Ana səhifə

Gender issues


Yüklə 3.85 Mb.
səhifə14/19
tarix26.06.2016
ölçüsü3.85 Mb.
1   ...   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19


Registration
Registration is not seen as a continuous process, as provided in the Act. Somehow, there is a notion of a ‘last date’ which was even announced formally in TN. For this reason, despite provisions to the contrary, in TN and Orissa, migrants were more often than not excluded. This is because registration was “open” and photographs were taken before the sowing season, a time of year when labour migrates out in search of jobs. Often, only the men go. Several women were turned back because they were not the “heads of the household”, which is itself a violation of the law. If entire families had migrated, they were told on their return that they have to now wait till the registration “opens” again.
In Orissa, money was charged for forms, and job card application forms were sold to the villagers for Rs 2 to10 each. In Tamil Nadu and Orissa, in some villages a payment had to be made for photographs @ Rs 20 – Rs 30. This was either a bribe to the computer operator in one TN village or a charge to a private photographer since the Panchayat had no money for photographs in another. The P.O. needs to provide money to Panchayats for this purpose. In West Bengal, village camps were held for registration in the two districts we visited. Photographs were not insisted upon (the voter ID or ration card numbers were used instead).


Eligibility and Verification

The household and its eligible adult members are usually verified on the basis of Voter ID, ration card. This is despite the fact that according to the Act and NOG, no documentary proofs ration card, etc the only requirement is verification by the particular gram panchayat and gram sabha that the applicants are local residents, together form a household and are adults (See NOG, p. 14-15).


In Orissa, Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra, local officials have evolved all kinds of completely illegal and unsound eligibility conditions imposed by the bureaucracy, some examples of which are given below:

  1. An age of 18 yrs to 60 yrs (older persons excluded)

  2. Insistence on presence of head of household or male member of household

  3. Payment of annual house tax of Rs 50 in Chichora (Nandurbar),

  4. Payment of Rs 20 for photographs

  5. Landless or farmers with less than 2 acres in Nanded

  6. Private homestead land or house and therefore exclusion of destitutes and abandoned women in natal homes

  7. BPL card, Voter ID, ration card

  8. Only 2 persons per household

Often, the local administration imposes a completely unwarranted limit on the number of eligible workers registered from each household – somewhere one, somewhere two. This is especially the case in the caste-ridden TN villages.


There is a great deal of pressure to exclude older persons. This is for two reasons, both easy to tackle. The first is the prevalence of piece rate work and absence of a different productivity norm for the older persons, which results in workers themselves raising this demand. The second is the restriction on number of eligible workers per household to an arbitrary one or two and to exclude the sixty plus. In any case, the National Old Age Pension Scheme must be universalized, the amount of pension must be raised to Rs 500 per month and the eligibility simply be the attainment of 60 years of age.

In none of the fours states were there any special instructions or government orders to recognize female-headed households as independent units irrespective of joint residence or kitchen. Though this is not of great importance in Maharashtra which has unlimited and individual entitlements, everywhere else it is of immense significance.


We had expected that the implementation of the NREGS in Maharashtra will be somewhat better than in states where it is being tried out for the first time. But the experience in two districts in the state, viz. Nanded and Nandurbar pointed to the contrary. Some people told us that they had been told that the Scheme was not for those with more than 2 acres of land, but they had nevertheless filled the forms. We also met a woman who said that she had returned to her natal home after her marriage broke down, but was told that she was not eligible because she no longer belonged to the village. Some said that they had been asked to get their photographs, but were not aware that the government is to bear the cost of the photos. However, while identity cards had been issued in Hardap to some extent, none were given in Gokul. From data supplied by the Collector’s office, it appears that hardly 18% of the applicants in Nanded have been issued identity cards; the proportion is 23.4% in Kinwat, 12.1% in Mahur and 15.5% in Bhokar tehsils. When we asked the SDO in charge of Kinwat the reason for the delay, we were informed that it was because the records were being computerized. In fact the Tehsildar of Mahur and his colleagues had not seen a job card yet, and our team had the privilege of handing over a photocopy of the one we had obtained from the Nanded Collectorate to him!
There are therefore two groups of people who are disproportionately excluded, the elderly since they are not considered capable of manual labour and female-headed households who ought to be recognized as independent households but are subsumed in the cards of their natal families or excluded altogether. We came across several women who had lived in the village for generations and the entire village was willing to corroborate this. Some had no ration cards, some had been born in the village, left after marriage and have now returned as separated/divorced women to their natal homes.



