Eleventh Five Year Plan

138 Eleventh Five Year PlanGenerating Awareness amongst TPDS Beneficiariesabout their Entitlement and Redressal Mechanismand Monitoring4.1.51 A mass awareness campaign on the rightsand entitlements of TPDS beneficiaries is proposedthrough newspaper advertisements, bill boards, posters,printing of annual calendar on the themes ofTPDS, and audio-visual publicity measures such asshort spots/quickies, audio jingles/radio spots, TVserials/documentaries.Training and Awareness of NegotiableWarehouse Receipt System4.1.52 This is a new scheme for the Eleventh Five YearPlan. The warehousing receipts at present do notenjoy the fiduciary trust of depositors and banks, asthere is fear of not being able to recover the loans inevents such as fraud or mismanagement on behalf ofthe warehouse or insolvency of depositor. The legalremedies are also time consuming and inadequate.In this context, it is proposed to develop a negotiablewarehouse receipt system for commodities includingagricultural commodities. The negotiable warehousereceipt system will result in increase in the liquidity inthe rural areas, encouragement of scientific warehousingof goods, lower cost of financing, etc.(IV) VILLAGE GRAIN BANK SCHEME4.1.53 The Village Grain Bank Scheme, which washitherto with the Ministry of Tribal Affairs, has beentransferred to the Department of Food and PublicDistribution w.e.f. The objective of the scheme is toestablish Grain Banks in chronically food-scarce areaand to provide safeguard against starvation during thelean period. The scheme is also to mitigate droughtinducedmigration and food shortages by makingfoodgrains available within the village during suchcalamities. During 2006–07, there was a budget provisionof Rs 50 crore for setting up 8591 Village GrainBanks in food-scarce areas.Further Innovations Needed to StrengthenTPDS and the Way Forward4.1.54 One of the long-standing criticisms of theTPDS has been that offtake of PDS cereals (rice andwheat) by States from FCI does not match with NSSestimates of PDS consumption of those same grains(as we noted earlier). For instance, Table 4.1.8 showsthat, according to NSS, over 1993–94, 1999–2000, and2004–05, consumption of PDS grains rose. It alsoshows that offtake of PDS grain from FCI by Statesincreased much more than consumption over the samedecade. The difference between the two shows theextent of leakage of PDS wheat and rice. This leakage[defined as 1—{ratio of (a) to (b)}] was 28% for wheatand rice together in 1993–94, but it had risen to 54%by 2004–05—a very significant increase in leakage.These facts clearly show that TPDS is in urgent needof reform.TABLE 4.1.8PDS Implied Leakage—Offtake vs Consumption1993–94 1999–2000 2004–05(a) NSS PDS consumption (m. tons)Rice 7.20 9.30 9.98Wheat 3.44 2.99 3.55Total 10.64 12.29 13.53(b) PDS offtake (m. tons)Rice 8.84 11.35 16.62Wheat 5.86 5.76 13.02Total 14.70 17.11 29.65Ratio of (a) to (b)Rice 0.81 0.82 0.60Wheat 0.59 0.52 0.27Total 0.72 0.72 0.46Source: NSS.4.1.55 These facts are further underlined by Annexure4.1.4, which demonstrates the massive leakage ofthe fiscal subsidy to the non-poor on the one handand the ineffective targeting of the poor by thecardholder-based TPDS system.4.1.56 Annexure 4.1.5 drives home the point aboutthe poor targeting by TPDS benefits. It estimates thebenefits in rupees per household of PDS grain beneficiaries[calculated as PDS quantity consumed* (PDSPrice—Average Market Price)]. It shows that the benefitsto the household are dependent upon whetheryou have a card or not (and which card you have—APL, BPL, or Antyodaya), and not on whether youare poor or non-poor. In fact, it demonstrates thatthere is very little difference between the benefits (inRs/household) of poor and non-poor households