Counting Poorly; and Identifying…??

In a recent affidavit to the Supreme Court the Planning Commission has revised the poverty line to estimate the number of poor in India. According to the affidavit now if one is consuming worth Rs. 25 in rural areas and Rs. 32 in urban areas, on 2011 prices, he/she should not be counted as poor. This has been revised from the 2004-05 poverty line of per-capita per day consumption of Rs. 15 in rural areas and Rs. 20 in urban areas. This extremely low and outrageous poverty line has rightly been criticized by the many quarters in media. The estimate of poverty made by the Suresh Tendulkar Committee based on the earlier poverty line was 37% ( 42% in rural areas and 26% in urban areas) for the year 2004-05 (see page 17 of the report). The Planning Commission in its earlier affidavit, submitted to the Supreme Court, had actually informed the court about the 2004-05 poverty line, on which, the apex court had expressed its shock. The revised poverty line has also been a shock to the country. The Planning Commission seems to be confused about the whole thing, the Congress party trying to downplay the affidavit and Congress allies in UPA are distancing themselves from the government on the issue.

The government patting its back for achieving 7 to 9 % of economic growth for last so many years is not ready to revise its poverty line norms which is outrageously low and outdated. The economists like Utsa Patnaik have been pointing it out for quite some time now that the nutrition level which can be achieved by consuming the equivalent of the poverty line defined by the Planning Commission is much less than the required nutrition level of 2400 calories per day, as recommended by the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR). (The flaws in the India's poverty line have been found by others too, calling it rather starvation line). But since it was not a legal case in the Supreme Court, it never caught the media attention those days, as it seems to be doing now. Now, thanks to the case filed by People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) and others, and the many orders given by the Supreme Court (like appointing the Food Security Commissioners), the issue of poverty line and defining poverty in India has got some public attention.

Killing two birds with one stone

The government, by underreporting poverty by putting the poverty line itself so low, wants to serve two purposes. One, it wants to show that the economic policies adopted by the government has been a success as they have helped reduce level of poverty in the country. You ask any question about poverty and low human development index in the country to any political party and you are slapped with the impressive growth figures. From Modi in Gujrat (poverty in vibrant Gujrat is 32% - 39% in rural areas and 20% in urban areas-, according to the same Rs. 15 and Rs. 20 poverty line) to Nitish in Bihar to (just voted out of power) Buddhadeb Bhattacharya in West Bengal all happily showing their growth records or doing everything in their power to achieve the economic growth. You ask a simple question that how this growth will be translated into betterment for people and you are branded as an anti development, anti growth and even anti nation. The friendly media which these governments have in form of national to local news channels and newspapers just love to sing the growth story.

Second purpose which the government is trying to serve by underreporting the poverty is that of shirking its responsibilities towards the people in general and poor people in particular. The lower number of poor families which are known as BPL (Below Poverty Line) families means the government has to provide fewer houses under Indira Awas Yojana (IAY), less subsidized food to BPL families under Public Distribution System and so on. That means the government can save on development expenditure and spend less on subsidy so that it can give more tax benefits and forgive more and more taxes to be levied on rich and the corporate world. In order to do this the very process of identifying the poor families is designed to exclude poor families rather than to include them.

Identifying the Poor: An Exercise of Exclusion

To make this a bit clearer, it would be useful to note that counting the poor or estimating the number of poor people and identifying them are two different exercises. Number and percentage of poor people is estimated by the Planning Commission, based on the National Sample Survey Organisation’s (NSSO’s) annual and quinquennial surveys on people’s consumption (NSSO also collects data on various other socio-economic indicators), applying the poverty line, of which it has informed to court. The process of identifying the poor families (known as BPL survey), on the other hand, is done by the state governments based on the directives of the Planning Commission. There have been three BPL survey so far in years 1992, 1997 and 2002. The government admits that there have been many anomalies in the BPL survey 2002 and there were problems of exclusion (of actual BPL families) and inclusion (of above poverty line or APL families), still it did not go for the BPL survey due in 2007, and for the last one decade the governments have been using the BPL list prepared in 2002. It also becomes difficult exercise for the state government because the Planning Commission puts a cap on the number of families which can be included in the BPL list. So if the state governments, even using the methodology given by the Planning Commission itself, find that there are more BPL families in their states than what is being suggested by the Planning Commission, they cannot do anything about it. This is exactly what happened in 2002. Since there has been many instances of exclusion of deserving families from the 2002 BPL list, and also the next BPL survey due in 2007 was not conducted, the state governments in some cases have come out with the Sate BPL lists (e.g. in Rajasthan), which has added to the confusion in the villages and the panchayat offices.

