Land grabbing in the name of development-New revelations

The nexus between politicians and land grabbers, whether belonging to the industry sector or real estate groups is well known and no worthwhile action is visible in spite of the thousands of acres being passed on to them for a song under one pretext or the other. The usual modus operandi is for the government to acquire land from poor farmers at a notional price citing public interest and "allot" them to the "friends" for the avowed purpose of setting up Special Economic Zones, Mega Parks, Industrial Parks etc. The allottee after getting the land do not use the same for the purpose for which it was allotted to them, denotify a part of it and sell it at a "mega" price at market rates. This has been highlighted by the latest report of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG)  which like other earlier reports may be forgotten by the citizens allowing the same to be re-enacted by these politicians after a lapse of time. These state actors know that public memory is very very short and public has other pressing concerns about the difficulties  faced by them for their very survival being which is their priority. Imagine how many billions of rupees the country has been losing over the years. Here is a peep into the latest CAG report.

 "Raising doubts on the fairness of allotment of government land to some top corporates for special economic zones (SEZs), the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) has said that 47 files related to them have gone missing in the commerce ministry and were not made available to the audit team despite requests. The auditor has published names of all the 47 SEZ developers who were allocated concessional government land at important locations in different cities whose files the commerce ministry refused to share for scrutiny. The CAG audit report on performance of SEZs was recently tabled in Parliament and will now be taken up for discussion by the public accounts committee (PAC).  Sources said when the audit team insisted on verifying details of these allotments and status of the projects, the ministry officials said these files were not traceable. "We wrote letters demanding these files, but were told they are not available," said a senior audit official."

Is it not interesting to see the list brought out by the CAG which contains most of the bigwigs of the corporate world who in the name of development gets huge tracts of land allotted to them at nominal prices for making a killing by selling their land at market rates?. While these corporate organizations are in the forefront in industrial and infrastructure development for which they must be applauded, the devious route they are taking through their contacts with government babus and mantris for getting manifold returns on their investment on land deserves to be condemned and the land value fully recovered with penal interest. Land appropriation and encroachment are a big business in this country and it is time that Supreme Court sets up a Special Investigation Team ( SIT) like the one created to chase black money recently. This SIT on land misappropriation and transgressions must cover all cases across the country over the last two decades.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

FOOD GRAIN WASTAGE AND THE SUPREME COURT-WILL THERE BE ACTION BY NDA GOVERNMENT?

True, a new government has taken over the reins in the country raising hopes of millions of Indians that better days are ahead in contrast to the policy paralysis prevalent earlier. But whether their hopes will fructify remains to be seen as bureaucrats still rule the roost and moving them to implement top policy decisions is still a big task. Food Corporation of India is a classical example about the bureaucratic grid lock that characterizes government programs, many of them well intended but not implemented properly. Looking back FCI and GOI were damned by the Supreme Court of India some time back for wasting precious food grains because of negligence and callousness in creating sound storage structures required to safe guard food grains for long duration. Here is a flash back on this issue and it is pitiable that nothing much has changed as far as this problem of wastage is concerned.  

"The court commissioners dubbed negligence by officials as `genocidal' and recommended responsibility and accountability be fixed at the highest level in Central and state governments. The commissioners have warned that this is just a third of the 1.37 lakh MT of wheat lying in the open since 2008-09 in Punjab, and the entire lot could have become unfit for consumption as Food Corporation of India (FCI) norms allow grains to be exposed to nature for only a year. In Haryana, too, 31,574 MT of grains have been lying in the open since 2008-09. Another 27.38 lakh MT of grain are lying in Punjab. While 18.90 MT of grains are wrapped in polythene, and gathering dust for the past two years. The commissioners report that "a significant quantity of these food grains are likely to go waste if urgent measures are not taken by the Government of India to release these stocks to poor immediately." The Supreme Court commissioners' statement comes in stark contrast to that of Pawar, who had earlier said in Parliament only 11,700 MT of grains worth Rs 6.86 crore had become unfit for consumption and reports of rotting grains were blown out of proportion. When contacted principle adviser to court commissioners, Biraj Patnaik, refused to comment, stating the issue is sub-judice. A counter affidavit filed by the government to this report quietly skirts the issue of rotting grains completely. Instead it talks of long-term arrangements to increase space for storage. The apex court, in its earlier hearing, had asked why grains should not be distributed to the poor instead of being allowed to rot in the open. The government claimed it cannot increase allocation of grains to the state under the PDS as it is not able take ad-hoc decisions while the new criteria is being developed by the government."

