Politics of Poverty
By Dhurjati Mukherjee
Lok Sabha elections announced, all political parties are gearing up to woo the electoral vote bank, specially the poor and reeling out promises and policies if brought to power. Social security measures are being spelt out, but none specifically talk of poverty eradication, though poverty analysis is an ongoing subject with poverty lines being drawn based on different stipulations by varied agencies from time to time. However, the fact remains that most of these analyses, particularly of governments, are somewhat theoretical propositions and are quite different from the ground reality. This is because the lack of involvement of civil society groups during the process of collection of data as also the trend to show lesser people are below the poverty line.
Recall the somewhat irrational assessment by the chief of Niti Aayog stating that poverty stands at just 5 per cent in the country. This observation drew flak from different international organisations, not just Oxfam, though none thought it worthwhile to comment. Such an observation may not be surprising, because in reality the true conditions of the masses in the rural areas, specially the backward districts of the country, are best hidden. Moreso, as every government would seek to claim having improved their lot.
Judging independently, while the political leadership makes tall claims, the agents of political parties are found torturing the impoverished and backward sections and grabbing their land though all this has not been adequately focussed in the media, only scattered reports of the neglect that the poor face. The ground situation doesn’t get the national attention as the information from grass-root leaders is kept in wraps and the gap between the rich and the poor is startling.
The very recent survey released by the National Sample Survey Office (NSSO) is an indictor as its Household Consumption Expenditure Survey (HCSE) showed that the richest 5 per cent of urban Indian households spend nearly 10 times more than the poorest 5 per cent on food and other necessities such as children’s education, medical treatment, clothing and transport during 2022-23. In rural areas, the rich 5 per cent spend nearly eight times more than the poorest 5 per cent, whose daily expenditure is as low as Rs 46.
Nine states, including West Bengal, Odisha, Jharkhand, Bihar and Assam, lagged behind the national average. In 2011-12, the average nationwide Monthly Per Capita Consumption Expenditure (MPCE) figures were Rs 1459 and Rs 2630 respectively for rural and urban areas. This is obvious due to the fact that the northern and eastern states lag behind those in western and southern part of India. Judged from all angles, education, health and basic facilities are grossly lacking in these states.
It has been shown that rural monthly per capita consumption spending rose 164 per cent from Rs 1430 in 2011-12 to Rs 3773 in 2022-23 whereas in urban centres, it shot up 148 per cent from Rs 2630 to Rs 6459 during the same period. But during this 11-year period, there has been a perceptible increase in prices of food items and this, on modest terms, almost doubled while, in some cases, to be more accurate increased by around 80 per cent.
Any analysis or report reveals the average, but this is somewhat misleading as this does not quite reflect the spending power of the bottom 25 per cent of the rural population. The inflationary conditions that have been manifest, both during and after the pandemic severely affected the rural poor. While incomes of at least 50 to 60 per cent becoming stagnant during the period comparisons have been made, there can be no reason to feel that the poor or the economically weaker sections are well off by any standards. Moreover, the very fact that the government decided to give free rations to 80 crore people for 5 years proves that this section needs support.
Even for the rich, the survey showed that the top 5 per cent in rural areas spend Rs 10,551 per month but this appears a gross understatement. Similarly, the 5 per cent richest in urban areas are found to spend Rs 20,821. This finding, according to several economists, is not quite correct as such people, who own multiple cars and live in palatial bungalows and even go on foreign jaunts for shopping, the figures are more than double of what has been revealed in the survey. While accepting that surveys often grossly underestimate the spending of the rich, in this instant case, the inaccuracy seems quite blatant.
Another interesting finding related to the investigation of the poverty scenario is India’s prevalence of so-called ‘zero-food’ children who have not eaten anything whatsoever over a 24-hour period, assessed through snapshot surveys, is comparable to the prevalence rates in the West African nations of Guinea, Benin, Liberia and Mali. A study that used data from the Union Health Ministry’s national family health survey for 2019-2021 estimated India’s prevalence of zero-food children at 19.3 per cent, the third highest after Guinea’s 21.8 per cent and Mali’s 20.5 per cent. The comparable figures are much lower in Bangladesh (5.6 per cent), Pakistan (9.2 per cent), Nigeria (8.8 per cent) and Ethiopia (14.8 per cent).
The main question that has arisen is whether the Niti Aayog has measured poverty based on the government’s flagship programmes, ignoring the standard parameters adopted the world over. The government’s recent growth figures suggested the consumption growth was 4.4 per cent. If people are getting more money, why are they not buying basic stuff such as soap, hair oil, toothpaste, biscuit and so on? The fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG) sector is not quite growing with the slow consumption demand in the rural areas.
Finally, it needs to be reiterated that tackling poverty or upgrading incomes of the bottom layers of the population, specially in the rural and backward areas, calls for a different approach to development. First and foremost is the need for imposition of a ‘super tax’ of 2 per cent, or at least 1 per cent, on the net wealth of the 167 wealthiest families in 2022-23 which would yield 0.5 per cent or 0.25 per cent of national income in revenues and create valuable fiscal space to fight poverty related issues.
Moreover, innumerable projects, most of which are geared for the metropolises and cities, must change, keeping in view not just the poverty and squalor of villagers but also the significant benefits in numbers if even 50 per cent of the projects are executed in rural areas. It is time that the political leadership adhere to the recommendations of economists and sociologists and give a new thrust to the rural sector. And while some good work has been done in recent years, much more needs to be desired. — INFA