Table 39: Eligible households/members of household not registered and reasons thereof

Tamil Nadu

Reason

 

Restrictions on Eligibility

Proof of local residence

Migration

Discontinuous Registration: Did not know about the Scheme and registration is 'closed' now

Inability to 'pay' for photograph, etc.

Non-recognition as household due to defintion of household on the basis of 'common kitchen'

Age

Number of Registered Workers per Household

Lack of documentary proofs like ration card, BPL card, voter ID card, inclusion in census list, etc.

Refusal to recognize women who are divorced/widowed/separated and have returned to natal homes as local residents

Absence of male 'head of household' at time of registration due to migration

Entire family had migrated at time of registration but have now returned

Mother-in-law

56

68

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Father-in-law

67

66

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Self (Wife)

 

 

 

 

21

 

 

 

 

All family members

 

 

13

 

 

15

19

17

 

Widowed/Separated daughter in natal home

 

3

7

9

 

 

 

 

15

Widowed daughter-in-law /Second wife of son

 

3

6

 

 

 

 

 

11

Female-headed households

 

 

4

2

 

 

5

8

9

Adult unmarried children

 

108

 

 

 

 

 

 

94

Adult married children

 

220

 

 

 

 

 

 

82

Orissa

Mother-in-law

52

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Father-in-law

74

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Self (Wife)

 

 

 

 

9

 

 

 

 

All family members

 

 

 

 

 

13

19

15

 

Widowed/Separated daughter in natal home

 

 

5

5

 

 

 

 

5

Widowed daughter-in-law

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4

Female-headed households

 

 

2

 

 

 

3

6

7

Adult unmarried children

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

102

Adult married children

 

 

44

 

 

 

 

 

92

Note: The question had multiple answers



Eligible households/members of household not registered and reasons thereof (contd.)

Maharashtra

Reason

 

Restrictions on Eligibility

Proof of local residence

Migration

Discontinuous Registration: Did not know about the Scheme and registration is 'closed' now

Inability to 'pay' for photograph, etc.

Non-recognition as household due to defintion of household on the basis of 'common kitchen'

Age

Number of Registered Workers per Household

Lack of documentary proofs like ration card, BPL card, voter ID card, inclusion in census list, etc.

Refusal to recognize women who are divorced/widowed/separated and have returned to natal homes as local residents

Absence of male 'head of household' at time of registration due to migration

Entire family had migrated at time of registration but have now returned

Mother-in-law

75

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Father-in-law

69

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Husband

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Self (Wife)

 

 

 

 

28

 

 

 

 

All family members

 

 

 

 

 

32

27

 

 

Widowed/Separated daughter in natal home

 

 

10

13

 

 

 

 

13

Widowed daughter-in-law /Second wife of son

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

7

Female-headed households

 

 

10

 

 

 

10

 

15

Adult unmarried children

 

 

98

 

 

 

 

 

85

Adult married children

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

73

West Bengal

All family members

 

 

 

 

 

4

 

 

 

