Biraj Patnaik’s observations on the procurement scam in Chhattisgarh and the removal of pulses from the PDS are worrisome, as is the cut in Centrally sponsored schemes (“ >Cutting the Food Act to the bone ”, June 24). However, my criticism is: Centrally sponsored schemes are being wound up precisely to give States flexibility to spend more money in an effective manner.
One cannot look at the fund cut alone and complain, but wait to see what States do with higher fiscal transfers; this is also because agriculture and health are state subjects. Restricting MSP can cause shortage, but the writer does not specify which crops. What if they were for bumper crops over the last few years which are now rotting in FCI godowns? Half-baked knowledge does not make good criticism.
To say that winding up AAY is akin to insulting Mr. Atal Bihari Vajpayee is a strange argument. Are we to pursue with welfare schemes no matter how broken they are, just because a beloved neta launched them? While blaming Prime Minister Narendra Modi for being authoritarian, analysts such as Mr. Patnaik are often quick to change their stand when he gives more leeway to States that are reluctant to implement the NFSA. This leeway is welcome because NFSA is largely unworkable, focusses on the wrong goods and will not eliminate nutrition problems which have more to with sanitation and pulses or vegetable scarcity.
Vinay Menon,
New Delhi
