Saturday, October 15, 2011

Communist Party of India (Marxist) Protests Against Advani's Jan Chetana Rath Yatra

Workers of Communist Party of India (Marxist) workers took out a rally and staged mahadharna in protest against senior BJP leader Lal Krishna Advani's Jan Chetana Rath Yatra in Patna on October 11, 2011.
Source: http://viewpatna.blogspot.com/2011/10/cpi-m-protests-lk-advanis-jan-chetana.html

Tuesday, October 11, 2011

बिहार केंद्रीय विश्वविध्यालय मामले में नीतीश कुमार के नाम पत्र

आदरणीय नीतीश कुमार जी,

आशा है आप स्वस्थ और सानंद होंगे.

मैं बिहार केंद्रीय विश्वविध्यालय को लेकर चल रहे विवाद के संदर्भ में आपसे कुछ अनुरोध करना चाह रहा था. इससे पहले कुछ बातें और जो संदर्भ के लिए जरूरी है.

मैं बिहार के औरंगाबाद जनपद के एक छोटे से गाँव सिमरी बाला का रहनेवाला हूँ. और गाँव का पहला ऐसा युवक रहा हूँ, जो किसी विश्वविध्यालय के दरवाजे तक पहुँचा हो. अध्ययन और अध्यापन के सिलसिले में पिछले ढाई दशक से उत्तर प्रदेश में हूँ, किन्तु हमेशा अपने बिहार के बारे में सोचा करता हूँ. जिस मिट्टी में इंसान जन्म लेता है उसका कर्ज कभी नहीं भूल पाता. मेरा भी अपने बिहार के प्रति कर्ज है,जिसे उतरने के लिए वैचारिक रूप से ही सही हमेशा तत्पर रहता हूँ.

नीतीश जी,हम और आप जानते हैं कि बिहार में कुशासन का एक लंबा दौर रहा है. जिस राज्य की तरफ आज पूरे देश की निगाहें लगी है, वहाँ कलतक सांस लेना भी मुश्किल था. आज बिहार की सड़कों और कानून व्यवस्था तथा आपके सुशासन की लोग तारीफ करते हैं, राजनीति में आपकी एक अलग बेदाग छवि है. किन्तु मैं समझता हूँ कि यह सब बातें सिर्फ आपके उत्साह वर्धन के लिए है ना कि महिमामंडन के लिए. हमारे आपके सामने बिहार की तरक्की, शिक्षा और रोजी-रोटी के लिए बिहार से बाहर रह रहे उन करोड़ों बिहारियों को सम्मान दिलाने की भी चुनौती है, जो आज भी बुनियादी सुविधाओं से वंचित हैं और असम से लेकर महाराष्ट्र तक हर रोज गोली और गालियाँ खाते हैं. आप्क पूर्ववर्ती मुख्यमंत्री बिहारियों के लिए गाली के प्रतीक बन चुके थे.

नीतीश जी, आज उन करोड़ों बिहारियों को आजीविका, शिक्षा और सम्मान दिलाने की चुनौती आपके कंधों पर है. ऐसे में हर एक कदम आपको काफी सोचकर उठाना चाहिए,जिससे कि हमारे सपनों पर पानी न फिर जाए. मैने नालंदा और बिहार केंद्रीय विश्वविध्यालय को लेकर प्रिंट और इलेक्ट्रानिक मीडिया की रिपोर्ट देखी है. मुझे जानकार बहुत दुख हुआ कि वर्ष 2009 में संसद में पारित केंद्रीय विश्वविध्यालय अधिनियम के बाद से आजतक बिहार में विश्वविध्यालय के लिए उपयुक्त जमीन नहीं मिल सकी. मुझे पता लगा कि केंद्र सरकार मोतिहारी में विश्वविध्यालय नहीं बनाना चाहती,क्योंकि वह राष्ट्रीय और अंतरराष्ट्रीय नेटवर्क पर नहीं आता. मैं समझता हूँ कि विश्वविध्यालय को एक राष्ट्रीय स्वरूप देने के लिए जरूरी होता है कि उसकी स्थापना ऐसी जगह हो जहाँ देश और दुनियाँ से आनेवाले विशेषग्यों और छात्रों को कोई असुविधा ना हो.

