PREVIOUS HOUR
GS-PK/2O/3.00

NEED FOR LINKING UNA RAILWAY LINE WITH

HOSHIARPUR RAILWAY LINE

ִ ֻ ֳϾֻ (ӕֲ) : ֮֮ߵ ֳ֬ , ׾ֿ ִֵ ן ֮ , ֕ ָߵ ָ ֳ֯ן ָ ߮

֯ ִ֬ ָָ ֮ ־ֿ ֮ ׾ֵ פ֮

׾פ ֻ֓ Ϥ ֳ״ ֮ ֟ ֕ ָ ׾֡ ٴ ã֮, ֲֺ , ֻ ֣ פ, ߸ ׮, ֜ ֣ ֟ פ פ ׾֪֮ וֻ ׿ֵָ (ӕֲ) ߴ ֟ וֻ ־ և ָ ־ և וֻ ׿ֵָ ֣ ػ פ ֵ, ߬ ִ ֻ֓ ֮֟ ӕֲ ֵ ֻ֓ Ϥ ֵ֮ פ þ פ ָ ֮ ׾֬ ߅ ֮֟ ֻ֓ Ϥ ߸, ֛, , ײֻ֯, פ ֳ וֻ ֬ þִ ׾ָָ֓ , ֬ þִ ָ וֻ , ֳ ֮ ׻֋ ׾֬ ״ֻ ֵ߅ ָ ӕֲ ו֮ ֻ֓ Ϥ ֳ ٴ ãֻ ֲָָ ֮-֮ , ֱ ׾֬ ߅ ֣ þ פ ֮֮ ֜ ֣ ӕֲ ߬ ִ ֵօ ֮֟ ֻ֓ Ϥ ״ ׿ֵָ, ׬ֵ֮, ָֻ֮ ֣ ָ ִ , ػ ׾֬ ߅

ָָ ӕֲ ֻ֓ Ϥ ׾֬ ֣ ٴ ־֮ֆ ֟ ߑןֿߑ ־ և ׿ֵָ ־ և ֣ ػ ֮ ־ã (ִ֯)

ߴ֟ ִ֮ ֺֻ (֕ã֮) : ֳ֬ , ֮ ֯ ִ֨

ָ֕ (ֻ֓ Ϥ) : ֳ֬ , ֮ ֯ ִ֨ (2 ָ )

PB-SC/2P/3.05

NEED FOR CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO CHANGE EXISTING RESERVATION SYSTEM FOR WELFARE OF SCs and STs

 

0 ϳ (֕ã֮) : , ד֟ ן ֮֕ן ֮ ׻֋ ָ ֟Դ֮ ־ã , ִ ӟ֮ ֮ ׻֋ ׾֮֬ ӿ֮ ֟Դ֮ ֻ ָ ֮ ־ֿ ׿ ϓָ-ָ ֣ ִ֕ ֕ ֟ ֮ և ֕ ׾ ׻֋ פ ֋ ָ ֳ ִ֕ ד֟ ן ֮֕ן ӟԟ ֮ ֻ ֳ ִ֮ ״ֻ֮ ־ã ׻֋ ־ָֿ֮ ׾֮֬ ӿ֮ ֻ ׾֟ ֮ ִ֕ ׻֟ ֟ ֲ ׾׳֮ ֕ ֲ֤ ֟ ָ ןֿ֟ ׮׿֟ ֲ֤ ןֿ֟ ָ ןֿ֟ ֳ ד֟ ן ֮֕ן Ӳ׬֟ ֳ ןֵ ִ֮ ״ֻ ד֟ ן ֮֕ן ׾׳֮ ןֵ ִֵ ׮ָָ և : þָ ד֟ ן ֮֕ן ֮ ֻ ֳ ֮ ֟ ָָ ֟Դ֮ ָ ן ָ ӿ֮ ߑ և ן ד֟ ן ֮֕ן ֳ ִ֮ ֳ׮֟ (ִ֯)

Ӥ 껻 (Ӭ Ϥ) : ֳ֬ , ֮֮ߵ ֤õ þֵ Ӳ֨

ִ ֻ ֳֻ (ӕֲ) : ֳ֬ , ֮֮ߵ ֤õ þֵ Ӳ֨

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (SHRIMATI PREMA CARIAPPA): Dr. Gyan Prakash Pilania; not present. Shri Chittabrata Majumdar; not here. Dr. M.A.M. Ramaswamy; not here.

Now, we take up the discussion on the working of the Ministries of Panchayati Raj and Rural Development.

FELICITATIONS TO SHRIMATI PREMA CARIAPPA FOR BEING IN CHAIR

֤ߵ ֵ ӡֵֻ ֕ ӡ ( ֓) : , ֯ ӓֵ֟ ֕ ִ ׾ ӡֵֻ ֵ ָ ֓ ָ , ֤ ָָ ֯ ֬և ֯ ֮ Ӥ ָ ׾ִָ֮֕ , ו Ӥ ָ ־ԯֻ ֮֬ , 0 , 0 ֻ ִ , .ָ.ֵָ֮ , Ù ֵ֟㻻 ֮ ִ֮߯ ֡ ׾ִָ֮֕ ֳ ֱ ӓֻ֮ ׻֋ ֮ Ӥ ָ ׾ִָ֮֕ ֯ ֤ ֬և þָ ִ֮ ֤ ָָ , ָָ ָ ֮ Ӥ ֯ ׮֤֮ , ֻ֮ ֮־֤ (ִ֯)

ߴ֟ ֵ (֬ Ϥ) : , ֮֮ߵ ֓ , ֟ ֯ ֬և þָ

SHRIMATI VANGA GEETHA (ANDHRA PRADESH): Madam, I would also like to associate myself with it.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (SHRIMATI PREMA CARIAPPA): Thank you very much. Now, we will take up the discussion on the working of the Ministries of Panchayati Raj and Rural Development. Shri Mangani Lal Mandal is to initiate the debate.

