Food Bill much diluted from original version

Dilution in provisions means many states will implement scheme only after general elections

The UPA-2's much awaited National Food Security Bill got a nod from the Lok Sabha on Monday, but a closer look at some of amendments incorporated just ahead of its passage in the Lower House of Parliament shows that in the current form, many of the Bill’s original provisions have been diluted.

State governments will now get one-year time from the promulgation of the Bill to implement the scheme, which in all probabilities means that many states will actually implement the provisions after the General Elections are over. Ofcourse, this does not include Congress-ruled ones, some of which are in the process of implementing the various provisions of the Bill or will do so in the next few months.

Also, a crucial amendment incorporated will compel the Central government to frame rules and policies regarding the National Food Security Bill in consultation with the states.

Though, this has been done to keep the spirit of federal structure alive, but this could possibly delay implementation of many key provisions of the legislation which include maternity benefit for six months to pregnant women and lactating mothers.

The penal provisions under the Bill have also been kept at just around Rs 5,000, while in the Chhattisgarh Bill, violators will be clamped with Essential Services Maintenance Act (ESMA).

Also, transfer of cash through the NFSB has been virtually ruled out after a crucial amendment incorporated in the Bill says that cash can only be given to purchase food grains and it has to be ensured that it is not diverted for other purposes. This practically closes the door for distribution of cash in lieu of food grains under the Bill. In the earlier versions cash in lieu of grains was an option.

Also, the force-majeure clause, which limits the responsibility of the Central government to distribute food grains in event of fire, floods, cyclone, war etc has also been diluted and now places upon the Central government along with the Planning Commission to determine the conditions and situations in which its responsibility to distribute grains will cease to exist.

Earlier, invocation of the ‘force-majeure’ clause was at the sole discretion of the Central government.

Some experts said that the NFSB expands the provisions of the current Antodaya Anna Yojana (AAY), which is targeted at the poorest of the poor and grant the same benefits, except for the quantity, to Below and Above Poverty Line (APL) families as well, merging the latter in the process and giving all a legal right.

The legal entitlement part ofcourse is a big differentiator along with the grievance redressal mechanism, will allow a beneficiary to lodge a complaint for not getting his quota of monthly ration, which the current TPDS does not allow.