अगर केन्द्र मोतिहारी को नहीं चाहती है तो ना सही, हमारी उदारता तो इसी में हैकि हम कपिल सिब्बल से कह दें कि पूरा बिहार आपका है आप जहाँ चाहें विश्वविध्यालय बना दें. मुख्यमंत्री जी,उन लाखों बिहारी युवाओं को केंद्रीय विश्वविध्यालय चाहिय,जो उच्च शिक्षा प्राप्त करने के लिए बिहार से बाहर दर-दर की ठोकरें खाते फिरते हैं और उंहें अपमान का घूँट पीकर शिक्षा प्राप्त करनी पड़ती है.

नीतीश जी, आपकी राजनीतिक छवि और कद कपिल सिब्बल से कहीं बहुत बड़ा है. और फिर बिहार की तरक्की के लिए बहुत बार आपको झुंकना पड़ेगा, फिर फलदार वृक्ष हमेशा झुक जाते हैं. बिहार की तरक्की में कहीं से भी दलगत राजनीति आड़े नहीं आनी चाहिए. अगर मोतिहारी की जगह बोधगया या पटना के कहीं आसपास ही जगह मिल जाए तो क्या बुरा.

नीतीश जी, बिहार के बौद्धिकों और युवाओं की तरफ से मैं आपसे अपील करता हूँ कि आप केंद्र को तत्काल यह संदेश भिजवा दें कि केंद्र जहाँ चाहे बिहार में एक नहीं दो-दो केंद्रीय विश्वविध्यालय की स्थापना कर ले. हम जमीन देने को तैयार हैं. और अगर अपने मोतिहारी के लोगों को विश्वविध्यालय खोलने का वचन दिया है तो वहाँ एक भव्य राज्य विश्वविध्यालय की स्थापना कीजिए, जो केंद्र के लिए भी आदर्श बने.

हम इस मामले में आपकी पहल की प्रतीक्षा करेंगे.

डा निरंजन सिंह
प्रवक्ता
एस.एस.वी.एम.कालेज, इलाहाबाद
पूर्व पत्रकार, हिन्दुस्तान, अमर उजाला
पूर्व सदस्य,राज्य ललित कला अकादमी,उत्तर प्रदेश
संपर्क: 1/2 ए सुभाष नगर नया माम्फोर्डगंज, इलाहाबाद-211002
फोन; 09455998412 / 09196110677

Once a chief minister of Bihar had stopped a yatra: Modi

Chief minister Narendra Modi wrote on his blog a day before the yatra from Sitabdiara in Bihar, “once a chief minister of Bihar had stopped a yatra of Advaniji. It is a matter of immense pleasure that today the chief minister of the same state is flagging off Advaniji’s yatra”.

“It is appropriate that this yatra is starting from the native place of Jayaprakash Narayanji on his birth anniversary,” wrote Modi.

Bihar’s Janata Dal (United) Chief Minister Nitish Kumar, an anti-Modi ally in the NDA, is to flag off L K Advani’s yatra on October 11, 2011.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/sadbhavana-payback-modi-wishes-advani-on-yatra-eve/858381/0

Monday, October 3, 2011

Rs 26: Garibi Hatao in the Congress-BJP Way

In the aftermath of a controversial affidavit by the Planning Commission in the Supreme Court, it is useful to remind its authors of the premise of the first Human Development Report of 1990 that “people are the real wealth of a nation”. UN Declaration of Alma-Ata on Primary Health Care, 1978 also argued for “promotion of food supply and proper nutrition.”

World’s premier intelligence agency will have us believe that, “rich nations generally employ more generous standards of poverty than poor nations” disregarding the fact that 1 in 6 US citizens are living in poverty, highest poverty rate since 1983. According to US census its poverty rate rose to 4.6 crore people in a population of 31 crore.

The question is: how to genuinely assess the felt needs of citizens who are below a decent way of living based on their consumption of food and arrangement for housing. Before that there is need to ponder over: what comes first, poverty alleviation or financial wealth generating economic activity in an “open-market economy”? Planning Commission has been putting the cart before the horse for quite a while.

