only 5% of the respondents were in favour of replacing PDS with cash transfers while the rest had no opinion.

The survey also found that only 31.5% of daily wage labourers who lived in these vulnerable locations had BPL cards. Further, of all the respondents 17% had no ration card at all. Even among those who had ration cards, 60% said that ration was distributed regularly and almost 60% got less than the quota they were entitled for (which is 35kgs per month of rice and wheat). Many did not have access to any ration cards because they did not have ration cards, their cards were unstamped, cancelled or not renewed, their biometric were due. There were also cases where shops were always closed or dealers refused to give rations.

On the other hand the survey also found that the cash-based welfare schemes in Delhi such as the old age, widow and disability pensions in Delhi also have their own share of problems. Only about 63% of the beneficiaries covered in the survey said they received their pensions regularly (only 30% in case of disability pensions). Further respondents reported problems in accessing these schemes due to difficulties in opening bank accounts, submitting documents, application procedures, attitude of bank officials and presence of middle-men.

The study therefore found while the PDS in Delhi needs a lot of reform for it to effectively reach people, people still prefer a reformed PDS over a shift to cash transfers. Further, the experience with current cash transfer schemes shows that even these are riddled with problems in delivery. The most significant issue that came up time and again during the survey was that of identification and the arbitrary manner in which BPL cards have been issued. The other is that of frequent policy changes (such as stamping of cards, use of biometrics) without informing people or making proper arrangements resulting in many being denied of their entitlements.

In light of our recent campaign in different slums of Delhi and the survey, we demand the following:

  1. The PDS in Delhi be strengthened rather than dismantled. The commodities available under the PDS must be expanded to include along with rice and wheat, pulses, sugar, kerosene, edible oil and millets
  2. It is clear that targeting has failed. PDS should be universalised and the current system of dividing the population in APL/BPL must be done away with.
  3. Immediate steps must be taken for reform of the PDS. This would include enhancing transparency, putting in place an effective grievance redressal system, ensuring doorstep delivery of foodgrains to the PDS shop, end-to-end computerisation, making fair price shops viable, taking immediate action against erring FPS dealers and so on.
  4. Urgently address the problems being face by people in Delhi in relation to renewal of ration cards.

We further demand that before making such major policy change such as replacing the PDS with cash transfers such proposals be widely discussed, especially with those who will be directly affected by this. The government must hold public consultations with the poor in different regions of Delhi on strengthening the PDS.

APL-BPL Band Karo! Sabko Sasta Ration Do!

Paisa Nahin Anaj Chahiye!! 

Rozi-Roti Adhikar Abhiyan Delhi

Posted in Right to food | Leave a comment

Right to urban livelihood

Right to urban livelihood: New dimension

Cities of India are striving to be ‘world-class cities’, ‘efficient growth centres’ and ‘centres of innovation’. Government policies and urban planning promote the cities in two different ways: one, developing them as nodes of financial growth at the cost of manufacturing with emphasis on services; second, commercializing all resources, including land, water, energy, transport, etc. so that greater revenue may accrue to city governments. In this context the urban poor face a situation of dual crisis – where, on one hand, they are being evicted and displaced from their shelter and, on the other hand, their livelihoods are being taken away through ‘modernisation’ and ‘mechanisation’. Such attacks on livelihood of the poor are not a recent phenomenon. Taking the case of Delhi, since 1996 there has been mass closure of almost 40,000 industrial units and, following the trend, in 2005-06 there has been sealing of around 1,000 commercial properties.

Today, the government is claiming the country’s economy is growing rapidly and the indicator is that the stock market index is touching new heights and crossing the magic figure of 20,000. Five star hotels, huge shopping malls, flyovers, metro rail, affordable air travel, etc, create an illusion of a booming economy. However, other aspects of the society such as destroyed settlements, devastated employment, criminal and suicidal activities are also growing day by day. Globalization has promoted use of technology to reduce the labor force and increase the profits. This adversely affects the most vulnerable groups like slum dwellers, homeless workers, construction workers, domestic workers, rickshaw pullers, rag-pickers, and so on. Financial growth at the cost of manufacturing with emphasis on the services shifts people from the formal to informal sector, and gives rise to different forms of ‘illegality’.