This year the government is conducting Socio-Economic and Caste Census-2011, which will serve dual purpose of identifying the BPL families as well as making a caste profile of the country’s population (since the caste based census could not be done along with the general census conducted last year). The process of this BPL survey was to be based on the recommendations of the NC Saxena committee, who recommended that regardless of the poverty ratio calculated by the Planning Commission, at least 50% of the total households should be included in the BPL list. The Planning Commission, however, has ignored this recommendation and has instructed the state governments that the number of BPL families will be according to the 2004-05 estimate of poverty in the state, which is based on its Rs. 15 and Rs. 20 per day consumption criteria.

The socio-economic and caste census 2011, for which pilots have already been conducted, is going to be based on three steps: 1. Some households are to be automatically excluded, 2. Some households are to be compulsorily included, and 3. Rest households will be ranked based on 7 deprivation criteria and a cut off mark will be decided to suit the poverty ratio decided by the Planning Commission. Recently, Jairam Ramesh, the newly appointed Minister of Rural Areas and Employment, hinted that the cap put on the BPL list may be revisited. He is also understood to have written a letter to the Deputy Chairperson of the Planning Commission. But it is unlikely that he would be able to convince the Planning Commission. The Ministry of Rural Areas and Employment has been in favour of keeping the cap at least to 50%, as recommended by the NAC member, NC Saxena. But the Planning Commission thinks otherwise.

The criteria of self exclusion being used in the socio-economic and caste census 2011 are extremely excluding and are likely to exclude many deserving poor families. For example anyone owning a two wheeler will be automatically out of the list. If you have a fridge you will be out of the BPL list automatically. Many poor people have a two wheeler (a moped or a second hand scooter/bike) for the very work they do like selling milk or vegetables. If a family in an urban slum (this year, for the first time, the exercise to identify poor is undertaken in urban areas as well) has somehow managed to buy a second hand fridge will be automatically out of the list. A poor farmer somehow possessing a Kisan Credit Card with credit limit of Rs. 50,000 is also going to be automatically excluded.

The families who are neither compulsorily included nor automatically excluded will be ranked according to 7 point deprivation criteria. The deprivation criteria also have serious problems. For example one of the deprivation criteria is a household having one room kacha house. The three room pucca house owner families have been excluded automatically, but what about families having two room houses or one room pucca houses. They are likely to not get a chance to be ranked under the deprivation criteria ranking and loose a chance to be identified as poor.

The whole process, therefore, is an exercise to exclude maximum number of poor families and bar them from being listed as BPL families. So that government can cut down and minimize its expenditure on development and can divert its resources towards the corporate sector people to give them subsidy for starting their industries and setting up SEZ, so that even higher economic growth can be achieved. If the intention was to provide necessary services to the poor, the government would have not gone into BPL vs. APL categorization. Studies have suggested that the schemes which are universal in nature perform better than those which are aimed at targeting the BPL families.

Development Debate

www.developmentdebate.in is a newly started website which focuses on the development and its discontent. The discourse of development has largely been dominated by the GDP growth rate, Stock Market performances, corporate led industrialization, big dams,and urbanization and world class cities etc. The negative impacts of such development process has been considered inevitable and the 'cost of progress' which must be paid.

But as we all know both the costs and fruits of such progress and corporate led growth are shared disproportionately by the various sections of the society. The movements against the displacement, land grab by the corporate, loss of livelihood, loss of any control over local natural resources, environmental destruction, gaining momentum across the country and the globe, have been trying to highlight these injustices to the victims of development.

We feel that there is a need to raise those voices from many corners in many ways and there are many efforts and initiatives towards that. This website is a modest effort to contribute towards the same. Our focus is going to be the south Asia region and the efforts will be to provide an one stop resource page, with all the relevant information like legislation and policies, statistics and the important developments.

We request you to kindly contribute to the debate. You can send your posts to admin@developmentdebate.in and/orahmadnesar@gmail.com.

