Gender issues
|
|  Yüklə 3.85 Mb.
|
Post Office Payment of WagesNagapattinam is an example of the positive impact of SHGs on women. When we enquired about the mode of wage payment we discovered it was through Post Office accounts in the name of individual workers. This caught our attention immediately, because some of us were skeptical about this for several reasons. We thought it might offer a greater scope for corruption since people may not know if only the genuine workers are receiving payments or some false entries are created in the muster rolls to siphon off money. The lack of literacy may not allow workers to verify timely and correct payment. Operating the account may prove to be very difficult for the workers, especially women. Distance may be another factor, since coverage may not be adequate. All these are of course valid concerns. But the only place where we encountered Postal Office transfers was Nagapattinam, and here it worked very well. We examined each aspect and randomly collated entries in muster rolls, pass books and job cards. We did not come across any discrepancy. Moreover, despite repeated and varied prodding, women workers were very happy with this arrangement. They said that cash was too liquid and and spent very quickly, whereas just the act of having to withdraw cash enabled them to save some money. There was some discomfort in areas where accounts were being opened for the first time, and many workers were suspicious about the Rs 50 they paid as bank opening balance. One good suggestion to address this problem is to permit zero balance accounts for this Scheme. One important explanation for the high comfort levels with Postal dealings was their experience with Co-operative banks and Post Offices through membership of SHGs. The other is that these are amongst the worst affected Tsunami areas, and compensation, etc. was paid in the same way. The third of course is a more effective bureaucracy. But despite the high comfort levels with Postal payment, women still prefer grain payment! The State Government has recently issued instructions asking district programme coordinators not to insist on bank payment and be guided by the workers preference. Exclusion/exploitation of Women Close to 70 per cent of the workers at NREGS worksites were women in the age group of 30-50 years, largely from landless, small and marginal farmer households, belonging to Dalit and Adivasi communities. The high percentage of poor Dalit and Adivasi women at EGS worksites is reportedly because men are unwilling to work at such low wages. At these abysmal wage, men would prefer to migrate or find alternative employment to increase family income while women would tend to stay back to look after the home and the family’s basic needs. In fact, the low wages have meant that even though persons from all sections registered for the programme, mostly women from low/no asset households availed of the work under the Scheme. Thus, the lower-than minimum wages have become a mechanism for targeting the Scheme at the poorest and most vulnerable. Ironically, this has made it a self-defeating exercise, as far as poverty alleviation is concerned since wage rates are more important than employment alone for reducing poverty. Another exclusion brought about by this method of work organization is of single women due to their inability to find a partner. In fact, single women have been turned back from the sites. If two women team up (sometimes, a mother and daughter) others at the worksite resist this since this tends to bring down averages. It is sometimes suggested that each pair be measured and paid separately so that the able bodied do not directly “subsidize” (sic) the elderly and women. These demands have found support at the conceptual level from the lower bureaucracy, but the task is administratively daunting and unfair to women and older people. Implements and Tools for Work Not all households own the implements required for loosening, digging and carrying the soil. These implements are expensive and not all households can afford to buy them. In Tamil Nadu, several Dalit landless and marginal farmer households told us that this was a big problem for them. The soil was clayey and had caked and hardened considerably. The Panchayat had 7-8 sets of implements for each of the three tasks of breaking, digging and carrying the soil. Workers who did not have the implements found, to their dismay, that prices had increased by 50 to 75 per cent in the local market since the launch of the Programme. At least 4 workers on the site reported that they became indebted in the process. Workers also reported high wear and tear of the implements and thus an impending replacement cost. There was a good suggestion by a Panchayat member that the implements be bought by the PO from the Programme funds and included under the material component. These could be kept with the GPs. We brought this up during our discussions with the State Government, who, however, rejected it out of hand. This notwithstanding, we must not loose sight of this issue. Child labour In several worksites in Maharashtra, in gross violation of the law, young children (7-13 years of age) worked with their parents on the worksite. They were typically involved