No subject

finally, to the panchayats.

Eight days later, they came back to Delhi to write a report that is an
explosive testament of false promises.

Let’s start with Indira Awaas Yojana, under which those below the poverty
line receive “construction assistance” of Rs 20,000 if they live in the
plains and Rs 25,000, if they live in the hills. IAY guidelines are clear
that the beneficiary should either be women, or the loan should be made out
jointly, to husband and wife.

In almost every single case, across India, the beneficiary is a man.

In Tirunelveli district, in Tamil Nadu, the team found houses under Indira
Awaas so badly constructed that the “beneficiaries” had not moved in. They
found similar empty shells built, but unused, in Godhra in Gujarat, and in
Bastar in Chhattisgarh.

They begin by describing IRDP, or the Integrated Rural Development
Programme, as the “single largest anti-poverty programme in India (which)
has been an instrument for directly attacking poverty to bring all-round
prosperity in rural areas”. IRDP works by identifying those who live below
the poverty line (BPL) and then giving them BPL cards. Assistance is then
given to the poor once they produce their cards. That’s the idea, at least
on paper.

The team found that, in fact, very few BPL cards have been issued. And after
visiting village after village, they have little choice but to conclude that
the “concept of the poorest of the poor is not correctly followed (and) a
major chunk of the benefit is being drawn by the creamy layer.”

Who is this creamy layer? Is it only the socially advantaged sections of
rural society? Not always. In Bhagalpur, in Bihar, they found that the Block
Development Officer of Jagdishpur has made away with a considerable sum of
money. This wouldn’t hurt so much if it wasn’t paired with another
statistic. About Rs 18 crore is sitting in government bank accounts in
Bhagalpur, money meant to be spent for eight national-level schemes.

In this, Bhagalpur is not alone. Under the descriptive title “Huge Closing
Balance”, the report lists 13 districts as worst offenders.

Some DRDAs have been creative about not spending money meant for the rural
poor. They have put the cash into fixed deposits. The DRDA in Sangrur, for
instance, has invested Rs 15 lakh in FDs, for that rainy day in the
not-too-distant future. Except it rains every day when you are a BPL
card-holder.

Others have obfuscated the trail by creating multiple bank accounts: 123
accounts for an IRDP project in Udaipur, 60 for a similar project in Bundi.
Across the country, almost all have transferred money from one scheme to
another, repeatedly.

How have they got away with it? Just 4 pages into their report, the team
says “the monitoring of various schemes at DRDA is so poor that it has lost
its significance”.

Strong words, from a team of government accountants.