One of the redeeming pictures emerging now with the new government setting new standards of governance, FCI stored food grains are released into the open market in a controlled way which has resulted in reduction of prices in the case of some food grains, especially rice and wheat. Nothing much has been heard about the extent of rotten grains still with the FCI though the Court wanted this to be distributed to the poor. What is not realized is that these grains in all likelihood might be inedible even for animals because of severe infestation and contamination. It is time that government takes a serious view regarding this issue, sets in motion a review of acquirement policy and make the FCI accountable to the Nation. Recent direction to states not to increase Minimum Support price being offered to mop up surplus grains from the farmers may be a good move to divert these grains into open market and avoid long term storage for which adequate storage capacity is still not available. Also interesting is the announcement by the new government to restructure and recast the FCI to make them more efficient and accountable, though it remains to be seen whether such statements get translated into reality.  

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

SODA CONTROVERSY-SUPREME COURT INTERVENES

It is most unfortunate that in India decisions which can be taken by the executive authorities often end up in judicial courts for orders and directives. Latest case to knock on the doors of the Court pertains to the safety of soda. When there are hundreds of food products, some of which are not even edible, are sold in the market with no proper overseeing, time of the Courts and the government is wasted on silly issues like safety of soda made by the industry as per the standards laid down by the concerned authorities. The observation of the court that consumer must be educated regarding the undesirability of consuming synthetic drinks touches the very core of the problem. Assuming that such education process is a long drawn affair, why should any one suspect that all soda products are dangerous? If so world over these products would have been banned by now. Here is a take on this issue as reported recently. 

"Justice KS Radhakrishnan and Justice Dipak Misra called for the records of the FSSAI's technical committee after counsel Prashant Bhushan said the authority's Sep 12 order was given by its committee on advertisement and labelling, not by the scientific panel on food additives. As Bhushan focused on the health hazards of carbonated beverages, Justice Radhakrishnan observed that the "best course is to educate people not to consume beverages." "All cricketers are promoting soft drinks on television," he said. Assailing the order which was submitted to the court, Bhushan said the order, issued Sep 12 by FSSAI assistant director Kamal Kumar, was like affixing the authority's stamp on a report by soft drink manufacturers. Bhushan, appearing for petitioner Centre for Public Interest Litigation, told the court that the order said benzene residue in carbonated beverages was formed only under certain conditions when agents like benzoates and ascorbic acid were present together with heat, ultraviolet light and metallic ion mixture."However, in the absence of benzoic acid and ascorbic acid together, benezene residues are not generated (in carbonated beverages)," the order said. It said that according to studies by Indian Council for Medical Research, the consumption pattern of the beverages was only 500 ml per day in a "worst case scenario which do not appear to pose any health hazard." The order said Indian Beverage Association had confirmed to the FSSAI that in India, benzoic and ascorbic acids were not present together in the beverages. Seeking the minutes of the technical committee which had a hearing for eight days, Bhushan asked if the FSSAI had itself done any test to determine the presence of benzoic acid in carbonated beverages. Bhushan told the court that the FSSAI was not accepting the findings of its own lab in Ghaziabad."

One may recall the pending proposal in New York, to limit the size of soda products sold in the market to 16 oz or less, is still mired in controversy while in India the very safety of the product is being questioned. If some body is using non-permitted chemical preservatives in a beverage product there is adequate reddressal mechanism in the statute books and those breaking the law can be hauled up for punishment. Regarding the issue of Benzene the traces of this chemical coming from thousands of Petrol Bunks located all over the country and being inhaled by those residing near these outlets and those using fossil fuel based transport must be more dangerous than a sip of soda! Probably not many are concerned about this danger while industry as a whole is being made a whipping boy! Consumer activists do serve a purpose but there should be some balance in accusing the industry day in and day out for things they cannot be blamed.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

WHAT IS A JUNK FOOD? NO ONE KNOWS!

Can there be a more ridiculous situation than what had happened in the Supreme Court some time back when GOI was quizzed regarding the prevalence of selling junk foods near the school premises? In stead of explaining to the court that the term junk food is an anachronism because all foods provide some calories or nutrients if they are edible. In stead the FSSAI, representing GOI informed the court that it is going to lay standards of safety for the so called "junk foods". Also FSSAI tried to prevaricate on the issue by diverting the attention of the court by fulminating against trans fatty acids which are supposed to be in all junk foods! It is a pity that in stead of agreeing to ban all unhealthy foods in or near educational institutions, this responsibility was shifted to the states most of which have lowest priority for matters connected with consumer safety. HRD Ministry which controls policies related to education must have pitched in by agreeing to bring out guidelines for foods that could be sold to children near the school. Here is a report on this case which was carried by major news agencies recently. 