A project of the UNDP on National Strategy for Urban Livelihoods provided an opportunity to a federation of groups in Delhi, Sajha Manch, to understand these problems at six resettlement sites in the city. By the collecting information through surveys and organizing a series of consultations and workshops, the Manch realized that the dynamic of urban livelihoods was distinctly different from the demand for guaranteed rural employment. Broadly, there were three categories of work in the city: (1) wage employment, which was largely unsafe; (2) self-employment, which was largely illegal; and (3) under-employment, which was both unsafe as well as illegal. These studies revealed three key demands of the workers: (1) the right to legal identity, (2) access to space and resources, and (3) credit on easy terms.

On the basis of these studies a tentative Urban Right to Work legislation has been drafted. This draft was debated with informal labor organizations, national trade unions, and civil society organizations in four seminars which made important suggestions. But the draft requires extensive national debate so that various labor movements can develop a common understating and it could become more comprehensive and effective from the worker’s point of view. It will also require a comprehensive campaign within all sections of society to enact such legislation.

The following are the main points of the draft:-

  • To ensure the livelihood of workers in urban areas, the first demand is that the every adult who register for any production work should get 300 days work in a year.
  • Everyone must get a living wage instead of minimum wage, as decided in the 15th Indian Labour Conference, 1957 and affirmed by the Supreme Court of India.
  • For salaried workers with employers the demand for a Tripartite Board is tenable, but for the self-employed, and the unemployed, the government should be the principal employer.
  • This means that if any category of urban worker – salaried, self-employed, or unemployed – is not getting a living wage then the government (Labor Department) has to compensate.
  • Instead of making separate Boards for different occupations, this draft proposes that the Labor Department should take full responsibility for all, in order that workers remain united.
  •  Thus Right to Work is considered to be a fundamental right, and not an employment guarantee scheme that is dependent on government’s discretion and people’s compulsion.
  • Workers’ accommodation near work should be an essential requirement so that a large share of workers’ income is not spent on transport.
  • Every worker, employed or seeking employment, should be entitled to registration and issuance of identity card by the Labor Department, and this should be interchangeable with the NREGA job card for ease of migrant workers.
  •  Every job must be healthy and safe, and be available for disabled and vulnerable people, so that it protects both environment and society.
  •  Every public works should be labor-intensive and 40% expenditure reserved for employment, while restrictions on public appointments in government departments should be removed.
  • Participation of workers in policy-making and the right to organize are crucial if transparency and accountability are to be demanded from government.
We appeal to all concerned for an open discussion on this draft so that a comprehensive debate can lead to a national campaign on the Right to Work, and the fragmented unorganized workers all over the country may be united to defend their rights. We hope you will send your views on this.
Posted in Right to work | 1 Comment

Bhalswa Jan Sumwai

Janunwai

Public Hearing

On 18.04.2011 Ration Vyawastha Sudhar Abhiyan organised a public hearing on C-5 Bhalswa Resettlement Colony, Delhi-42 People from Badli, Kalandar Colony, Vishwanathpuri Basant Dada Patil Nagar & Bhalswa Resettlement colony participated. The member of Participants were around 200, the number may increased but due to change in time schedule of MLA from 2: 00PM to 10.00 AM large number of people were not able to attend the meeting. People attending the meeting have clearly raised the voice against eh new govt. Policy of cash against Ration and signed for the same. People emphazed that in today’s scenario the law should be implemented in decent manner even the FP.S and K.O.D. owner should be force to act as per laws is FPS steals 75 kg. grains  and KOD steals. 50 litre of kerosine a FIR should be launched and his licence should be cancel with immediate effect but department is not doing so, that’s why public is paying the price by the facing problems. Govt. implements the policy of cash against ration more forcefully then it would make a disasters impact.

MLA is representative of public, and his duty is to raise the concerns of public in assembly but instead of raising the concerns & problems he tried to impose his own issues on public. IN meeting it was very clear that public wants ration instead of cash but MLA for his own interest wants to be implemented the cash against ration with the help of their supporters forcefully.