In an affidavit filed by B D Virdi, Adviser, Planning Commission before the Supreme Court in the PUCL vs Union of India & Others or Writ Petition (Civil) 196 of 2001, the Commission said that any citizen who spends more than Rs 965 per month in urban India (around Rs.32 per day) and Rs 781 in rural India (around Rs.26 per day) “at June 2011 price level” would be considered not to be poor. This is set a poverty line based on the monetary value of some normative expenditure that is deemed essential.

It has done so as an act of generosity that comes naturally to nations that are privatizing governance and subsidizing artificial persons which are ‘engines of growth’. Supreme Court’s observations reveal that “faster rate of growth is systematically associated with higher inequality”. Here ‘growth’ means rate of generation of financial wealth alone and not the growth of citizens who can afford nutritious food.

Even as per Tendulkar Committee, the total Below Poverty Line population was 40.74 crore in March 2005. It highly insensitive on the part of Virdi to suggest that “the total BPL population as per 2009/10 estimation may be lower” than that what emerges from Tendulkar Committee’s projection. World over rise in food prices increases poverty but this insincere affidavit states the contrary.

While it is trite to state that it is the government's responsibility to feed the citizens who are unable to buy anything for themselves, the influence of external financial institutions on the Commission is getting structural changes institutionalized so that the government withdraws. Such calibrated steps are taken in the name of targetting or identifying the poor.

The affidavit submits that “At June 2011 price level, for a family of five this provisional poverty line would amount to Rs.4, 824 per month in urban areas and Rs.3,905 per month in rural areas. However, final poverty lines following the Tendulkar Committee will only be available after completion of the 2011-12 NSS Survey” by National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO). Till then poor can wait. In the meanwhile, “The poverty estimates for 2009/10 are being worked out on the basis of the detailed NSSO data which has become available”.

While hearing the PUCL case on September 20, 2011, the Bench of Justice Dalveer Bhandari and Justice Deepak Verma ordered, “We direct the States and Union Territories to inform the public about the availability of the night shelters through print media and electronic media, so that the poor and needy people may avail the benefit of the night shelters.” Clearly, Rs 26 per day for rural India and Rs Rs 32 for urban India is not sufficient to ensure housing for the poor. As to urban India, the Committee on Slum Statistics/Census under the Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation has projected the slum population to be 9.3 Crore as of March 2011, which was 5.23 crore in 2001.

While deciding on Rs 32 per day for urban India, the planners seem to have failed in factoring in slums which are “any compact housing cluster or settlement of at least 20 households with a collection of poorly built tenements which are, mostly temporary in nature with inadequate sanitary, drinking water facilities and unhygienic conditions”. Although it does not seem obvious to the Commission, it is quite intelligible to any discerning citizen who is not guided by external financial institutions that such living circumstances breed diseases of all ilk. Such diseases take a huge toll on the poor and if it turns out to be an epidemic then on country’s economy.

In the order dated May 14, 2011, the apex court observed, “We see no rationale in not distributing food grains according to the estimate of Union of India. The food allocation should be based on every year's population estimate as carried out by the Planning Commission or the Registrar General, in the absence of any official census figure.” These orders of the apex court has to be implemented in the 35 States/Union Territories, 640 districts, 5,924 sub-districts, 7,935 towns and 6,40,867 villages. As per Census 2011, the provisional population of India is 121 crore. But there is nothing on record to show that Indian National Congress led government has complied with the court’s order so far. The matter will come for further directions on November 2, 2011.

National Commission for Enterprises in the Unorganised Sector headed by Arjun Sengupta found in its report on “Conditions of Work and Promotion of Livelihoods in the Unorganized Sector” at the end of 2004-05 that 77% of Indians, or 83.6 crore citizens, lived on less than 20 rupees per day. But USA’s central intelligence agency states that as per 2007 estimates 25% of India’s population is below poverty line. Its website mentions this figure as of August 29, 2011.

The 39 page Report of the Expert Group to review the methodology for estimation of poverty authored by Suresh Tendulkar, R Radhakrishna and Suranjan Sengupta for the Planning Commission in November 2009 left the all-India urban poverty estimate unaltered at 25.7%.

It has revised the estimate of poverty in India for 2004-05 to 37.2% from 27.5% and for rural India to 41.8%. Its estimation was based on consumption share of commodities around poverty line class for urban areas in all India. The commodities included consumption of cereal, pulses, milk, edible oil, meat products, vegetables, fresh fruits, dry fruits, sugar, salt, spices, fuel, clothing, footwear, education, medical, entertainment, rent, footwear and conveyance.