Widowed/Separated daughter in natal home

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

13

Widowed daughter-in-law

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5

Female-headed households

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

7

Adult unmarried children

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

71

Adult married children

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

53

Note: The question had multiple answers

Atharipada is one of the 12 tribal clusters of Telkhedi in Nandurbar, which is itself one of the three villages that form part of Rajbardi GP. Two young men had done a house to house survey to register the households for the NREGS. They were trained by the Extension Officer of the Panchayat Samiti for the purpose, and promised a wage of Rs 60 per day for a total of 18 days, but were yet to receive the payment. They informed us that they were told not to register those workers who are above the age of 60. This was confirmed when we met some elderly men who said they had not received an identity card, but wished to have one. At the worksite at Rampur-Virpur, a similar demand was raised by elderly workers. No special instructions had been given regarding physically challenged persons. At Athharipada, single widowed women were included in the family of other married males (sons, father-in-law or husband’s brother, etc). Only in the absence of such males was the card issued in the name of the woman. In Rampur, forms of individual women had been accepted, but not in Chichora where they insisted that “bring along a male member of the family for registration.” Due to lack of clarity about the concept of nuclear family, a few cards that we saw had included all members of the joint family (eg. father and married son with their respective families) instead of issuing them with separate cards. The BDO at Shahada told us that separate cards were issued only if they were insisted upon. He was unable to answer our question on whether special instructions were issued about registering female headed households. At Chichora, workers who had migrated during the period when the registration was done had not been included in the list of registered workers.
At Atharipada, every one was asked to gather at the local school to have their group photo taken. Since they were not informed otherwise, all of them paid Rs 20 per photo to the photographer from Raj Photo Studio, Dhadgaon. Villagers told us that they were categorically told that if they had no money, they would not be photographed. As one person told us, “People sold grain to pay the photographer”. Villagers told us that initially the Gram Sevak told them that unless they paid their annual house taxes, they would not be issued their identity and job cards. However a visit by the Collector to the neighbouring village of Jugni prompted a swift distribution of the cards in a single day to all whose names had been registered. Incidentally this was the first Collector to visit the area after Independence! But the Gram Sevak had not yet made it! But in Rampur and Chichora, no photos had been taken. In Chichora, however, families paid Rs 50 towards house tax before getting the identity card.
As per the records obtained from the Collectorate, of the total of 53679 households in Shahada, 35333 households have registered for work with the Gram panchayats, but only 8500 (24%) identity and job cards have been issued. For Nandurbar district, the number of identity cards issued is 51000 against a total household strength of 2,09, 682 (24%). No separate data is available for Dhadgaon.
In the verification process, the only aspects that have to be ascertained are family, local residence and age. Neither the Act nor the Guidelines call for any documentary proof. However, the administration has often introduced all kinds of arbitrary requirement – ration cards, voter IDs, Census lists, etc. In fact, the ID number system used in the 2002 BPLsurvey, which has been adopted for the NREGS by Orissa leaves even the BDOs utterly confused. The result is that they are incapable of and therefore unwilling to add any new names to the 2002 household listing. This has meant that those households who do not have ration cards (APL or BPL) and a unique ID number have not got registered, which is leading to huge delays. This also implies clinging on to the definition of household according to common kitchen.
Job cards

There is a long waiting period between registration and the receipt of job cards (2 months) in Tamil Nadu’s Villipuram district and Maharashtra. Female-headed households are denied job cards in many places. Job card distribution is slow, and Sarpanches do not feel bound to distribute cards. In Tamil Nadu’s Villupuram district, we visited the Sarpanch of GP Kalamarudur against whom the villagers had complained, saying that he has not signed the job cards for a very long time. He incidentally had the biggest house on the main street in the Block headquarter. We met him as he played carrom in the Panchayat office, where he very coolly informed us that he was not in any way bound to distribute the cards since no instructions to do so have been issued. On the contrary, he claimed that the BDO had asked him not to distribute the cards. When we brought this to the notice of the DM, he agreed that the administration was waiting for the notification of the revised Schedule of Rates. After our intervention and the DM’s instructions the cards were distributed. The performance of Villupuram continuous to be sluggish compared to Nagapattinam, and the slack can be gauged from the high gap between registration and job card distribution.