DISCUSSION ON WORKING OF THE MINISTRIES OF PANCHAYATI RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT

 

THE MINISTER OF PANCHAYATI RAJ (SHRI MANI SHANKAR AIYAR): Madam, may I just make a remark? I understand that this morning it was pointed out that the Annual Report of the Ministry of Panchayati Raj was not available at the Publications counter. I would like to tender an unqualified apology to the Chair and to the House for the non-availability of this Annual Report. It has been submitted to the printers, and we are hoping to get it very soon. But that is no excuse. It is entirely my fault that we do not have the Report to share with hon. Members when we commence this debate. If on account of that, they would wish not to discuss the working of the Ministry of Panchayati Raj, I should bow to the will of the House. But if they are prepared to discuss the working of this Ministry, even in the absence of the Annual Report, I would be extremely grateful to them and to the House. Thank you, Madam.(ends)

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (SHRIMATI PREMA CARIAPPA): I hope the House will agree with this.

SHRI V. NARAYANASAMY: Yes; Madam.

ָ ֻ ӛ־ֻ : , ֟ ֮֮ߵ ӡ ֟ ָ ׸ , ׸ ֮֮ߵ ֤õ ֋ ֓ ? ׻֋ ӡ ֟ ָ ׾ָ֓ postpone ֋ (Followed by 2q/SKC)

2Q/3.10/SKC-MP

SHRI SHARAD ANANTRAO JOSHI: Madam, the Business Advisory Committee had very advisedly put the discussion on the two Ministries together because the Panchayati Raj and Rural Development Ministries are closely related. Since one of the Reports is not available, I had myself suggested, in the letter, that the discussion on both the Ministries be postponed.

SHRI SURENDRA LATH: Madam, we agree with the hon. Member.

SHRI V. NARAYANASWAMY: Madam, I would like to make a submission. The hon. Minister has submitted in this august House how things had happened and wanted the House to make a decision. Everybody wanted a discussion on the working of the Rural Development Ministry and because Panchayati Raj is also a part of that, we wanted it to be discussed too. Now, Madam, concern has been shown and, to be frank, I request the House to take up the discussion on the Ministry of Rural Development because a lot of schemes are being implemented through the Ministry of Rural Development and the country should know about them. Also, we would like to know the hon. Minister's response. Hon. Members can start the discussion on the working of the Panchayati Raj Ministry now and the hon. Minister could respond on Monday. By that time, if the Report comes, some other Members may also speak. Just for not submitting the Report, the proceedings of the House should not be disturbed.

ָ ֻ ӛ־ֻ : ָ ׸ , ֋?

SHRI V. NARAYANASAMY: We can discuss. What is there?

SHRI RAVULA CHANDRA SEKAR REDDY: Madam, we can take it up for discussion now. The Minister could give his reply on Monday. We can discuss it today itself.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (SHRIMATI PREMA CARIAPPA): The hon. Minister has said that if the Members are prepared, they can discuss the subject and majority of the Members are ready. So, we will take it up.

֮ ֻ ӛ (ײָ) : ֮֮ߵ ֳ֬ , ֮֮ߵ ӓֵ֟ ֕ ӡ ֮ ֣ ֌ , ֲָ ֮ ָ ӓֵ֟ ӡֵֻ פ ֵ ß֟ þ֟ӡ , ָ ֟ և ӡֵֻ ָ֬ Ӹ֮ , ׻֋ ֤ ֟ ֛, ϵ ֛, ױ ו֮֟ Ù ״׮Ù , ӓֵ֟ ֕ , ӳ־֟: Ù ִ֟ ֲ ָ ֓ Annual Report և , ׻֋ ֮֮ߵ ӡ פ þֵ ׻֋ ֮ ־֮ , ָָ ֮֮ߵ ӡ ֲ ׾֮֬ 74 ӿ֮ ֵ ӓֵ֟ Ӿ׮ ã֮ פ ֵ, ã֟ פ ֵ ֕ ӓֵ֟ ӡֵֻ ֵ ֵ