in carrying and throwing the dug soil in order to increase the family’s meager earnings. Apart from its sheer illegality, it also meant that this work was unpaid and invisible. Some were school going, and we asked them their class in school. Most were in the 5th to 7th Standards. We found one young girl (between 13 - 14 years of age) working in her ill mother’s place in Orissa. The entire workforce at the worksite was very protective about her and admonished us for our disapproval of child labour. “Who will feed them? The mother is a widow with no land and very ill. Don’t make an issue of this”, they said. Selection of Works The NREGS is also meant to create durable assets through labour-intensive works and to stop distress migration in the lean seasons. There are four concerns with regard to the works under the NREGS. The first is the vital issue of the permissible list of works under the Scheme, which have been prioritized and listed in Schedule I of the Act. “1. The focus of the Scheme shall be on the following works in their order of priority:--
(vii).flood control and protection works including drainage in water logged areas; (viii).rural connectivity to provide all-weather access; and (ix).any other work which may be notified by the Central Government in consultation with the State Government..” (Schedule I) The second is the identification and prioritization of specific works by the gram sabha. The third is to devise mechanisms that ensure that women, Dalits and other non-dominant sections find voice in the gram sabha and through assemblies of registered workers and women workers so that their needs are reflected in the works selected. The fourth is whether the NREGS can respond to the demand for individual beneficiary works and income generation activities under the NREGS like horticulture, sericulture, stitching, etc. With this in mind, we investigated both the types of works selected and the method followed. Both male and female workers under the NREGS reported that in many places the gram sabha was held for the selection of works, but very few women attended it and none participated in the discussion. Despite their numerical predominance as workers under the Scheme, women have had very little voice in the selection of works on which they labour. The workforce participation rate and illiteracy amongst women are high. We found that where women were organized into collectives, be it as part of a mass organization or SHG, it added to their self confidence in articulating their priorities. They identified the severe scarcity of water storage in the area as the most important issue. Where they exist, hand pumps suffer from poor maintenance and falling water tables. Wells are in plenty, but most dry up in the summer and the water level is falling. This burdens women who have to spend more time under worse conditions to undertake household responsibilities. Women told us that their main concerns are food security, health, sanitation and water. The severe water crisis prompted them to prioritise water harvesting structures. Also, since most of them owned some livestock, they wanted to know if pastures for grazing could be developed under this Scheme since lack of fodder and water poses a huge challenge to rearing animals like cows, goat, hen and cock. Women demanded the inclusion of infrastructure for social and human development like an anganwadi, a ration shop and a primary healthcare center in the list of selected works, and accorded these a very high priority. However, they were told that it would be difficult to obtain sanction for health centres, anganwadis, ration shops or such other works. The two other activities that women are keen to undertake in NREGS are home based and small scale industries like sericulture, food processing, pisciculture, and rearing livestock. However, they remained silent or absent in gram sabha meetings, which is one reason why road construction came second after water conservation projects. The second reason is that such suggestions are dismissed out of hand since they are not permissible under the NREGS.
This focus on durable physical asset creation not only denied women full wages but also made it difficult for women to suggest works for health, education, etc. This also rules out key development activities like the construction of social infrastructure, maintenance of assets and services like sanitation, etc. This restrictive specification leaves little room to address local requirements and robs the gram sabhas and panchayats of the initiative to plan works. Thus, the concern of minimising waste and leakage through ‘unproductive’ works ends up undermining decentralized local planning and gender concerns. It also makes it very difficult to generate work quickly. We found that gram sabhas were clearly told by panchayat officials, who in turn were told by the bureaucracy, to restrict their selection to durable assets through earth works. When we enquired why, we were told by officials that they were not aware of mechanisms that allow for location-specific flexibility in the types of works that may be taken up. Nobody wanted to take the risk of stepping out of line. The table below clearly brings out the domination by ponds and roads in the works selected.