Table 40: Percentage Households who have received job cards and applied for work

 

District

Village

Received Job Card

Applied for Work

 

 

 

Yes

No

Yes

No

Orissa

Mayurbhanj

Kanthi

59

41

0

100

Bodhimoha

54

46

0

100

Bahubandha

51

49

0

100

Sundergarh

Jharbeda

61

39

0

100

Jagada

55

45

0

100

West Bengal

Midnapur

Karnagarh

89

11

16

84

Jaambani

95

5

12

88

Choukidghata

91

9

14

86

Tasar Ara(N)

87

13

13

87

Bankura

Benia Baid

85

15

10

90

Kankradara

79

21

17

83

Tantkanali

92

8

10

90

Jamda

85

15

21

79

Salbani

94

6

22

78

Maharashtra

Nanded

Sayphal

19

81

15

85

Hardap

57

43

21

79

Nandurbar

Chinchora (Dara)

27

73

8

92

Telkhedi

23

77

7

93

Tamil Nadu

Villupuram

Kalamaruthur

19

81

0

100

Kumaramangalam

21

64

0

100

Nagapattinam

Illupur

69

19

10

90

Keelaiyur

63

21

6

94

Note: Here, we have adopted the official common kitchen definition. The Maharashtra Data is for Identity Cards.

In Orissa and Maharashtra too there were several complaints of delays, and often workers reported that they were photographed, but have not receive cards. In Maharashtra, there is a dual process underway: one, to issue identity cards, and the second to issue job cards. This is also laid down in the MREGS. While the issuing of individual cards is a vital step in a Scheme that provides universal open-ended individual entitlements, it is not at all clear why this is becoming an impediment to the issuing of job cards which are required under the NREGS. Till the time of our survey, nobody had received job cards, only identity cards had been issued.


In West Bengal, distribution of job cards was a relatively smooth process, though there were some complaints that the Panchayat Presidents were sometimes partisan and did not give job cards to households affiliated to rival parties. However, these problems were solved through the intervention of BDOs and DPCs.

Apart from the receipt of job cards, another major issue is possession of the job cards. We found that these were often not with the registered workers, and were taken away on one pretext or the other. In Tamil Nadu’s Villupuram district, for instance, the Presidents told the workers that they might ‘misplace’ the cards so he would safeguard them. The women we spoke to were extremely scornful of this, and said that if they can keep their ration cards safely, why not the job cards? But the most extreme and disturbing example of this that we encountered was in Rasagobindapur block, in villages Angargadia, Pattagardia, Katuni, Takirdahi of GP Rasagobindapura and in Udala block’s Bahubandha village, all in Mayurbhanj district of Orissa. The Village Labour Leader (a misnomer for what is essentially a contractor, and is referred to as such by the village people) had taken away everybody’s job cards. This shocking fact was revealed in the presence of the Gram Sevak, and we immediately called up the DM. The DM responded swiftly and effectively: FIRs were lodged against the VLL and job cards returned. However, at the Seminar held at the state capital, people from different parts of the state reported the same phenomenon of VLLs taking forcible possession of the cards. Participants in the Orissa state Seminar from Malkaigiri, Korapat, Gajapati and Ganjam reported that no job cards were distributed, nor was any work started under the programme.


An analysis of available official data in the relevant period tells a similar story. The data for Maharashtra is very confusing: in several districts, there are more households who have received job cards than have applied for registration! The job card distribution is extremely slow and only 30 per cent of the rural households had received job cards by July.


Table 41: Status of implementation of NREGA during June 2006-07 in Maharashtra

S.No

District

% of rural households with job cards

% of rural households who have applied for registration

% of households who have applied for work and hold Job cards

1

Ahmednagar

58.93

70.04

1.94

2

Aurangabad

62.28

100.00

3.13

3

Bhandara

33.28

36.62

10.52

4

Chandrapur

4.35

6.40

100.00

5

Dhule

12.45

19.97

2.83

6

Gadchiroli

36.28

46.08

42.79

7

Gondya

52.73

23.48

182.71

8

Hingoli

2.09

1.24

31.60

9

Nanded

3.03

4.27

0.00

10

Nandurbar

53.67

30.23

7.22

11

Yawatmal

7.59

4.35

43.68

12

Amravati

14.58

9.98

18.65

 

Total

29.48

26.44

28.60

The data for Orissa shows higher distribution by August, and in some districts at least the definition of household has moved beyond the Census notion of a common kitchen, reflected in the figures exceeding 100 per cent.