Thanks

मोमबत्तियों की रौशनी का दायरा

अण्णा जी ने आज (9 अप्रैल) अपना अनशन कोक या पेप्सी कंपनी के नींबू पानी से समाप्त कर दिया (टीवी पर नींबूज़, या फिर वो मिनिट मेड्स था !, के कई कार्टन दिखे, जिसे पीकर गांधीवादी अनशनकरियों ने अपना अपना अनशन तोड़ा) I उन्होंने देश भर में युवाओं में जो उत्साह जगाया वो हम सब को प्रभावित करता है I पीछे मंच पर, देश के आग के लपटों वाले मानचित्र में भारत माता की तस्वीर लगा कर तथा गांधी जी के सत्याग्रह को अपना कर उन्होंने संप्रंग सरकार को उनकी माँगें मानने को मजबूर कर दिया I

इस पूरे आंदोलन में उनके साथ अपने टीवी वाले भी ज़ोरदार ढंग से आगाए I मीडिया, जो पैसे लेकर खबरें छापता है और नेताओं को चुनाव के दिनों में सकारात्मक खबरें देने के लिए पैकेज बेचता है, भ्रष्टाचार के विरुद्ध अण्णा जी के साथ आ गया I नीरा राडीया से निर्देश लेकर लेख लिखने वाला हमारा मीडिया अण्णा जी के इस आंदोलन से काफी उत्साहित है और इसकी तुलना तहरीर चौक से कर रहा है I जो टीवी वाले नीरा राडीया से निर्देश लेते हैं कि उन्हें किसे क्या संदेश देना है और किस दल से क्या वक्तव्य लेना है, उनका भरपूर समर्थन मिला अण्णा जी को I

देश के उद्योगपती, जो भ्रष्टाचार का लाभ सब से पहले लेते हैं और सब से अधिक उसे बढ़ावा देते हैं - चुनाओं में राजनेताओं को करोड़ों चंदा दे कर और बाद में उसे भुना कर - वो भी अण्णा जी के समर्थन में उतर गए I अपने फिल्मी हीरो ओर हीरोइन भी काफी उत्साह से भाग लिए इस आंदोलन में I

देश के लगभग सभी शहरों में अण्णा जी के समर्थन में मध्य वर्ग खड़ा हो गया, अपनी मोमबत्तियों के साथ I ये मोमबत्तीयां आप और हम पहले भी देख चुके हैं, इंडिया गेट और गेटवे ऑफ इंडिया पे I जब ताज होटल पे हमला हुआ, जब आरुषि को न्याय नहीं मिला, जब रुचिका का गुनहगार छुट गया, जब जेसिका के हत्यारे बच गए I और इनमें से अधिकांश बार मध्य वर्ग की मोमबत्तियाँ जीत गयीं I लेकिन हाँ, यह ज़रूर कहना होगा कि इस बार मध्य वर्ग सबसे अधिक संख्या और उत्साह से अण्णा जी के आंदोलन में शामिल हुआ I

सरकार ने भी ना - ना करते करते अनशनकारियों की लगभग सभी माँगे मान ली I तो अब एक समिति बन गयी है जो लोकपाल विधेयक का मसौदा बनाएगी, जिसे सरकार मॉनसून सत्र में ही सदन में रखेगी I ध्यान दीजिये की पिछली सरकारों ने पिछले 40 वर्षों से एक लोकपाल विधेयक, जिसमें एक कमज़ोर लोकपाल का प्रावधान है, को पारित नहीं किया है I अब आशा बनी है कि एक मज़बूत लोकपाल विधेयक पारित हो सकेगा I कुछ लोगों को चिंता है कि कहीं यह ज़्यादा ही मज़बूत ना हो जाए, जो अंततः लोकतंत्र के लिए ठीक नहीं होता I आशा है कि विधेयक का मसौदा बनाते समय समिति इन सभी बातों पर ग़ौर करेगी I

मध्य वर्ग कैसे और क्यों इस आंदोलन में इस बड़े स्तर पर शामिल हो पाया इस पर अभी समाजशास्त्रियों और राजनीति के विद्वानों के विश्लेषण आने बाक़ी हैं, लेकिन कुछ जिज्ञासा है मन में (फिलहाल तो जो स्थिति है, उसमें आशंका करने की इजाज़त नहीं है) I