Taking note of the above, the apex Court vide its order dated 14.05.2011 direct that:“….According to the Tendulkar Committeee, with the price level of 2011, it is impossible for an individual in an urban area to consume 2100 calories in Rs.20 and an individual in a rural area to consume 2400 calories at Rs.15. The Planning Commission may revise norms of per capita amount looking to the price index of May 2011 or any other subsequent dates”. This appears to be an indictment of the Commission which should be sufficient reason for the concerned officials to step down or recuse themselves from such work in future. The Planning Commission’s affidavit stating “the Poverty Lines recommended by Tendulkar Committee are not anchored in calorie intake norm” seems to be defending the indefensible.

It appears relevant to recollect the historical context of planning process in India. In 1887, the founder of Indian National Congress, A O Hume addressed the dull misery of the starving residents of India saying, “Toil, toil, toil; hunger, hunger, hunger, sickness, suffering, sorrow; these alas, alas, alas are the keynotes of their short and sad existence" in a pamphlet at the Madras Session. Things remain the same even today. Later, speaking on behalf of the party, Mahatma Gandhi said, “Above all the Congress represents, in its essence, the dumb semi-starved millions scattered over the length and breadth of the land in its 7, 00, 000 villages” at the Second Round Table Conference in 193l in London. This party cannot claim to represent the starving millions after the affidavit filed on behalf of its Prime Minister.

In order to address hunger and starvation among other issues, in October 1938, Subhas Chandra Bose formed a National Planning Committee at the national level in his capacity as the President of Indian National Congress during the commencement of World War II. This Committee functioned till 1949 with its sub-committees and made several valuable recommendations under Jawaharlal Nehru’s chairmanship. Later, following a resolution of Congress Working Committee in January 1950 that recommended setting up of a statutory body for planning and its announcement in the Union Budget of February 1950, the Planning Commission was set up by a resolution of Government of India dated March 15, 1950. Those were war time efforts. There is now a need for peace time efforts for genuine democratic planning.

Supreme Court is compelled to act because there is rampant hunger, starvation and malnutrition in the country which has not been addressed by two national political parties who are dishonest to their party constitution. As per Article I and II of the Constitution of the Indian National Congress, Dr Manmohan Singh is a socialist first and the Chairman of the Planning Commission later. This is true about Bhartiya Janta Party as well because Article II of its Constitution pledges allegiance to socialism. The registration document of the party also reveals its ideology as Gandhian Socialism.

It has been argued by Yashwant Sinha, former finance minister that “Planning Commission is the nodal agency for estimating poverty along with the Ministry of Rural Development, Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation, NSSO under the Ministry of Statistics and Program Implementation, Registrar General of Census under the Ministry of Home Affairs and now the Unique Identification Authority of India housed in the Planning Commission.” Sinha is also a socialist as per his party’s constitution. Has he been pro-poor as a finance minister and currently as Chairman, Parliamentary Standing on Finance?

While creation of multiple agencies is indeed akin to shifting the responsibility, the real issue is lack of political consensus on ensuring genuine public health, public education and public transport to deal with dehumanizing poverty of fellow citizens. The measures to address social services and make public investments for it emanates from the Constitution of these two principal national parties but their allegiance to their funders stops them from addressing deprivation. If words like “socialist” are empty words that merit no serious attention, then what is the rationale for insincere hullabaloo over words used in an affidavit?

With its repeated failure to address the gnawing felt needs of the poor in the country, the Planning Commission stands exposed. Its scandalous recommendations create a compelling logic to disband the Commission. This can initiate the planning process as envisaged in the Constitution under Eleventh Schedule (Article 243-G) for rural local government and under Twelfth Schedule (Article 243-W) for urban local government for reaching the unreached malnourished compatriots unmindful of whether or not one agrees with CIA’s assessment of India “developing into an open-market economy” with “traces of its past autarkic policies”. The fact remains that almost every act of the Planning Commission echoes the above assessment despite stark poverty in USA.

“What is important is that the food must reach the Hungry," observed Supreme Court of India on August 20, 2001. Will all the opposition parties including the Left and regional parties act together to ensure that?
Gopal Krishna