The organization CFAR, Association for social justice and research, hazard cetnre, Bhalswa Resettlement  development & Bhalawa Lok Shakti manch have clearly in the favour of ration not in favour of cash & in near future they will continue to raise the voice against cash against ration.

MLA in Jansunwai

Posted in Right to food | Leave a comment

Report: Global Food Security and Sovereignty Threatened by Corporate and Government “Land Grabs” in Poor Countries

Report: Global Food Security and Sovereignty Threatened by Corporate and Government “Land Grabs” in Poor Countries

Food_misinvestanuradha

Since the food crisis of 2008, food justice activists have warned that governments in concert with multinational corporations have accelerated a worldwide “land grab” to buy up vast swaths of arable land in poor countries. According to The Economist magazine, between 37 to 49 million acres of farmland were put up for sale in deals involving foreign nationals between 2006 and mid-2009.

AMY GOODMAN: From threats to food safety in the US, we move now to threats to food security and sovereignty worldwide. Since the food crisis of 2008, food justice activists have warned that governments, in concert with multinational corporations, have accelerated a worldwide “land grab” to buy up vast swaths of arable land in poor countries. According to The Economist magazine, between 37 to 49 million acres of farmland were put up for sale in deals involving foreign nationals between 2006 and mid-2009. The purchases are often made in the name of development, but critics see a new means to deprive local populations, especially in Africa and Asia, of their land and their chance at food sovereignty.

Joining us now by Demcoracy Now! video stream in Burlington, Vermont, is Anuradha Mittal, executive director of the Oakland Institute, a public policy think tank that’s been closely tracking this issue. In a recent report on the land grabs, the Oakland Institute concludes, quote, “Investors are targeting countries with weak laws, buying arable land on the cheap, and failing to deliver on promises of jobs and investments.”

Anuradha, welcome to Democracy Now! We just have a few minutes. As you listened to this description of corporate farming in this country, how has it gone global?

ANURADHA MITTAL: Well, Amy, what David Kirby was talking about is a failed agricultural system. As we know, it’s totally upside down and backwards. And instead of fixing it, we are now sending it overseas, creating these large-scale corporate plantations, all in the name of development and improving food security in poor countries. But instead we are exporting a failed model, and that is causing great threats to food security internationally.

AMY GOODMAN: What do you mean by “food security”?

ANURADHA MITTAL: Well, we have a situation, especially since 2008, that over a billion people, one-sixth of humanity, is estimated to be going hungry. And a majority of them are small-scale farmers. And instead of improving their livelihoods, instead of ensuring their rights to seeds, to water and to land, we have this trend, what you described as “land grabs,” which is rich, wealthier countries, which are food insecure, buying up huge amounts of land in poor nations. Even investors, such as Goldman Sachs, for instance, and hedge funds and sovereign wealth funds, looking for new soft commodities market to invest in, and they’re buying up land instead of ensuring agrarian reform and land reform in poor nations so people have land to grow food for their families and communities.

AMY GOODMAN: What do you mean, Goldman Sachs, for example? How is it involved?

ANURADHA MITTAL: Well, what has happened with the crash of the housing market is that investors have looked for new opportunities in the soft commodities market to invest. And with the price increase of food in 2008—it was almost 83 percent increased between 2005 and 2008—they have decided that agriculture is the next hot commodity. So you have hedge funds, you have sovereign wealth funds, which are buying up and leasing land. And we’re talking about unbelievable deals. These are, you know, not just a few hundred acres. We’re talking about thousands and thousands of hectares being bought up for ninety-nine years, leases, for one dollar per year lease. In some cases, you know, 70 percent of the financing has been provided by the host country. No taxes have to be paid, and nothing has to be paid for the first four years. So if you look at some of the prospectus of these hedge funds, they’re promising 15, 20 percent returns, some are promising 30 percent returns, whereas agricultural land in the United States has usually returned of five to six percent.

AMY GOODMAN: Can you talk about the example of Haiti? Over time, before and after the earthquake, when there’s a crisis, how local agriculture is undermined, and also then how it’s strengthened?