दस वर्षों से इरोम शर्मिला नाम की एक महिला आमरण अनशन पर बैठी हैं, जो देश के कई हिस्सों में थोपे गए AFSPA नाम के कानून को भंग करने की माँग कर रही हैं I ये कानून उत्तर-पूर्व तथा कश्मीर में सुरक्षा बलों को असीमित अधिकार देता है I सुरक्षा बलों द्वारा इस अपने अधिकारों और हथियारों का दुरुपयोग के मामले नए नहीं हैं I ऐसे में सुरक्षा बलों को अत्यंत ही ग़ैर लोकतान्त्रिक ढंग से केवल शक के आधार पर गोली मार देने का अधिकार देने वाला यह कानून उत्तर पूर्व के कई क्षेत्रों में लगभग 5 दशकों से लागू है I ऐसे कानून का विरोध उसी अनशन से करने वाली इरोम शर्मिला का नाम भी फेसबूक और ट्विटर के मध्य वर्गीय क्रांतिवीरों में से अधिकांश को शायद ही मालूम हो I

AFSPA एक अकेला आलोकतांत्रिक कानून नहीं है I ULAPA नमक एक अन्य केंद्रीय कानून है जो सरकार को TADA तथा POTA जैसे कानूनों की तरह असीमित अधिकार देता है I छत्तीसगढ़ तथा महाराष्ट्र समेत कई राज्यों में राज्य स्तर पर ऐसे कानून लागू हैं I राजद्रोह के विरुद्ध एक कानून है जो सरकार की आलोचना के लिए किसी को भी जेल भेज सकता है I राजद्रोह के विरुद्ध कानून तथा छत्तीसगढ़ के संविधान विरोधी कानून के सहारे सरकार ने बिनायक सेन को जेल में डाल रखा है I बिनायक सेन देश की संविधान में विश्वास रखने वाले एक ऐसे डॉक्टर हैं जिन्होंने वर्षों छत्तीसगढ़ के ग़रीब तथा शोषित आदिवासियों के बीच काम किया है I लेकिन उन्हें जेल भेजने वाली सरकार से हमारे वैबसाइट वाले मध्य वर्गीय क्रांतिकारियों को कोई शिकायत नहीं है I

छत्तीसगढ़, झारखंड, उड़ीसा समेत देश के सभी हिस्सों में बहुराष्ट्रीय और देशी कंपनियों द्वारा हमारे संसाधनों की लूट जारी है I और यह लूट भ्रष्टाचार से नहीं, सरकार से बाक़ायदा MOU करके की जा रही है I बात केवल मधु कोड़ा जैसे मुख्यमंत्रियों या राजा जैसे मंत्रियों की नहीं है I बल्कि ये समझना ज़रूरी है की देश के संसाधनों की लूट की छुट, नीति बनाकर देश की प्रगति के नाम पे, दी जा रही है I यह कहा जाता है कि हमारे जंगलों, खनिज संसाधनों, नदियों, ज़मीनों, जल संसाधन पे देशी – विदेशी कंपनियों का कब्ज़ा होने देना देश के प्रगति के लिए – जो कम से कम 9% वार्षिक की दर से ही होनी चाहिए – आवश्यक है I संसाधनों को कौड़ियों के भाव उद्योगों को देने कि नीति तो है ही, उद्योग जगत हमारे भ्रष्ट तंत्र का फायदा उठाने में कहीं से पीछे नहीं है I राजा और कोड़ा इन्हीं उदारवादी नीतियों के संरक्षण में भ्रष्ट होते जाने के प्रतीक हैं I

संसाधनों के दोहन करने तथा उद्योग लगाने के लिए लाखों आदिवासी, दलित, ग़रीब, किसान, मज़दूर अपने खेतों, गाँवों, जंगलों, ज़मीनों तालाबों, नदियों से बेदखल किए जा रहे हैं I अपने आजीविका तथा अपने जड़ों से विस्थापित इन विकास पीड़ितों के पुनर्वास के लिए कोई क़ानून नहीं है I विस्थापन का विरोध करने वाले ग़रीब आदिवासी सरकारी कोप के शिकार हो रहे हैं I देश भर में विस्थापन विरोधी आंदोलनों को दबाने में सरकार अधिकाधिक निर्मम तरीक़े अपना रही है I ग़रीबों के विस्थापन या संसाधनों के अंधाधुंध दोहन का विरोध करने वाले न सिर्फ विकास विरोधी कहे जाते हैं, बल्कि उन्हें मावोवादी या उनका समर्थक घोषित किया जा रहा है और जेलों में बंद किया जा रहा है I लेकिन मध्यवर्ग कि मोमबत्तियों को यह प्रत्यक्ष अन्याय दिखाई नहीं पड़ता या वो इससे निरपेक्ष रहती हैं I क्यों? क्या इसलिये कि इन उदारवादी नीतियों का लाभार्थी मध्य वर्ग भी है I क्या कारण है कि मीडिया को विस्थापन विरोधी आंदोलनों से कोई सहानुभूती नहीं है I

