The cash transfer schemes including the present one is primarily to address the question of poor governance without taking into account the impact it may have on the welfare of the poor and vulnerable. In Kotkasim block of Alwar district of Rajasthan ‘Cash for Kerosene Scheme’ [CFKS] was launched on 5th December 2011 on pilot basis for six months.
Office of the Adviser to theSupreme Court Commissioners conducted an assessment study of the Cash for Kerosene pilot at Kotkasim, Alwar, Rajasthan.
The assessment study findings are in complete variance with the district administration so far as the impact of the scheme is concerned. Whereas the facts are the same but the interpretation of the same facts are diametrically opposite. District administration terms the pilot has a huge success and has been extended till December 2012 and it has planned to extend the same to entire district in near future. The study however concludes that the pilot is nothing more than a ‘denial by design’ and therefore must be closed down. Based on the findings it recommends that (a) CFKS should be scrapped forthwith (b) high level enquiry should be ordered to find out under what compulsions the CFKS was launched without preparations (c) a detailed independent assessment should be undertaken of the scheme and (d) alternate strategy is required to check black of kerosene as people are not ready for CFKS type of measure.
The impact of CFKS on use of Kerosene
From day one of the implementation of the scheme the consumption of kerosene has come down. This has been reported by all the stake-holders namely government, shop-keepers and households as we shall see in the sub-sections below. The consumption declined with the launching of the scheme in December and thereafter it continued declining and reached almost zero sales by June-end. Prior to launch the Kerosene use was about 84 thousand KL per month for about 25 thousand card holders which for last six months range between one to five thousand litres. The average consumption is not even five percent of the pre-pilot period use.
The district administration falsely claims that that there is no effective demand for kerosene
This explanation however does not hold water in the face of critical appraisal of government’s own records, the survey findings and the reality of shopkeepers boycott.
The sample respondents are relatively socially backwardness and economically deprived
The assessment study is based on government records, interviews with different stake holders and a sample survey of 144 households spread over four villages. The sample is biased in favour of official poor as comparatively much larger proportion of BPL, SBPL and AAY households were covered –about 55%. Among head of the households, 51% are illiterates; 32% up to primary. Out of total of 144 only one reported to be graduate and one post graduate. 61% are wage earners and only 30% reported to be self-employed. Most of the families are nuclear families as 76% reported one earner
Three-fourths of the poor families use kerosene and need to buy from the ration shop.
82% respondents said that they use kerosene. The range of use in the four sample areas vary from 68 to 90%. There is thus a demand for kerosene provided there are no barriers in supply. The use however varies in space and time due to various factors. Regular use of kerosene has been reported by 63% of the households and sometime use by another 13%.
CFKS denies access to kerosene to poor and vulnerable
The data suggest that the number of families who lifted kerosene from the dealer declined from around 57% in Oct and Nov 2011 to less than 18 % in the month of May 2012. There has been secular decline from January 2012 from 57.1% to 48.6% in Feb, 37.9% in March, 30.7 % in April and 17.9% in May. The pattern has been similar for all the four regions though with varying degree. In Kotkasim proper the reported decline is relatively sharper: Nov 70%; Dec 58%; Jan 65%; Feb 54%; March 41%; April 38%; May 6.8%.
Peoples’ responses demolish government arguments about decline in kerosene use
51% of all respondents reported change in the consumption. When asked about the details of change, 17 of these 68 respondents said that they have stopped buying kerosene due to high cost and inability to bear the cost. The other reasons cited were non-availability of kerosene at ration shops [21] and long procedures and formalities. The other articulated aspects of impact include non-transfer of subsidy account, extra time, wage loss, and extra day for bank operation. If look at the data of Jhadka and Patan Ahir we may conclude that due to CFKS, there is no access due to cost and supply constraint.
The patterns of decline in demand indicate towards two dimensions - (a) gradual decline in number of buyers and (b) all of a sudden fall in the month of May compared to April. This demand pattern raises valid questions about the veracity of the above stated position of the district administration. It rather supports the arguments related to non-availability of the subsidy in hand and other related issues in the context of point (a) above and role of shop-keepers in the context of point (b). Thus people did buy kerosene till they could afford at market price and was available but stopped when it started pinching and supply choked.
Operating a bank account is an ‘imposed burden’ on them
Possession of 14-digit no frill account is central to the scheme. However, the assessment study suggests that people do not have a need to open an account. Many may have been persuaded to open, but do not find much utility. For the poor it is drag on limited resources. Story of accounts makes it quite obvious:
(a) Till date only 14258 accounts have been opened including 800 in Dec 2012 prior to visit of Finance Minister- it comes to 58% of total 24604 eligible accounts.
(b) Only 6000 accounts were opened by end of Dec 2011
(c) Study suggests that only roughly one-fourth families reported a bank account prior to scheme,
(d)When asked about the necessity of the bank account, a good number said that it is needed for subsidy. Over fifty present reported to have opened accounts just for subsidy i.e. as part of CFKS on persuasion of the district administration
(e) People did not open accounts also because of time consuming process, difficulty of process, illiteracy, and lack of awareness and most importantly they do not need
(f) Many who had an account reported that first going to bank and then to shop is time consuming meaning thereby that operating account is not the effort worth taking
(g) Many others directly questioned the very need for it. One dozen respondents asked, “when earlier it [kerosene] was available without bank account than why now all this’?,
(h) Dealers who facilitated camps for opening bank accounts said that people were disinterested in opening accounts.
