The depreciation of the rupee has nothing to do with the food security bill: KV Thomas

Market analysts call it bad politics over economics while the opposition calls it a poll gimmick. But KV Thomas, the minister of state for food and consumer affairs, defends his food security bill as the government’s obligation towards the people of the country.

The word "food security" covers all that people need to survive. Do you think by giving only foodgrains, you are actually giving food security to people?
That is only a beginning. It is true that we want nutritious food for everyone.

In the bill we are providing nutritious food to pregnant women, lactating women, newborn children and children up to the 8th standard. But in the case of adults, we are protecting their right to foodgrains.

There are other schemes like the pulses and edible oil schemes. But those do not constitute a right as of now.

We have to make the food security scheme a success story and look at various other challenges like improving the public distribution system and strengthening our storage capacity.

Once that has been done with the present scheme, we can think about adding more items, so that all the nutritious items are also part of the Food Security Act in future.

But you are talking about improving the Public Distribution System (PDS) system which has failed for the last 65 years. How will you improve it just by passing the Food Security Act?
See, you have to take a holistic view. We cannot say just because the PDS system is not good we will not implement the bill. We have to start somewhere and once this bill becomes a reality, people would be conscious about their right to foodgrains. Then the  PDS system  would be more accountable.

Secondly, in the bill we have made the Panchayati Raj(s) the social auditing agents. Definitely, we need to improve our PDS. We have a nine point programme to improve the PDS system by using computerisation, Aadhaar cards and a biometric system. Through this, we have already brought down the number of ration cards from 22 crore to just 16 crore. Our transportation loss has come down from 2.5% to 0.07% .

So it is a commendable achievement. But there is scope for improvement.

Critics have said that the UPA has passed such an expensive bill because its actual cost would have to be borne by the next government, and not yours. What do you have to say to that?
There is a TPDS (Targetted Public Distribution System) system.

On the basis of the 2000 census, the subsidy component is 1,09,000 crore. Is there any government which comes into power that can get out of this TPDS system? I do not think so.

Now, the 2011 census is out and according to that the subsidy burden comes to 1,13,000 crore. What would be the burden after the present bill is passed? It would be an additional 10,000 crore. Can we not bear this additional cost which is spread over 12 months?

Secondly, our primary aim is to improve and strengthen the PDS system, where the leakage is up to 30%. So, once we save money on that, our subsidy burden will come down further. We have to work it out.

But this extra burden of Rs10,000 crore is at the current cost of Minimum Support Price (MSP). The cost will go up next year when the MSP goes up.
Suppose there was no food security bill. Will the MSP price not go up then? Why do you link the MSP cost only to the food security bill?

It is because now the government is obliged to provide foodgrains at Rs2 and Rs3 per kg, no matter what the MSP is.
Tell me, can any government get out of PDS? You have to give food grains to Below Poverty Line (BPL), Above Poverty Line (ABL), Antyodaya Anna Yojana (AAY).

I think all the future governments will have to give susbsidised foodgrains to these categories and this is what we are doing. But there is a clause in the bill for revision of prices after three years. We will see what changes are needed in the law.

It is being said that the Indian markets have reacted negatively to your bill and the rupee has also taken a beating.
The ordinance for food security came two-and-a-half months ago. Three states have already implemented it. Did the markets fall at that time? Suppose there was no food security bill, would the depreciation of rupee not have taken place? The depreciation in the currency value has nothing to do with our bill.

Don’t you think that the state governments will get credit though the scheme is actually termed as a game changer for the UPA government ahead of polls?
See, the Congress has committed itself to some things from the very beginning.

Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru brought the five year plan. The left parties called it a starvation plan.He started irrigation projects and that is why we have such a strong agriculture base.

Indiraji brought us the space programme. People asked if a country where millions go hungry can afford a space programme.

Then Rajivji brought telecommunication and Panchayati Raj. Now we have Soniaji and Manmohanji who brought us the right to information, the right to education.

We are moving from a welfare state to a rights-oriented state.

Now, we are bringing the right to food. So this is the vision of the Congress government. Critics may say anything.

What will happen in a drought year? How will the government meet its obligation?
We have made projections till 2039-40. And those projections say that we need only 30% of what we produce to keep the food security going. So we would have sufficient reserves even in a drought year to meet the obligation for the government under the Food Security Act.

The act will cover 67% of the population. Will it not bring down the price of foodgrains in the open market, harming the interest of traders?
Currently, the country is witnessing high inflation. And a major part of this is in the food sector.

So if the food inflation comes down due to this, it will help the country. Regarding the traders, they can procure the foodgrains and export it in the international market. But we  guarantee that we will procure directly from the farmers and the interest of the farmers will be protected.