पिछले दो दशकों में जब से उदारवादी भूमंडकीकरण का दौर चला है, देश में लाखों किसानों ने आत्महत्या कर लिया है I आंध्र और विदर्भ ही नहीं, पंजाब और गुजरात जैसे संपन्न राज्यों में भी किसानों को भूमंडलीकरण के नीति की क़ीमत अपनी जान दे कर चुकानी पड़ी है I परंतु मध्य वर्ग के लिए यह सब कभी मुद्दा नहीं बना I देश के ग़रीब आदिवासी, दलित, किसान – मज़दूर ज़रूर अपनी आवाज़ उठाते रहे हैं – कभी विस्थापन के विरोध में तो कभी सरकार की किसान विरोधी नीतियों के विरोध में I लेकिन न तो देश का मध्य वर्ग उनके साथ आता है न ही मीडिया का समर्थन उन्हें मिलता है I क्यों ग़रीबों, आदिवासियों, किसानों, मज़दूरों के आंदोलन अलग थलग पड़ जाते हैं और उन्हें मध्यवर्ग का समर्थन नहीं मिलता I क्या ये स्पष्ट हो गया है अब कि शहरी मध्य वर्ग, अपने मॉल, मल्टीप्लेक्स, और पिज़्ज़ा हट से बाहर केवल अपने भ्रष्टाचार के मुद्दे पर ही आयेगा I और ग़रीबों, किसानों, आदिवासियों और दलितों के जीवन से जुड़े प्रश्न उसके लिए अर्थहीन हैं I

पिछले कई वर्षों से केंद्र सरकार उद्योग जगत को लाखों करोड़ की टैक्स छुट देती रही है I देश में आर्थिक विकास (कम से कम 9% की दर से) को बढ़ावा देने के लिए दिया गया यह छूट पिछले वित्तीय वर्ष में लगभग 4.6 लाख करोड़ का था, जबकि उस वर्ष में केंद्र सरकार का कुल बजट लगभग 10 लाख करोड़ का था I क्या एक ग़रीब देश में जहाँ ग़रीब आबादी के शिक्षा, स्वास्थ्य, पानी, भोजन आदि के लिए कार्यक्रमों के लिए पैसे की का बहाना कियाजाता है, यह किसी भ्रष्टाचार से कम है I परंतु मीडिया या मध्यवर्ग को यह नीतिगत भ्रष्टाचार दिखायी नहीं देता I क्या मध्य वर्ग की मोमबत्तियों की रौशनी का दायरा इतना सीमित है I

When the Prime Minister Speaks!

We have a Prime Minister who rarely speaks up. May be he believes in work more than words, which is certainly a good thing. But the actions of his government are there to see. And since he does not speak much, when he does speak up he is giving some important message to the people. And we must carefully analyze when and what is he speaking. According to the BJP he is a weak Prime Minister. However, he has shown that he can rise up to the occasion and be as strong as it needs him to be to get a nuclear deal with the USA. So let’s not get into the weak argument of the weakness of the Prime Minister. But it is certainly interesting to recall the rare occasions when he does speak up.

The Prime Minister i guess has not said anything about the ongoing litigation about CVC in the Supreme Court. His government filed an affidavit saying the government was not aware of the case against the present CVC, at the time of his appointment. The Home Minister is saying the case against him was discussed in the meeting, where the names for the appointment of the CVC were being considered. The Court wants to know if the files were sent to the PMO. Perhaps his office will say something about it the court through the attorney general.