, ֮ ֯ ֟ Ӭ ׌ օ Louis Fischer ֮ ָ֡ , ׾֤ , ӳ־֟: ׸ ꅠ Louis Fischer ֲ ֮֟ , ֟ Ӭ ֮֟ , ֤֕ ֤֮ ֮֟ , Louis Fischer ֮֟ Louis Fischer ֲ ׻ , Ù׻֮ ָ ׻ , ׮֮ ָ ׻ ֟ Ӭ ָ ֲ ׻  ֲָ֟ ִ פ Louis Fischer ֯ ֯, ֟ֆ ָ ֯ ֕ , ֯ ־ã ? ֤֕ ָ Ӹ֮ ? ֮-־ã Ӹ֮ ? ֟ Ӭ ָ ֲ þ֟ӡ , 7 ׾ֻ ׸ײ ֮ 7 ִ ָ֕ ꅠ Louis Fischer ֵ , ׸֟ , ә , ֤֕ ֤ ׻֋ ֛ ֟ Ӭ כ֮ ׸ײ ã֮ ָ 7 ׾ֻ ׸ײ ֓ ß֮, ָ ֻ֤ ֲ օ 7 ꮵ ׾ֻ , ֕þ Ӿ ꅠ ֟ Ӭ ָ ֮֯ ӓֵ֟, Ӿ, ָ֕ ֮, ן׮׬ֵ ָ ֮-־ã ֻև ֋ (2 R/NB ָ ֿ:)

NB/2R/3.15

ֻ ֻ ӛ (֟) : ֮־ ׮ֵ֤ ־ֿ֋ , ٟ ׻֋ ־ã , ֣ ֮ ׻֋ ӛ , ׾֮֯ ־ã , ؙ ־ã , Village Republic ־ã , ֮֯ ֟ Ӭ , ֮֯ 1985 ֮֯ ֮ , DRDA ֚ ֵ ֵ ָ ֮ֆ , Ӿ þֻӲ֮ ֮֋ ֻև ֋, ָ פ ֋, ָ ״֙, ִ֤ ֜ ָ߲ ߓ ֻ ܵ ֙, օ ָ ӓֵ֟ ־ , ױ ֻ 10 ֻ ־ , ֵ ֮ , ӓֵ֟ ֮ , ׻֋ Ӿ׮ ֬֟ , Ӿ׮ ־ã ߅ ׾֮֬ 73 ӿ֮ , ױ 74 ӿ֮ , ӓֵ֟ ֟ Ӭ concept Village Republic , ָֻ֟ ָ ָ ֲָ ֜ ֮֮ߵ ӡ ֳ ֕ ӓֵ֟ סֵ ִ֮ ֵ , ו ִ ִ֮ ִ פ ֵ , ôָ ӓֵ֟ ־ã ׻֋ 175 ز֤ ָ ֵԾ ֮ , ָ ן ֮ ߅ ן ָ֬ ָ ֕ ָ ֵԮֵ֮ , ָ ָ֮ ֲֻ ֮֮ߵ ӡ ָ ָ , þ ӡ ߤ ӡֵֻ ֲ֕ ߓ ֟ Ӭ ֮֯ , ֿ ו , ָ ֟֋, ָ֮ , ֕ , ֕ District Planning Committee ֮֮ , ֚ ֟ Ӭ ߓ ßָ ӳ ֕ ֮֯ ֢ ׾ Ӿ ßָ ֟ , ߤָ , ָ ֟ ֕ וֻ ֌ , Ͼע ӓֵ֟ ָ ֻ, וֻ ׸֤ ָ ֻ

ֳ֬ , ֣ ־ ߓ ßָ ָ DRDA , ו וֻ ׸֤ ֮ פ, ֛ ִ , ߓ ֵ әָ Rural Development ֮ , ִ ӓֵ֟ ֮ , әָ , , ָ ָ֮ ״ֻ , ָ߲ ָ ״֮֙ ֟ , ӓֵ֟ ֕ ӡֵֻ וִ , ֮֯ ִו ֵԾ , ֱ ֢ ߤָ , ִו ֵԾ

, ӿ ֲ ֤ ֵֻ ֟ , ֟ , ֲ ӡ , Fishery College Principal Institutional Finance Department ֮ advisor ֵ֮ օ ӵ ָָ ߮ օ ״ֻ֮ ׻֋ ֋, ֯ ֱ Fishery Sector ָ֮ ֮ ׻֋ , ֯ ߮ ׬׸ ֯ Ӿ ׻֋ Ӿ ãן , ֮֯ ׾ , ָ ָ֮ ߮ ׬׸ model village פֵ , ֲ ֋, ֵ֟ Ӿ ׿ ֟-ןֿ֟ , .. , כ , ֛ , ײֻ֕ , Ӿ 5-10 ־֙ ־ָ-ֈ , ֲ ֛ ֟ ָ open latrine 2S/AKG ָ ֿ:

AKG/2S/3.20

֮ ֻ ӛ (֟) : ָ ߴ׸ ֟ Ӆ ײָ , ״ֻ֛֮ , , ֲ ãן ߮ ־ã ֮־ߵ ֻ , ֮ ױָߕ פօ Ѿ ֮ , ִ ӓֵ֟ ־ã, ׾ֻ ֣ ָ וִָ ߅ ֳ Ѿ ׯ י ֮֟ , և , Ѿ 3-4 ֲֻ , פ ֵօ ײָ ֟ , ָ ֲֻ ִָ ִֵ ָ ׻֋ ֲֻ ֟ , ֕ ױָߕ ׻֋ ִ  Ѿ 4-5-7 ֛-֛ ֲֻ ֮ פ ֋ ֳ ֻ և ָ  ֲֻ פ ֵօ ֻ ֟ , ִ ߻ , ֻ ױָߕ, ֔׻ֵ ֟ ֛-֛ ֔׻ֵ օ פֵ ֔׻ֵ ָ֯ ֜ ֮ י ־ã ֟ և ֻ ϵ ֋ ֲֻ ֤ , ֤ כ-ظ ױ ֤ ׻֋ ֻ פ ֟ օ ָ ִ ӓֵ֟ ־ã օ ֮֯ ӓֵ֟ ֕ ӡֵֻ ָ ӿ ֲ ד֮ , ָ օ ߮ ... (־֮֬) ...