"Most of the junk foods have high quantity of trans-fatty acids and is low in minerals, vitamins and other essential food nutrients. And, said to be a major reason for obesity among children in schools in cities such as Delhi and Mumbai. The ministry told the court that the authority has constituted a scientific panel to prescribe standards for fatty acid residues, poisonous metals and microbiological parameters in food items including those considered junk food. Once the new standards are prescribed, the ministry has said that its enforcement will be responsibility of the respective state governments. Such (state government) authorities are required to collect samples of food and take action on the findings of the tests reports based on safety parameters and standards prescribed by the authority, the ministry reply to the court said. The food safety law provides the power to the state governments to impose a fine on those selling sub-standard food not adhering to the standards. Despite that action against adulterated or sub-standard has not been of desirable levels. On the bigger question raised in the Public Interest Litigation of Rahul Verma regarding imposing a ban on junk food in schools and educational institutions, the ministry said it was an administrative decision to be taken by respective educational institutions. The ban cannot be imposed under the food safety and standard act of 2006, the ministry said".

While reporting on the Supreme Court proceedings, no one seems to have been bothered by thousands of push carts operating near every school in this country selling cut fruits, ice candy, local sweets etc under most insanitary condition. Why FSSAI chose to highlight dangers of trans fats could have been to exhibit its technical prowess vis-a-vis food safety to the court! Probably it is time stern action is taken against school management if such unhygienic foods are allowed to be sold to students in their schools. Cut fruits are by far the most dangerous source of infectious food borne pathogens and the tender body system of the children is more vulnerable to infections by consuming these fruits and other similar risky food products. Parents also have an obligation towards their wards and the practice of giving hefty pocket money to school going kids spawns many undesirable activities in and near the school.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

THE ENDOSULFAN "LOVING"GOVERNMENT!-ACTION WITHOUT CONSCIENCE!

Does the Government of India love the ominous pesticide Endosulfan so much that it seems to have lost its conscience, when the Supreme Court was told that this pesticide is "unlikely" to cause any health hazard in spite of 72 countries in the world banning it out right because of its role in many health disorders?. Alternately the powerful Endosulfan lobby has been able to make the government impotent due to considerations other than technical. One must recall that Dr Achutan Commission in August 2001 categorically concluded that an entire population in a district in Kerala suffered from Endosulfan induced health disorders based on evidence collected by spending time among the affected population. It appears that the present team being led by the DG of ICMR has come to a different conclusion in suggesting that the health disorders in that district must be due to congenital factors which should be investigated by the sate government, in stead of blaming the "innocent" Endosulfan! Having agreed to ban this much hated chemical at the Stockholm Convention, does GOI has any conscience left to plead in the Supreme Court to lift the temporary ban which is in place to day? Adding insult to injury, the Endosulfan manufacturers have engaged a senior lawyer of the ruling party for defending its indefensible stand, clearly pointing out its anti-people stance when it comes to lobbyists and power brokers!.

"Maintaining that Endosulfan is unlikely to cause any public health concern or hazard, the Centre has urged the Supreme Court to lift the ban imposed on its production and sale in May this year. In its response to a petition filed by the Democratic Youth Federation of India, the Centre said that long-term use of the pesticide was unlikely to present public health concern. The Centre made it clear that Endosulfan was not the reason behind health problems in Kasaragod in Kerala. On May 13, the court, while banning its use all over India, directed the statutory authorities to freeze the production licences granted to the manufacturers of Endosulfan till further orders. The Court also formed an expert committee to go into all aspects of Endosulfan and asked the Centre to submit a report. Enclosing the report, the Centre, in its affidavit, said: "There is an overall weight of evidence from in-vitro and in-vivo screening tests that Endosulfan is not an endocrine disruptor. It is reported that Endosulfan is either carcinogenic or mutagenic. There is no evidence to suggest that Endosulfan bioaccumulates." Further "it is noteworthy that a number of countries that have banned this chemical have done so as a precautionary measure due to suspected long-term effects on human health. Use of Endosulfan has been put on hold in Kerala also as a precautionary measure. The tragedy in Kasaragod was due to aerial spraying of Endosulfan. A number of countries that have banned Endosulfan have done so as they have very low level of agricultural activities."