ANURADHA MITTAL: Definitely, Amy. I mean, we have a situation, in the name of promoting food security, we have dumped in third world countries, forgetting that the majority of the people in third world nations are employed in agriculture. And when there is hunger in a place like Haiti or in a place elsewhere, say in Africa, it is because the farmers are too poor to buy food. And instead of creating markets, we have dumped subsidized foods. And what David was talking about, this whole farm bill in the United States, which subsidizes huge, big corporate giants, such as Cargill, they can go sell below the cost of production. They can take over markets in poor countries, as was done in Haiti in the case of rice. And when a calamity strikes, instead of building up markets again for the local population, we again send more food aid, destroying the capacity of people to be able to grow for themselves, destroying the markets for the local farmers, and they become dependent on food aid. In fact, they become cheap labor for the US corporations, maquila factories and maquiladoras that might be placed in those countries then.

AMY GOODMAN: Anuradha Mittal, the foreword to the Oakland Institute report “Investment in Agriculture: The Role of the International Finance Corporation in the Global Land Grab” is by the farmer and philanthropist Howard Buffett, son of the billionaire Warren Buffett. Howard Buffett writes the following, of land grabbing in Africa, he says, “These deals will make the rich richer and the poor poorer, creating clear winners who benefit, while the losers are denied their livelihoods…[Africa] does not need policies that enable foreign investors to grow and export food for their own people to the detriment of the local population. I’ll be even bolder—such policies will hurt Africa, fueling conflict over land and water…Africa is not a commodity. It must not be labeled ‘open for business.'” Your response?

ANURADHA MITTAL: Well, I think Howard could not have said it any better, because what we are seeing is a shocking trend where international financial institutions, including the World Bank, Food and Agriculture Organization, are claiming that agricultural land and sale and lease of agricultural land is a development opportunity for third world countries; it’s a win-win situation; food insecure countries will have access to land to grow food, whereas cash-strapped countries like Ethiopia, Sudan will have cash. The problem is that it is going to increase inequities, that the local benefits and the benefits do not accrue to the local population. And that is why we have been forced to call it a new form of colonization. We have to look at plantations in Latin America that did not bring development to these countries. They created banana republics. And now this trend is spreading across the globe in the name of development, and it needs to be challenged. There are no good case studies of how this foreign direct investment in agriculture can promote development in third world countries. In fact, we have to fight back and ensure land reform is back on the agenda and people have access and control over their land, water and seeds, which is the basis of food security and food sovereignty of any country, any community, and of all peoples.

AMY GOODMAN: What is the most important movement, would you say, to take note of in the world now in fighting back?

ANURADHA MITTAL: Well, Amy, the beauty of it is, the struggle that’s happening at the grassroots level. I’ve been in India, wherein POSCO—the local communities in Orissa, villages in Orissa are fighting back against the South Korean steel company POSCO, which has been trying to take over forest land, denying communities who depend on the forest products for their livelihoods. We know in Madagascar, it was the grassroots revolt which toppled the government, which was selling off half of the country’s arable land to a South Korean company, Daewoo. So, on one hand, we have to support these grassroots struggles, which might not be known internationally, but which are fighting back, because it is a matter of life and death. It is about livelihoods. It is about centuries of doing things of agriculture that they have practiced. At the same time, we have to challenge institutions such as the World Bank, that are once again coming forward with a paradigm, which is going to promote development, which we know is a completely false model and in fact will create these huge, big plantations with small-holder farmers who will become sharecroppers.

AMY GOODMAN: Anuradha Mittal, I want to thank you for being with us. We will link to your report of the Oakland Institute. She is executive director of the Oakland Institute. Thanks so much.

Posted in Right to food | Leave a comment

Hello world!

Welcome to WordPress.com. After you read this, you should delete and write your own post, with a new title above. Or hit Add New on the left (of the admin dashboard) to start a fresh post.

Here are some suggestions for your first post.

  1. You can find new ideas for what to blog about by reading the Daily Post.
  2. Add PressThis to your browser. It creates a new blog post for you about any interesting  page you read on the web.
  3. Make some changes to this page, and then hit preview on the right. You can alway preview any post or edit you before you share it to the world.
Posted in Right to food, Right to work | 1 Comment