ӓֵ֟ ֕ ӡ ( ָ) : , ֮֟ ߮ ֱ ß֮ , וִ ߕ ן׮׬ , ׻֋ 8 Ӳָ, ֮ ӛ ָ ӓ ֯ ֲ ִס֟ ߮ ָ ӓֵ֟ ֕ ֻ , פ ֯ ֟ , ֵ ֣ ֮

֮ ֻ ӛ : - ֮־֤ ֮֮ߵ ӡ , ֮֯ օ ߮ ָ ָ ֓ ߮ ָ ׾ ߮ ꅠ ֮֮ߵ ӡ ӓֵ֟ ׾ , ֓ ꅠ ߮ ֮֯ , 1970 ߮ 200 ״׻ֵ֮ ָ߲ ߓ ߮ 30 ״׻ֵ֮, ֱ 30 ״׻ֵ֮ ָ߲ ߓ ָ ָ߲ ֤֯ޛ ָ , ֲ ָ ֤ ֻ ׸ ָ 2004-10 ֮ ִ ֟ ׻֋ 30 ״׻ֵ֮ ָ߲ ߓ , 2010 ָ߲ ֟-ןֿ֟ ִ֯ , ָ߲ ָ ֮ ָ ֟ 2010 , 2004 9 ו֮֟ ׮ָָ , ׻֙ , ׻֋ ׳ֵ֮ ֻ ߛ ׻֙ ֱ ֮־ ֮֬ ׾ ӡֵֻ וִָ , ӓֵ֟ ֕ ӡֵֻ ִ ׾ ӡֵֻ ֮ ׻֋ ׾֢ ӡֵֻ ָ ֮־ ֮֬ ׾ ӡֵֻ ָ ֻ , ӡֵֻ וִָ ֮֮ߵ ӡ ֟ , ׻֋ ֓

, ӓֵ֟ ֕ ׾ֳ ִֻ֯ ׾ֳ ־ ֱ ָָ ֮ ָ ׮ִ ֮ ߲ 18 ָ ֋ ׾̮֕ ָָ ׿ ֟ , ָָ ֕֙ ָ , ׿ ִ ߲ 20 ָ ֵ ָ ֓ ־ã , ו ָ ָָ ֮ ӓֵ֟ ֕ ӡֵֻ ßֻ ׻֋ ֮ ֮ כ ֮ כ ֮ וֻ ßָ ָ ֮֟ ׮֙ظ ׻֋, ׸ ׻֋ ֋ֲ, Ù ֻ , (2 ָ ֿ:)

2T/HMS-GSP/3.25

֮ ֻ ӛ (֟) : ׾ָ֮ ָָ כ֙ ֟ Ù כ ֮ , כÙ כ ֮ ָ ׾ֳ , ֮֟ , ָ ֲ ׾ֳ , , ӿ ֲ כÙ ָ 0ָ00 ָ ֵ֮ ֵ, ִ օ כÙ ֻ ֻי , 0ָ000 ִ֬ ֯ ו֮֟ ֵ , ָ  ֯ וִ כÙ ָ ׮־ֵ ־ã ߮ ߮ ָ ׮־ֵ ִ ßָ ָ ִו , ׿ , ָ߲ , ָ ־ָ ־ã ֻ ָ ֻ ֻי , 000 , 000 ֲֻ֟ Ӿ ָ ׬ ָ֮ ֵֻ ػ֌ כ ֮ , ָָ ֯ ֲ 1985 0ָ000 ֚ և0ָ000 ֵ ֻ օ և0ָ000 ֵ ִ ׮ֵ֮ ָ ֵ ֻ ֋ ׾ֵ ֵ , ָ߲ ԅ ָ߲ ןֿ֟ ֲ ֜ ֤օ , ꌙ ָ ׻֋ ӓֵ֟ ӡֵֻ ָև ֣ 0000 000 , ӓֵ֟ ״ן ִ֬ ָ ꌙ ϴ , ָ օ ָ ևי ߿֮ , ׾ֻ , ו ֟ Ӭ "׾ֻ ׸ײ" ؙ ӳ־ օ ? ָ ױָ ꌙ , ָ ꌙ , 껙 ꌙ ꌙ , - ꌙ , և֮ ֻ ָ - , ֯ 0000 ָ , ן׮׬ ϴ , ֮ ߓ ֵ ָ ֋օ כÙ ֻ ָ וֻ ֮ , כÙ כ ֮ , ָ߲ ׻֋, ָ ׻֋, þ־ֻӲ֮ ׻֋ ֛ ָ ֤֮ օ סֵ ׮־ օ ׾ֳ , օ

֟, ֲ ӿ ֲ ֯ օ ֕ 껱 ֛ ؜ ߙ 껱 ֛ ߕ ݻ֤ ֟ פ ָ0ָ00 껱 ֻ ֻ ׸ϕי ׿ֵ֮ ִֻ֯ ׸ϕי ݻ֤ ׸ ׻֋ ֟ 껱 ֯ 0ָ000 ߮ ֯ וִ ֟ פ , "ֲ֛" פ ֵ , סֵ ׮־ 껱 ӓֵ֟ ־ã ֯ ׮־ֵ ֮և ֵ ׿ וֻ ׸֤ ֤õ ן׮׬ , ו֋ 껱 ֻ, ֯ ӓֵ֟ וֻ ׸֤ ו֋ ֯ ֮ ֵ 껱 ֣ ִ ָ ֮ ָ߲

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (SHRIMATI PREMA CARIAPPA): Mandalji, your party had seven minutes. You have already taken fourteen minutes.