Mr. A Raja, an ex-minister of his cabinet is finally behind the bars. He has been charged by CBI of some grave criminal acts of favouring some telecom companies at the cost of huge losses to the exchequer. And remember Mr. Raja was a minister till few months ago. He is not somebody from a distant past. He was a minister in the very same government which the Prime Minister is still heading. Should he say something? The Opposition is demanding a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) to probe the scam. The UPA made unsuccessful attempts to crack the unity of the Opposition. The Prime Minister spoke at last saying he would be happy to appear before the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of the Parliament, headed by a senior BJP leader, making the argument for JPC looking weak. But do not we have a right to know that how was Mr. Raja able to play with the policies without the knowledge of the PMO?

But it perhaps is not fair to expect a Prime Minister, who believes in actions, to speak on such small matters. So who from the government are speaking about it? Mr. Kapil Sibbal, who replaced Raja as Telecom Minister, came out with strange mathematical abilities to say that CAG was not right in calculating the losses to the exchequer. According to Mr. Sibbal, there is no loss at all. Montek Sigh Ahluwalia, the deputy chairperson of the Planning Commission suggested that not necessarily we evaluate everything from the perspective of the loss to the exchequer. We also need to look at the welfare aspect of a policy. Welfare! Yes you heard right. That is what he said. A firebrand supporter of the economic liberalisation and one who opposes every move to welfare of people by saying it will cost the exchequer is talking about welfare. So what should we think/say about this newly found welfare-ism of Mr. Ahluwalia? What does he say about other welfare issues?

Speaking in seminar in New Delhi, he said that it’s not necessary to pay minimum wages to the workers working under MGNREGA. And the Prime Minister agrees to him. Earlier, in a letter written to the UPA chairperson, he also has expressed his unwillingness to pay minimum wages to these workers. MGNREGA is a flagship welfare programme of the UPA government. The programme grantees 100 days of employment to every poor household in the rural areas. For more than two years there was a cap on any increase in the wages paid to the workers being employed under MGNREGA. The government of India was not willing to pay more than Rs. 100 per day as wage in this programme. People from all over the country has been demanding to raise it to the minimum wages fixed by the state governments under the Minimum Wages Act 1948 and also to link it to inflation index (Consumer Price Index). The National Advisory Council (NAC) advised the government to pay minimum wages to the MGNREGA workers and also link it to inflation. The Andhra Pradesh high court asked the government not to violate the Minimum Wages Act. But the UPA government ignored both NAC (headed by the UPA chairperson Ms. Sonia Gandhi) and the High Court’s directives. Recently the government just linked the wage to the CPI- Agriculture Labour, taking the 2009 wage as base wage (and not 2008 when the wage was fixed at Rs. 100). In spite of linking MGNREGA wage to CPI-AL, it’s lower than the minimum wage fixed by the state governments in seven states. (One should add here that the minimum wages declared by the state governments are also not linked to the price index in most of the cases.) The central and state governments in seven states are violating both the Minimum Wages Act and the Equal Remuneration Act. The Prime Minister is not saying anything.

Besides 2G spectrum, we have been witnessing a series of corruption cases from Commonwealth Games to Adarsh Society, Lavasa and the most recent in the series is ISRO's deal with DEVAS. ISRO comes directly under the PMO. When corruption is almost threatening his government's stability and everyday we are being informed of a bigger scam what all we hear from the Prime Minister is a sermon on how corruption is a stain on our image. Nothing specific just a general remark.

But he recently spoke up on a very important issue. He said that we should not bring back the licence raj in the name of protecting the environment. The statement is being linked by the media to the recent decision of the Ministry of Environment and Forest to give a nod to the POSCO project in Orissa with some conditions. And the conditions are just to ask the company to abide by the Acts passed by the parliament and the R&R policies of the Orissa government, which is anyways has so many lapses. The POSCO project in Orissa is going to be, so far, the largest foreign investment in the country. The controversial project is expected to have immense social and environmental costs and being opposed vehemently by the people who are going to be affected. There are many loopholes in the clearance given to POSCO and there is no proper mechanism to ensure that the company actually compiles with the conditions put by the MoEF.

So our Prime Minister does speak when he sees there is a perceived 'threat' to the mindless industrialization, the high rate of economic growth, and the liberalization policies. The commitments of this government are clearly for the economic growth (reverting back to the 9% and achieving double digit growth as soon as possible). The farmers suicides, displacement of tribal and other poor people, lack of rehabilitation of displaced population, lack of minimum wages to poor, corruption involving billions of rupees nothing is important enough for the Prime Minister. Yes, but the economic growth is something we can not compromise with.