The translation of the list of works to a shelf of projects needs the vital steps of obtaining technical sanction and estimation after a survey. This is where the government machinery faces its biggest crisis: inadequate technical staff. It is essentially for this reason that there is a tendency to stick to the list of works included in the District Perspective Plan prepared under the National Food for Work Programme. Converting needs to works and finally an implement-able shelf of projects requires technical support and extensive capacity building at the village and Panchayat level. The state governments must ensure that there is an efficient and responsive organization of sufficient personnel for speedy design, estimation and sanction of works selected by the villagers. Water harvesting and conservation works received high priority everywhere, and therefore a team of agricultural engineers and watershed planners are a must for designing earthen structures through earth and soil engineering. However, the lack of political commitment to decentralized local area development is often a far greater impediment than skills and engineering support. There is at the moment a tendency to stick to the projects already sanctioned by the administration, which is all right as a transitional strategy till a system of more participatory and creative local area development is engendered. There is therefore a predominance of works like tank deepening and repairs, and road construction. With village planning as the norm, the projects suggested in the gram sabha were mostly for new or deepening of water conservation structures, link roads, schools, health centers and other buildings, ponds, stop-dams, hand pumps and taps. Upper caste land-owning men often mentioned construction of lengthy pucca roads between villages or to Block headquarters and minor/medium irrigation structures that benefit three-four villages. The village people usually welcomed these, but there were disputes over prioritisation. While the better off sections were keener on activities with a high potential for profit like rabi irrigation, fish tanks, etc., the poor were more focused on biomass optimization for fuel and fodder, basic drinking water needs, water for daily chores and livestock closer to their padas/hamlets, soil moisture conservation, etc. Village Bodhimoha in Orissa has an interesting example of conflicts over selection of works. The SC and ST poor in the village were keen to get the tank near their hamlet repaired first as it served their daily water needs. The upper caste members were more interested in constructing a tank at some distance from residences, which they wanted to use for commercial fish rearing. Despite the Palli Sabha listing the tank in the SC hamlet as number one in priority, the BDO issued a work order for the distant tank. This led to fisticuffs, and the BDO took the technical position that both works were listed in the FFWP Perspective Plan, but could not show it to us. Ultimately, the tank was constructed, and taken by the upper caste President for fish rearing while the poor are not allowed to take fish. In Orissa and West Bengal, the village communities as well as the workers are interested broadly in five types of works: water storage and harvesting; roads and connectivity; buildings for social infrastructure; nurseries for plantation and fruit trees; and leveling and bunding of farms. In the hilly terrain, which is the catchments of large rivers, the concentration of rainfall in high intensity results in rapid run off of rainwater. Uplands and midlands remain largely fallow. This has meant low productivity and inadequate food security. For this reason, farm bunds are essential to conserve water. In the drought prone areas, workers and villagers want measures that mitigate the adverse impact of drought like malnutrition, death of livestock, crop failure and distress out-migration for work, reduce soil erosion and help overcome the degeneration of forests in the area. Forest and land dependence is very high in the tribal areas in our selected districts, which was reflected in a demand for afforestation and nursery raising activities. The lack of irrigation facilities has resulted in high seasonal out-migration from the villages of Orissa each year. At the moment, the list of works focuses too much on roads and big ponds. In Orissa and Tamil Nadu, we were told that the more powerful people in the village were trying to usurp the powers of the gram sabha and deciding the list of works through fake gram sabha meetings. We also came across one instance of a fake worksite, where workers were asked to construct an existing road! However, the NREGS has already stimulated the local community to think of works that contribute to local area development and respond to their real felt needs. The Collector of Bankura, for example, pointed out that till now, the focus has been on ponds, tanks, check dams and dugwells. Since the district has 21 per cent forest area, regeneration of sal forest is an important activity. However, sal nurseries are relatively more expensive. DFO north has set up a sal nursery. The DM is keen to promote horticulture in the uplands and midlands and there is a demand for activities like fish culture. Even though the States are given at least a consultative role in adding works, this has not yet been operationalized under the Scheme in any of the 4 states. In order to ensure dovetailing and convergence of the various programmes and schemes, the Guidelines should allow all such works as have been approved/accepted by the Planning Commission under any of the planned Schemes of the Centre or states. If the states wish to include any additional works, they may consult the Central Government. This will be simple and speedy. The Guidelines already permit dovetailing the EGA with other government programme where the labour component is provided by the EGA. In West Bengal, this is being done. It is also important to follow the selection and prioritization in the Gram Sabhas convened for the NREGS rather than sticking to the FFWP Perspective Plan alone. There will be a gestation period, but this must not become an excuse for complacency or neglect of the current listing. It is also very important to publicize the land improvement provisions for SCs, STs, etc. and to include Female Headed farms in this list. Role of Panchayats The political equations are already beginning to change at the Block and local level because the NREGS is disturbing the local power