֮ ֻ ӛ : ׿֋ ֵ , 10 ״֮֙ ֯?

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN : But you have taken fourteen minutes. (Interruptions) Okay. Please conclude.

SHRI MANI SHANKAR AIYAR : Madam, this is very constructive contribution.

֮ ֻ ӛ : , ׻֋ ־ ָ ز֤ ָ ֮ ֮֮ ֮ ׸֟Ԯ ֮ ֣ ֟ ָ0ָ00 پ ׸ پ ׸ , ꌙ ׻֋ ֳ پ ׸ ֛-֛

(2 /ߋ־ ָ ֿ:)

SK-PSV/2U/3.30

֮ ֻ ӛ (֟) : ֯ ӓֵ֟ ָ֬ ָ پ ׸ ִ ӓֵ֟ ֕ ӡֵֻ ִ ׾ ӡֵֻ ֯ ֟ ָ Ѿ ӓֵ֟ ־ã Ɵ , 껱 ӓֵ֟ ߮ ֮ ֮ ו֋ ו ָ ֯ ֮ ӓֵ֟ 30 ָ וֻ ׸֤ ֮ ֓ ӓֵ֟ ״ן ֮ ֓ , ֯ Եָ , ֯ 껱 Եָ ו֋

, ֟ ָ߲ ״֙߅ ֟ Ӭ ָ߲ ָ ֟ Ӭ ֟ ֓ ֟ Ӭ ֜ ֮֕ן ֵ, ׻֋ ֟ Ӭ ֛ ןָ ֮֟ - ֟ ֟ ֟ Ӭ ֮֯ , ֮ ֟ Ӭ ןš օ ֆ-- , ֌ ןš פ, ׻֋ ֆ-- ֻ ֌ ֛ ֋, ֟ Ӭ ָ ϴ ֮ օ ֟ Ӭ ? ׾ֻ ׸ײ ꯙ օ ֲ ִָ ֤֕ ֮֮ ״ֻ ֲ ן ָ ֓ ߅ ֟ Ӭ ֛ ָ֤ ꅠ ֤֕ ֮֮ ֲ ִָ ״ֻ ֋, ֲ ױָ ֟ Ӭ ִ߮ , , ִ߮ ߅ ֟ Ӭ ױ ֤֕ כ ֙ ָ "poverty is the worst form of violence." ֟ Ӭ ֟ Ӭ ֮֯ ָ ֮, ?

ֻ ָ ָָ ֛ ָ֮֟ ָ֮֟ ֟ ָ ָ߲ ߓ ֮ ֻ 36 ןֿ֟ ָ ָָ 2000 ֤ 0000 , ־ , ׻֋ ׾֮ߵ ֲ ־ , ֲ ָ ׾֮ߵ օ , ָ ֮ , ֮ ֕֙ ָ , ꅠ 1999-2000 ָ ָָ 26 ןֿ֟ ָ߲ ߓ ֕ ãן ֲָ , ֱ ֻ ִֻ֯ ׸ , ו օ ד֮ ֌ .. "India has made a substantial progress in the reduction of poverty. Yet, as many as 260 million persons are living below the poverty line." ߮ 1970 200 ״׻ֵ֮ , 30 ״׻ֵ֮ 2010 ߸ ָ 260 ״׻ֵ֮ ֙ և ߓ , ֵ ֮ ָָ 11 ӓ־ ֮ ָָ օ ָ ָָ ָ߲ ״֙ , ׮ִԻ , ײֻ ֙ և ߸

: "According to the UNDP's Human Development Project, 2003, India has the largest number of poor among the countries of the world and is home to one-fourth of the world's poor. A large number of hard core poor are located in remote and inaccessible areas. The problem of poverty alleviation is going to be far more difficult than in the past, since those who were near the poverty line might have crossed it." ׸ ֵ ֮ ָ ָָ ָ , ָ ֕ ָ - ãן ֕ , ֕ ãן ֵ־ 47 ןֿ֟ ָ ֻ֮ ָ 26 ײָ ָ ִָ ָ , 5-7 Ù , ו֮ ָ ... (2 ָ ֿ:)

YSR/3.35/2W

SHRI MANGANI LAL MANDAL (CONTD.): "The regional differences in poverty reduction are substantial. The decline between 1973-74 and 1999-2000 in states' incidence of poverty in rural areas ranged between 12-50 percentage points during 1973-2000 and 20-40 percentage points in urban areas. The interstate variations in the rural poverty reduction during 1957-90 has been attributed to the variations in their agricultural productivity improvement. In addition, variations in initial endowments of physical infrastructure and human resources contributed to the interstate variations in the performance. States such as Andhra Pradesh, Kerala, and West Bengal, which had a higher rural poverty ratio in the first phase, had lower rural poverty ratios in the second phase. Andhra Pradesh, which had benefited from the Green Revolution, and Kerala and West Bengal, which had implemented land reforms experienced significant decline in the rural poverty ratio. Despite this, the rural poverty level was higher in West Bengal in 1999-2000 than that of all-India, due to the extremely high poverty level in West Bengal in the first phase."