Table 42: Status of implementation of NREGA during August 2006-07 in Orissa

S.No

District

% of rural households with job cards

% of rural households who have applied for registration

1

Bolangir

47.44

86.40

2

Boudh

57.25

82.70

3

Deogarh

71.04

94.90

4

Dhenikanal

51.63

84.63

5

Gajapati

85.46

89.71

6

Ganjam

45.15

77.03

7

Jharsuguda

49.93

70.23

8

Kalahandi

54.26

77.29

9

Keonjhar

35.38

93.44

10

Koraput

54.77

69.49

11

Malkangiri

160.86

81.27

12

Mayurbhanj

17.67

80.96

13

Nabarangpur

112.98

71.20

14

Nuapada

115.59

89.29

15

Phulbani/ Kandhamal

51.93

76.00

16

Rayagada

68.75

85.84

17

Sambalpur

72.37

86.82

18

Sonepur/ Subarnpur

48.23

84.35

19

Sundergarh

58.16

68.19

 

Total

57.16

79.38

Despite the late start, Tamil Nadu is catching up. The discrepancy between registration and job card distribution is high, and the performance across districts is highly uneven.




Table 43: Status of implementation of NREGA during July 2006-07 in Tamil Nadu

S. No.

District

% of rural households with job cards

% of rural households who have applied for registration

% of households who have applied for work and hold Job cards

1

Tiruvannamalai

54.51

97.47

4.23

2

South Arcot/Cuddalore

70.00

100.00

7.97

3

Villupuram

36.59

100.00

8.15

4

Nagapattinam

79.59

97.75

4.08

5

Dindigul

28.24

100.00

25.59

6

Sivagangai

30.41

100.00

7.98

 

Total

49.55

98.97

7.86

In West Bengal too job card distribution has not kept pace with registration, and the more backward southern districts are lagging far behind.




Table 44: Status of implementation of NREGA during August 2006-07 in West Bengal

S. No.

District

% of rural households with job cards

% of rural households who have applied for registration

% of households who have applied for work and hold Job cards

1

Purulia

43.25

51.87

33.64

2

Malda

41.44

57.02

61.45

3

West Midnapur

28.85

79.39

13.11

4

Bankura

58.92

86.87

22.44

5

West/ North Dinajpur

100.00

98.93

79.62

6

Murshidabad

53.55

66.35

14.85

7

Birhbhum

86.56

95.11

52.91

8

Jalpaiguri

59.55

67.21

7.45

9

South Dinajpur

59.94

79.23

22.64

10

24 South Parganas

25.50

81.73

11.21

 

Total

48.34

75.88

32.02


Individual cards

The focus on household cards and the non-issuance of individual cards has led to the exclusion of female-headed and nuclear households that remain invisible in common kitchens and natal homes. In this context, the decision of Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu to issue individual cards is a welcome step, which must be emulated. By far the more successful, Tamil Nadu’s Nagapattinam district’s practice of issuing individual cards to each eligible household member is a pioneering step. This is truly empowering for the workers, giving them a sense of citizenship, of rights. It gives women independence and strengthens their status, adding to their self-confidence in accessing work and livelihood as well as their intra-household position.