equations. The resentment because of the non-payment of minimum wages has led to a great deal of acrimony between the project implementation authorities (the government and panchayat functionaries) on the one hand and the workers on the other. The local bureaucracy has told the workers that the norms and work-wage process are determined by the Central Government, which of course is not correct. In both Tamil Nadu and Orissa Sarphanches told us (in private) that there were three main reasons why the GPs were not really interested in this Programme. The first is the absence of staff at the Panchayat level, which makes design and technical estimation very difficult. The second and related point is that the banning of contractors in this Scheme means that nobody has the incentive to organize the works and inform workers, arrange for the material component, get the technical survey done, pursue the PO to issue work orders, etc. “Even getting the work order and advance from the Block Office involves several trips, not to mention chasing the JE”. Finally, we were told, very pragmatically, “There is no scope for any extra earning (sic) in this Scheme. Too many rules and too much publicity on TV.” The message has gone down not to mess around with this Scheme. In other words, they argued that the banning of contractors and avenues for leakages has resulted in a lukewarm response from the gram panchayat Presidents. In Orissa, the FFWP contractors continue to work in the NREGS, as a ‘village labour leader’ (sic), a highly coveted post and candidates are reported to spend up to Rs 20,000 on elections to this post. The institution was introduced in 1995 to address a problem common to all rural development programmes. An amount of Rs 200 crores was found outstanding as advances against work orders issued in the name of JEs and AEs. It was decided that the work order be issued in the name of one of the villagers selected by the Palli Sabha as Village Labour Leader. Sometimes, the contractors put up candidates from the village as their proxies, who fulfill the eligibility of local residence. The VLL receives wages for skilled labour at the rate of Rs 75 per day from the Project for its duration. However, we were shocked to find that in at least two worksites, the wage of the VLL was coming out of the common pool based on measurement of work, thereby implying that this masked contractor was paid out of the wages of the manual workers. From what we saw, the institution of VLLs is a guise for contractors. Most of them did not even live in the villages, but in the Block headquarters. They were usually contractors under the FFWP and SGRY. The State Government officials told us at the Seminar that an order has been issued to prevent the VLLs from handling any cash and wage transaction. The Gram Panchayats will now implement the works directly, but may take the VLLs assistance in supervision. It is not very clear if this will reduce the difficulties posed by the present arrangement. A far better solution is to hire village level workers or Gram Sevaks for each village. In Tamil Nadu, all the Presidents we met were big landlords from the upper caste and the eligible workers of the NREGS were their farm labour. This meant that the GP would try to only deliver “largesse” not rights. In fact, in Keezhakuppam Velur GP of Villupuram, the President had made workers perform farm labour on his private field under the NREGS! For this, he paid them for some token road work. After a futile 2 hour village meeting during which he tried to locate ‘muster rolls’ and kept trying to unsuccessfully break a lock of the Panchayat office to access them, we gave up. The workers were scared to say anything in front of him. But those at a slight distance from the inner circle told our survey team that they received Rs. 50 to Rs. 60 under NREGS to work on the President’s private land. One young class VIII student, too scared to speak in the village, followed us on his cycle and gave a letter, which also confirmed this. However, a few Sarpanches at the Seminars we held in Nagapattinam who appeared very enthusiastic had a different complaint: the government had apparently set an initial limit of Rs 1 lakh per GP, which was a problem because it meant that some other works that the GP was interested in could not be taken up. In West Bengal, the situation was very different. The Panchayats already had a ready shelf of works with technical sanction. There are functional beneficiary committees for each of the works. There, the problem was different: the Collector and GPs seemed very proactive and enthusiastic: the Block officials were not. In fact, in both the villages, the GP Presidents told us that the BDOs had stopped the works because they had no money, something the DPC denied. The President also reported that despite technical approval and repeated requests, he was yet to receive work orders for two works. In some places, the Panchayats were very enthusiastic. There is an interesting example of how Panchayats beat the heat in West Bengal. When the works re-started after the elections it was extremely hot during May. In Junebedia Panchayat, workers and the beneficiary committee jointly decided to split the work day into two parts from 5 to 9 in the morning and from 5 to 9 or 6 to 10 at night. At night, halogen bulbs were used to light up the worksite, giving it a festive air. The high degree of experience and powers with PRIs and success in de-centralization in West Bengal should facilitate the success of the NREGS. The gram sabhas too are far more active and democratized, which is another positive factor. It would be a fair assessment to say that almost everywhere; the response of the Block officials was not in tune with the enthusiasm of the workers. Apart from West Bengal, panchayats too lacked enthusiasm. This in fact sums up by and large the condition in most parts we visited: the people were full of expectations and energy; the administration was apprehensive and wary; the politicians recognized its enormous potential for mobilization as well as disenchantment and were selectively vigilant. The causes for the inadequacies on part of the GPs can be analytically divided into the following categories:
Therefore, there is a need to mobilize the Gram Sabha through the assembly of registered workers and SHGs, and devolve powers to Panchayats. Capacity building too is very important. Monitoring and vigilance committees must be formed everywhere. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||