(i) The process details suggest that the response of the people towards bank account was not very encouraging initially. This made the administration jittery and persuasive. It is alleged that even threatening strategies were used by the administration to get the accounts opened. For instance, the dealer of Village Pataliya explained how he was being mistreated by the DSO to procure account numbers from his customers. In fact, one common thing reported throughout the survey was the way the consumers were harassed by making ration (including wheat) conditional to the submission of account number. The dealers who were the agents of this harassment acted on behest of the DSO.
(j) Data suggest that several other reasons for less number of accounts include migration, old age of head of the household, indifference to the scheme, lack of awareness about the scheme and so on. But primarily it is lack of necessity and paltry sum of subsidy is no motivation.
(k) The data further suggest that 15.7% households even now do not have any accounts in Kotkasim
Mere opening of account is not sufficient:
Because of persuasion and the camp at door step, almost all in the village Kharol have opened accounts. But none of them have operated the accounts. In fact they have not even received their pass books till date after a lapse of several months. If they do receive their passbooks one day, they will still not be able to make trips to the bank to withdraw subsidy and they may not be in a position to buy kerosene at the high cost. If the feedback mechanism does kick in, they will one day stop receiving the subsidy as they will not be buying kerosene – effectively having been driven away from the PDS and written about in the media as ‘not in need of kerosene’.
CFKS is anti-poor, vulnerable and marginalized in essence
Study clearly brings forth the point that a poor cannot wait for subsidy to be deposited in bank. Poor, vulnerable and marginalized would not like to get entangled in issues like where and when the account will be opened, when the money will be deposited and how and when the money will be withdrawn. Rather than getting into these questions the poor will stop buying kerosene. The Government perhaps is well aware of this reality and by introducing the pilot Government’s intent was to deprive the majority access to kerosene by design.
Blatantly undemocratic practice: Views of elected representatives totally ignored
Our assessment brings in bold relief that the views of the elected representatives stand totally ignored. To that extent it is the most undemocratic scheme. It is obvious from the fact that a PIL filed by the elected representatives is pending in the high court of Rajasthan on the issue. The point here is that can a scheme should be continued when the elected representatives are not interested in it.
Scheme was launched without preparation: Protocol stand violated
The Scheme was launched by the district administration without adequate preparation. Accounts were not opened, subsidy was not deposited, impact on shop-keepers was not evaluated properly, people were not made aware, required precautions were not taken, etc.
Scheme is a burden on the banks:
The scheme is not only a burden on the people and shop keepers but is equally a burden on the banks. Banks are not interested in the scheme as it defies the very logic on which the banks exists i.e. the logic of market. No-frill large number of accounts with extremely low level of transaction is against the principles of market economy for banks. No wonder therefore no commercial bank was interested in the scheme. SBI has flatly refused. The banks are least interested in such accounts and bank’s general response to people is in effect ‘insulting’.
The mandate of the people is crystal clear: Close down the CFKS.
In response to a direct question out of total 88 responses 66 [75%] categorically said it should be closed down; six said improve or close down; six were in favour of continuity without any rider and wanted other items to added; nine said that it should continue but wanted banking should to be easier and less time consuming.
The pilot raises several economical and moral and ethical questions. Economically opening an account means putting an additional burden on the poor families in terms of opportunity cost in particular. Moreover, forcing a person to do otherwise for a benefit of say ninety rupees a month cannot be justified ethically and morally. Because such an ‘imposed burden’ coupled with inability to resist or protest only makes a person totally withdraw from the situation. And that is what was prominently visible during the study in places like Kharol and among households like that of Subhash [See Case Below].
Case 1: Name: Subhash ; Ration Card No.: 796; Ration Card Type: APL; Village: Kharola
|
No pass-book-No Subsidy, buying kerosene in black from Khairtal
This ration card is one of six in a huge family of carpenters. This card itself has 10 units. The family effectively survives on daily wage and therefore they are not as well off as some of their neighbors. He has only one more earner in the family of 10. The family is very poor. There is no M.cycle, TV, Fridge even electricity.
The family regularly uses kerosene for the purposes of cooking and lighting. Mr Subhash came to know about the scheme only when he reached the shop for kerosene in December 2011 and the shopkeeper asked to pay at the rate of 44.5 per litre. It was a rude shock for him and made him angry but had no choice.
In January 2012, bank account was opened in the Harsoli branch of GVB. At that time it was promised that the passbook would be delivered at the home but it has yet not reached them. They have been to the bank twice, which is 9 km from their village, but to no avail. The family has not got the subsidy in hand as yet.
Since January 2012 the family is buying kerosene from the black market in Khertal for Rs.35.
Mr Subhash is quite angry and frustrated but is helpless to do anything. He has no support her from anyone.
|
