Politics of poverty: you’re not ‘poor’ if you spend Rs 32/day

Anyone who spends as little as Rs 32 a day in India’s cities – and Rs 26 in rural areas – counts as living above the poverty line and won’t qualify for government welfare schemes that are targeted the poor.

That’s the Planning Commission’s submission to the Supreme Court in a case that reignites the politics over poverty – or, more specifically, where the poverty line should be drawn. In an affidavit filed before the court, the panel said that anyone spending more than Rs 965 per month in urban India and Rs 781 in rural India would be deemed not to be poor.
The affidavit was filed in connection with a public interest litigation that is being pursued by the civil rights group, the People’s Union for Civil Liberties, which is pitching for the government to raise the poverty threshold so that larger numbers of the poor can qualify for food subsidies.

The government’s new definition of poverty redraws the line from the Rs 20 a day expenditure in urban areas (and Rs 15 in rural areas) it had drawn up earlier, which had drawn criticism from the Supreme Court and developmental activists.

In March, a Supreme Court bench had observed: “We fail to understand the rationale and justification for the cap fixed by the Planning Commission.”

The Planning Commission’s latest affidavit noted that the current level of spending by those above the poverty line would be sufficient to meet their basic needs. “The recommended poverty lines ensure the adequacy of actual private expenditure per capita near the poverty lines on food, education and health and the actual calories consumed are close to the revised calorie intake norm for urban areas and higher than the norm in rural areas.”

It, however, noted that the government was awaiting fresh data from the National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO) in order to revise the data. The Central government had in May commissioned a fresh study to make re-assess poverty levels in India.

But even the new definition was slammed by National Advisory Council member Aruna Roy who said it reflected “the government’s deep lack of empathy for the poor and a perspective completely divorced from reality.”

By setting such an “extremely low estimated expenditure threshold”, she added, the government was merely trying to artificially reduce the number of people living below the poverty line – and therefore lower government expenditure on the poor.

In effect, the government was ignoring its commitment to provide the barest minimum needs to the poorest of its people, she noted. India’s inability or unwillingness to provide adequate resources to meet people’s basic needs would hamper their participation in the economy , she said.