, Ù ָ , ָ ָ߲ , ֜ ٣ ־ ֟ , ٣ ִ ָ ָָ ׮ , 1995-96 ֓ ֵ , ָ ִ פ ֵ 1985 ևԆָ߯ , ָֆևԕ߯ , ָ ָ ָ ָ ֮֋ ֻ, þ-ָ ֮, ׮׿֟ ָ ֮, ־ ָ ֮, ӯ ִ ָ ֮ ֕ ָ ָ ֮ ָ ֻ ֋ 1995-96 ױָ , ٣ ִ, 2005-06 ֵ 2,28,983 ֋ ֓ ֱ ִו ִ ׾ , ֲ ֓ ֲ ִ ֟ , ׸ ֟ , 2,28,983 ֋ ֮ ֓ ֮ ָ ָ߲ ״֙ ֮ ָ ׮ָָ ״֙ 2001 ֮֮ ָ֬ ָ ֵ֟ ֵ כ ׻֙ 65 ָ ָ߲ և ֻ ܵ ׸֮ , ָ ׸֮

, ãן , ãן ִ ָ ׮ֵ֮ ִ ֵ , ֟ , ָ߲ ״֙? ָ ֮ ֮ פ ׾֢ ӡ , ו פ ֕֙ ָ ֤ פֵ , ôָ פֵ , ֲ ֮֯ ׮ֵ֮ ָ ֵ , ָ߲ ״֙? ָ߲ ״֙, ״֙߅ ֟ ״֙߅ ָ߲ ֳ ״֙, ֲ ֋, ֮ ִ֬ ֋, ׻֋ ֨ӟ ֮־-פ ֮ ֣-֣ ׸ӯע ׮ִ ָ ׸ӯע ׮ִ , ִ ִ֤, ֵ ׮ִ , ֲ ֵ ׮ִ , ֯ ָ߲ ߓ ֻ ׻֋, ו֮ ׻֋ ֮־-פ ֮ , -׌ ֜ ֲ -׌ ֜, ֕ ָ߲ ״֙? ٣ ־ ֵ , ִ þֵ ֵ 1983 ִ ֋ִֵֻ ןֿ֟ 21.76 , 1999-2000 ֜ 26.58 ֵ

2/ ָ ...

AKA-VKK/2X/3:40

֮ ֻ ӛ (֟) : , ָ ָָ ß־ ֮֮ߵ ִ ׾ ӡ ӓֵ֟ ֕ ӡ ֟ Ӭ ֮֯ ָ ֛ þָ֕ ֮ ֮ ׻֋, ֮ և , ׾֮֬ 73, 74 ӿ֮ օ ֮ ֲֻ֟ ? ֤ ӓ ׮ֵ֤ ־ֿ֋ - , ֛, ֮, ׿ ד, ӓ ߕ ָ ӓ ߕ ָ ׻֋ ָָ ֮ ֮֟ ִ ָ ׻֋ ָָ , ߴ ӓ ߕ ֯ ֮ ָ߲ ߓ ֳ׮֟ , ָ ٣ ־ , -߮ ٣ ־ , ָָ ֮ ֓ , ׸ִ ֵ , , ָָ ֱ ׸ִ ׾ֿ˻ , ֵ ׾ֻֿ ߅ סֵ ׮־ ֻ סֵ ™ ָ ִ֮ , ֋ ӿ ֵ - ֤- ֟ , ™ ִ ֻ֕ ׾֬ , ֵֻ ׾֬ , Ӿ ֮ , ײֻ֕ , ֛ , ׌׾֙ ꅠ ֲ ֮֯ , ֮֯ ָ ׻֋ ֯ ׮֬׸ ٟ ߅

, ֲ ֣, ֻ ֮֯ ֤ ִֵ ׻ֵ , ִ ׾ ӓֵ֟ ֕ ӡֵֻ ָ ֻ ֓ ֮ ֟ ִ֯ ֮֯ ֮ פ, ׻֋ ֯ ױ ֮־֤

, ӟ ֟ ֯ ָ ֮־֤ פ, ֤ ֯ ֮־֤ פօ ֮֮ߵ ֤ߵ ֵ ӡ ֮־֤ ß־ , ֳ þ֟ օ ֛ ֯ ֕ ָ ָ ӟָ™ߵ פ ֯, ݵ ָ, ָ , ֯ ֮־֤ ֮ ֟ ִ֯ ֮־֤ (ִ֯)

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (SHRIMATI PREMA CARIAPPA): Thank you Mr. Mandalji. Now, Shri V. Narayanasamy.