What is more interesting is that GOI cited studies published in 2006 for supporting its stand while world has traveled a lot during the last 5 years. If the world community has taken a decision in 2011 to ban this pesticide based on scientific evidence, GOI cannot claim that it is only right in saying there is no safety problem and allowing the use of the chemical in India. Do the Indian citizens have no right to live in a safe environment, compared to those in other countries where the pesticide has been banned? Are they second class denizens in this planet with their lives being dispensable? If the argument of GOI is to be believed, compared to India, other countries banning this pesticide have low agricultural activities! What does this mean? This stand reinforces the need to discontinue use of this chemical immediately in the country because of greater chance for damage among population. Further it has the cheek to say that Endosulfan is not an endocrine disruptor, in spite of massive evidence contradicting this stand! One can only hope that Supreme Court will see through the real intention of GOI, that is to support the pesticide industry and protect the honest citizens of this country from such government supported practices of slow poisoning .

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

ROTTING GRAINS, SUPREME COURT AND THE PARLIAMENT-A "NO-WIN" SITUATION

It it not a shame for a democratic country like India to be "directed" by the highest judicial body to save the millions of tons of grains under its custody, to be distributed free of cost to poor people? Adding to the ignominy of such a situation is the prevarication of the food minister in interpreting the court order as a suggestion rather than a judicial directive and got a rap on his knuckle from very same court for misinterpreting its order. It is unfortunate that the GOI was found shirking its responsibility of ensuring food security in the country. A serious question that deserves an assertive answer is whether the claim regarding the spoilage of food grains to the extent mentioned in the court is really true. Does the GOI, with its vast "babudom' for verifying the actual situation on the ground, concur with the court's observation? Why should the country need a minister for food if courts have to do the job? Looking at the commotion that prevailed in the Parliament after the court pronouncement, a honest and proud citizen of the country cannot but hang his head in shame for the behavior of the elected representatives of this democratic institution.

"The issue of rotting food grains and the Supreme Court order directing the government to distribute them among the hungry today led to uproar in the Lok Sabha prompting two adjournments. Leader of the Opposition Sushma Swaraj raised the issue hours after the Supreme Court took exception to Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar's statement that its directive on free distribution of food grains to the poor instead of allowing them to rot in godowns was a suggestion which could not be implemented. Ms. Swaraj made the statement in the midst of a discussion on the Indian Medicine Central Council (Amendment) Bill, 2010, prompting an impromptu debate on the matter and demands for presence of Mr. Pawar in the House. Mr. Pawar, who later came to the House, said government would honour the decision of the Supreme Court, a copy of which has not reached him. Amid opposition uproar over rotting food grains, she raised the issue after a calling attention motion moved by Harsimrat Kaur(Akali Dal) over rejection of 40 lakh tonnes of rice variety PAU-201 by the Food Safety Standards Authority. Ms. Kaur's calling attention earlier had generated heat in the House with Akali Dal members twice trooping into the Well dissatisfied over Health Minister Ghulam Nabi Azad's reply that a report of the expert committee, including those from the National Institute of Nutrition, on PAU-201 rice variety is likely to be submitted by the second week of September. The Food Safety Standards Authority of India has rejected it citing provisions of the Prevention of Food Adulteration (PFA) and the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. Ms. Kaur made a strong plea to allow the 40 lakh tonnes rice to be distributed for human consumption contending that the analysis reports of 75 samples reveal that only nine of them were not found to be conforming to the standards of rice as prescribed under the PFA rules, a stand accepted by Azad".

How can a honorable member question the decision of the safety authorities that food grains tested by its officials were not conforming to the standards set by the parliament under the PFA Act of 1956? Who will take the responsibility if freely distributed grains affect the health of the recipients adversely? It would have been better if the appellate authorities were asked to recheck the quality on an emergency basis and go by its decision. Probably there could be marginal deficiency like increased moisture or higher refractions or some minor short comings which can be rectified easily. Even constituting an expert committee cannot justify by-passing the existing regulations. But short circuiting the established safety regulations for even temporary advantage is fraught with serious consequences for the credibility of the system in the long run. Ever since the issue was pitchforked into national and international attention, various players in this drama did not acquit themselves creditably. A sorry situation indeed!

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com