Why are Tamil Nadu and Kerala opposed to the proposed changes in Food Security law? | Explained
The story so far On July 6, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister C. Joseph Vijay urged the Centre to retain the present provision of 35 kg
The story so far On July 6, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister C. Joseph Vijay urged the Centre to retain the present provision of 35 kg of food grains per household per month under the Antyodaya Anna Yojana (AAY) scheme, meant for the poorest of the poor, and not to make it a per capita system. The next day, the CPI(M)’sPolit Bureau also voiced its concern and demanded that the proposed amendment to the entitlement criteria be dropped. About 10 days ago, immediately after the Union government made public its plan to amend the Food Security Act (NFSA) in this regard, Kerala’s Food Minister Anoop Jacob expressed reservations over the move. Also read | NFSA amendments: 7 kg of foodgrains for a person, and maximum 35 kg for a household What is the amendment mooted? On June 24, the Food and Public Distribution (F&PD) department at the Centre, while publishing a draft amendment bill to the NFSA, stated that every person belonging to households covered under AAY would be entitled to seven kg of food grains per month, subject to a maximum of 35 kg per household per month. At present, the entitlement is for the entire household with a ceiling of 35 kg per month. The proposed amendment covers the first proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 3 (Right to receive foodgrains at subsidised prices by persons belonging to eligible households) of the Act. The public can comment on the amendments till July 13 and send their views by email to suneel.sachdeva@nic.in and saurabhomar.edu@gov.in. Why is the change being proposed? The existing household-based entitlement, though intended as a protective measure for the most vulnerable families, results in significant inequities depending upon the size of the household, according to the F&PD department.
Smaller households receive a higher per-capita entitlement, whereas larger households receive a lower per-capita entitlement, which may fall below the entitlement available to priority households. The aim and purpose are to remove intra-category inequities, provide for more rational food grain allocation and better align entitlements with nutritional requirements, a note prepared by the department points out. However, the proposed amendment does not seek to address the issue of inclusion of ineligible persons as beneficiaries, the problem of which is being experienced at the State-level. What is the story behind the two southern States’ opposition? It is not for the first time that the two States are articulating their opposition to matters concerning the food policy, as their contemporary political history has an important ingredient — politics of food. Kerala, which has a long history of the public distribution system (PDS) dating back to the now-abolished princely State of Travancore (Thiruvananthapuram), introduced informal food distribution mechanisms to mitigate the food shortage of the poor and vulnerable, and was perhaps the first to launch a formal PDS in 1962, three years before the establishment of the Food Corporation of India (FCI). At least on two occasions — 1952 and 1967 — Tamil Nadu saw political upsets, the incumbent regime getting reduced to a minority in 1952 and being shown the door (in 1967). The reason was that the governments of the periods in question were not being swift in handling the rice shortage. Since 1967, successive Chief Ministers of the State have been cautious in taking decisions with regard to the subject of rice. It was no wonder that the two States were vociferous in their stand in the run-up to the formulation of the NFSA.
The BriefWire