SHRI V. NARAYANASAMY (PONDICHERRY): Madam, Vice-Chairman, I am grateful to you for having given me this opportunity to speak on the very important subject of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj. Rural Development and Panchayati Raj is the lifeline of our country. In fact, it envisages economic emancipation of the down-trodden people and also social transformation. India is a welfare State where support is to be provided by the Government to the people who are living below the poverty line, the middle class, the lower middle class sections of the society, the Scheduled Caste community and also the other backward classes, especially people who are living in the rural areas. Madam, we have been talking in this Parliament and outside, either as Members of Parliament or as Ministers, that our heart goes to the people who are living in the villages. But, unfortunately, of late, we have seen that the thrust of the various Governments has been for the urban areas. Today, if you compare the rural areas with the urban areas, all facilities have been provided to the people living in the urban areas, whether it is education, health sector, protected water supply, electricity, roads, infrastructure development, railway system, transport facilities and so on and so forth. But if you go to the rural areas, people are not getting even the protected water supply. Roads in rural areas are very bad. If a person living in a city goes there, he will not like to stay for three or four days in a village. Apart from that, there is shortage of medical facilities for those poor people. Education is available. Schools are open. But I am referring to quality education to those rural people who are living there. (Contd. by RSS/2y)

RSS/2y/3.45

SHRI V. NARAYANASAMY (CONTD.): Any Government-- I am not referring to the Congress-ruled States or the Opposition-ruled States--when it comes to the question of the development of the rural areas, a lot more has to be done. The UPA Government, under the leadership of Dr. Manmohan Singh, the hon. Minister of Rural Development and the hon. Minister of Panchayati Raj, have been doing a lot in this respect. They have been going around and telling the people and the bureaucrats that the rural development is the real development of this country. We have seen the kind of thrust that has been given by the UPA Government for rural development. Today, on the Budget presented by the hon. Finance Minister, Shri P. Chidambaram, for 2006-07, the comments have come in all the newspapers that it is a rural-oriented Budget. In the past, two, three years back, when the NDA Government was there, though they have been telling that India is shining, the real India was not shining. Today, the thrust has been given by the Government for the rural development, and I am grateful to the hon. Minister for Rural Development and the hon. Minister for Panchayati Raj, who have been taking a lot of interest, organizing several meetings, and educating the people as far as the rural development is concerned.

Madam, now, I come to the Bharat Nirman scheme, which is a very noble scheme. It practically goes into the root cause of the problems facing the rural development. Today, we find that there is a large scale migration of the people from the rural areas to the urban areas. There are several factors which are leading to the migration. One is, the person who has studied in the rural areas, he does not have any employment opportunity for him. Secondly, the land which is held by his parents, is sufficient only for the parents to work in the fields, and he is not having any employment there, and proper facilities are not there.

(THE VICE-CHAIRMAN, PROF. P.J. KURIAN, in the Chair.)

As I have already pointed out, education and health facilities are lacking in the rural areas. Thirdly, people who are living in the rural areas, are coming to the urban areas because, the urban areas are attractive for them because of the availability of infrastructure for them. Therefore, the hon. President of India, whenever he goes out to any State, has been very clearly telling for providing the urban facilities in the rural areas. He has been propagating that all the facilities which are available to the people living in the urban areas, should also be made available to the people living in the rural areas. Now, under the new scheme, called the Bharat Nirman, which is a very ambitious scheme, worth Rs. 1,75,000 crores, we have been telling people that this scheme is going to provide the road facilities in the rural areas, rural electrification, rural health, education in the rural areas and all other facilities for the people living in the rural areas so that the migration can be arrested. We know that this will take time. The hon. Member, Shri Mangani Lal Mandal, was telling this House very clearly that though we have had so many programmes, about 220 schemes are implemented by the Ministry of Rural Development for the development of the rural areas, to improve the lot of the people living below the poverty line, we have not achieved the target. There are so many factors responsible for this. One is, the implementing agencies in the State have to be monitored properly. In the Federal Structure, there are some difficulties also. I agree with you. But, it does not mean that the Central Government should give funds and close its eyes. It should not close its eyes. Yes, you provide funds to them for various schemes, whether it is the Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme, whether it is the housing scheme, whether it is the sanitation scheme, or whether it is the Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana Scheme. Various schemes are there for which you are providing the money. Where is the monitoring agency? At the State level, it is at the mercy of the collector, or, the DRDA Department in the district. I am not accusing any Government. I want to submit one thing. When I went to the State and inquired about the implementation of various Central Government schemes, I came to know that the money has been sent to the States. I say authoritatively that the Central Government has sent the money to the State. (contd. by 2z)

MKS/MCM/3.50/2z

SHRI V. NARAYANASAMY (CONTD.): Even though tens months of the current financial year 2005-06 are over, only 25 per cent of the schemes have been implemented. The rural development schemes are not being implemented in some States. I do not want to have any quarrel whether it is a Congress Party ruled State or an opposition party ruled State. That shows how much money given by the Central Government is lying in banks. The real beneficiaries are not getting the benefits. Ten months of the current financial year are over. In March, the financial year is going to conclude. Eleven months are over. When we have a review for ten months, only 25 per cent of the Schemes have been implemented in the States. What is going to happen for the rest of the money? Sir, I would like to caution the Rural Development Minister that that money would be diverted to other schemes which have not been sanctioned by the Government of India. What are you going to do? How can we expect the people living below the poverty line to come up? How can you expect that to happen? Unless and until the money that has been provided for the various schemes, for the purpose of bringing the people above the poverty line is fully utilised, how are you going to achieve the target? When the great leader Indiraji was the Prime Minister of this country, she brought a 20-Point Programme; for its implementation, there was a monitoring authority at the State level, and also at the district level. There were agencies to monitor that. Nowadays, what happens is, when we go to the State, we get so many complaints concerning the implementation of the Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. Sir, I have another complaint. I gave you only one complaint.