Already, we encountered two examples in relation to the issue of household cards. Mostly women go to work in Tamil Nadu as the men are unwilling to work on the low wages, and have migrated or taken up farm labour or are simply unemployed. Two women told us that their husbands have taken to a very unfortunate practice of using the job card as blackmail to resolves discords with wives over alcohol, etc. The second problem faced by another woman was that her husband uses it to force her to part with her wages, such as they are. In fact, a woman in Orissa told us that things are quiet now because the wages are low, but if they increase to the minimum wage, the men won’t even let the women go for the NREGS work since they would want to avail of it themselves.
Application for Work

Discussions with villagers everywhere, except a few pockets, revealed that none of them had applied for work despite possessing job cards. The entire approach is extremely complicated and bureaucratic. People have no idea that they had to apply for work, leave alone how to do so. This is despite the fact that all the states have printed prescribed forms for this. The printed forms seem more for the benefit of Monitors than the people! Workers are under the impression that after registration the onus is on the Panchayat and local administration to provide them 100 days of work and that the possession of the job card would automatically ensure this. In fact, most registered workers are complacent in the belief that the administration will soon ‘open’ worksites and call them. They have no idea that the process of accessing employment in public works has been put on its head (or the right way up!) and now the onus is on the workers to apply for work. They are innocent of this transition from a supply-driven FFWP to a demand-driven NREGS. They are a bit perplexed though that they have not yet received the unemployment allowance in the absence of work, but have assumed that they will get it later. Thus, this cornerstone of the guarantee, its greatest strength, can ironically render the entire Scheme infructuous. “Nobody applied” could become the excuse to scuttle the Scheme.


The major highlight of the NREGA is its demand driven approach. Although the earlier Maharashtra EGS did incorporate a system whereby a demand for work had to be raised, there were inordinate delays in providing the work due to a longwinded bureaucratic process of sanction. As a result, the Scheme deteriorated into a top-down approach where various line departments undertake certain works, and workers are called to the worksites. The same approach prevailed in the later National Food for Work Programme and the Sampoorna Gramin Rozgar Yojana. As a result, only those who are present in the village, have not migrated elsewhere and come to know about the work are able to access it. Moreover, if the availability of work is less than the demand, many workers have to return empty-handed. Our search for a site located at Mahadapur village in Mahur tehsil (which incidentally was closed when we reached there) resulted in an unscheduled meeting with at least 50 villagers at another village Ivleshwar, all of whom complained bitterly that there had not been a single government worksite in their vicinity for the last 4 years, despite the fact that there was a dire need for work in the village. On other sites such as Rui, many said that they had not got any work on government sites last year. The same situation prevailed at Gokul Gondegaon and Hardap. It is clear that the Maharashtra EGS did not meet this demand for work in the previous years.
At the Dahegaon site, it was the Forest Guard who had informed workers that work was to begin near their village; at Lanji, it was the Agricultural Assistant, in Shekapur and Rui, it was certain ‘middlemen’ who informed the villagers that labour was needed. It was the same at Loni in Kinwat taluka.

The All India Agricultural Workers Union has submitted applications for work in March (1330 applicants), in April (1267 applicants) and May (655 applicants) from several villages in the tehsil, and even received an acknowledgment in Nanded. Yet all those who had applied for work remain unemployed to date. We also had a meeting with the Tehsildar, Bhokar and the SDO in charge of the tehsil on our way to Nanded. When we pointed this out to the SDO, and informed him that these workers would now be applying for unemployment benefit, he took recourse to the fact that the applications had been submitted to the Tehsildar and not the GP. We pointed out that the option to submit applications to the Tehsildar has been clearly mentioned in the NOG of the NREGA. But there was no satisfactory explanation as to why work had not been awarded.


The crucial aspect of the NREGA is the provision for workers to demand work as per their requirement, and the mandate to the government to make it available within the prescribed limit of 15 days. However, in our survey, we did not find a single site where the demand driven aspect of the Act was put into practice. The official explanation for this is that the workers are illiterate and cannot apply on their own, but we found that workers had no idea that they were required to apply.
An important suggestion made by an activist in Tamil Nadu was that the GP should launch a campaign for spreading information about applications, and for the first two years at least, there should be a door-to-door survey every trimester to inform people about this crucial aspect of the Programme and also generate applications. Officials must also have to explain why they were unable to provide the 100 days of work, especially in the most sluggish blocks and districts.

1   ...   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19


Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur ©atelim.com 2016
rəhbərliyinə müraciət