The second complaint is about the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. It is a very marvellous Scheme; it is an innovative Scheme meant for helping the districts wherein the poor people are living. Now, the enumeration is being done, the enrolment is being done. The hon. Minister, the hon. Prime Minister of India, the hon. Chairman, UPA, Madam Gandhi, all went there, to Andhra Pradesh, and inaugurated the Scheme on 2nd February, 2006. The people of this country want to know how it will be successfully implemented. When we go to the State, when we talk to the people, when we talk to the workers, they tell us that this Scheme is implemented in some of the States in a biased manner; the applications of the deserving people are not given for the purpose of enrolling them, for the purpose of giving them the benefit. The Minister will say, "No, it is not within our domain. It is the State Government which is to implement it." Sir, I would like to submit to you that out of the total money provided for this Scheme, 90 per cent you are giving; only 10 per cent is being given by the State Government. The State Government is utilising it for the purpose of achieving their political ends. What they do is they simply put a photograph of the Chief Minister of their State; they are publicising as if the Scheme is being implemented by the State. Yes, it is being implemented by the State Government, but the money is given by the Central Government. Sir, 90 per cent of the total funds are given by the Central Government. I do not want to go to the extent of saying that the Chief Minister's photograph is there; they should, at least, mention in that that the Scheme is being brought by the Central Government. They should mention it. It is not being mentioned. While selecting the beneficiaries, there is a political bias. How can you expect the real beneficiaries to get the advantage under the Scheme? Please tell me what steps you are going to take for implementing the Scheme. The Scheme is going to be implemented in such a way that only 25 to 30 million people will get the advantage. The real beneficiaries have to get the advantage; that is what we want. That is your intention also. About Rs.25,000 crores are going to be spent, every year, on that. If the money goes to the wrong people, selected by the Government which is in power, and if the real beneficiaries do not get the benefits, how can you expect the people living below the poverty line to come up? What are you going to do to see that the money reaches the real beneficiaries? It is not the hon. Minister who is providing the funds to the States. And watching it from outside is not going to help you at all. Have a machinery. Have a Consultative Council. Have a monitoring machinery. Let it be implemented through a public representative. Have an organisation; have the Members of Parliament and MLAs, irrespective of party lines. And also, public personalities can also be there at the national level, the State level and the district level. (Contd. by 3A)

VK/3A/3.55

SHRI V. NARAYANASAMY (CONTD): They will be monitoring it; otherwise, your scheme will be diluted and you will not be able to achieve the purpose. Therefore, kindly take note of it. There is already a lot of criticism in the States that it is being done in a biased manner; it is being used politically and the deserving people are not getting the benefit. Therefore, I request the hon. Minister to consider this aspect.

Sir, there is one other important thing, that is, the Self-Help Groups; empowering the women. I am very happy that men are also helping them. Banks are supporting them. Today, women are earning on their own. They want to sustain themselves. If they do not have the support of their husband, they are earning on their own and are educating their children. It is a very good thing. Banks are also supporting them. But there is one lacuna here. Through this scheme, you are not only bringing the women together, but also giving them employment opportunities and apart from that you are also empowering the women with money power. There is one important factor here, that is, marketing of products and items which are produced by women. What is happening in the world of electronic media? The multinational companies are giving a lot of publicity to their products. When these women go to the market to sell their products, they suffer a lot. I request the hon. Minister to consider this aspect. Why don't you create an agency at the State level and at the district level for marketing the products manufactured by these women? In this way, you will be creating more employment opportunities in the rural areas. You acquire the products and then distribute them through the State machinery. Like the Khadi Board and the Handloom Board, why don't you have such an agency in order to help the Self-Help Groups? Now we find that women are getting educated and they are able to do a lot of productive work and are able to sustain their families.

So far as housing is concerned, the Ministry of Rural Development has got several housing schemes for the SC and ST people, for the general category. For fishermen also there is one scheme implemented by the Agriculture Department. Then there is the WAMBAY scheme for the urban people. So, various schemes have been implemented. The Ministry is having a very good scheme for the people in the rural areas. The Ministry should focus more on the housing schemes for the people in rural areas. You will find a lot of huts in villages, especially in the southern part of the country. The hon. Minister of Panchayati Raj also comes from a rural constituency. He knows how many huts are there in the rural areas. He will be able to explain it better than me. Now the Government has got ambitious plan of converting thatched roofing into brick built construction. In Pondicherry, we have already implemented this scheme. There are 50,000 thatched houses in the entire State. We have got an ambitious plan of converting them into brick built houses. We are providing them Rs. 60,000 as a grant for constructing these houses. (Interruptions). Soon, it will become a State like Goa. Within five years, we would convert these houses into brick built construction. In other States, it is a little difficult because an enormous amount of money is involved in it. Therefore, I request the hon. Minister to increase the allocation to the housing sector for the purpose of constructing houses for the people living in rural areas. There are other Departments which are giving money for schemes meant for SC and ST people. But for the general category, your Ministry has to provide funds.

(Contd. by 3B)

PREVIOUS HOUR