Op-Ed: The Fine Art of Hoodwinking People

The Narendra Modi government at the Centre has been frequently pilloried and ridiculed for being a ‘jumla sarkar’ – and justifiably so. But surprisingly, the fact that the Naveen Patnaik dispensation in Odisha has been no less a ‘jumla’ government appears to have escaped the attention of commentators in our state. Forget the charges made […]

housing-scheme

The Narendra Modi government at the Centre has been frequently pilloried and ridiculed for being a ‘jumla sarkar’ - and justifiably so. But surprisingly, the fact that the Naveen Patnaik dispensation in Odisha has been no less a ‘jumla’ government appears to have escaped the attention of commentators in our state.

Forget the charges made by Union minister Dharmendra Pradhan in his letter to Union minister for Panchayati Raj Narendra Singh Tomar today since there is little doubt that it is motivated by political considerations with the coming elections in mind. But surely we cannot accuse the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG), a constitutional authority that has been pointing out in its reports for successive years that the state government has been building houses on paper, of partisan conduct, can we? In its report for the year 2017-18, for example, it has pointed out the gross mismatch between the amount of money spent and the targets achieved by the Panchayati Raj department. The state utilized Rs 923 crores (55%) out of the Rs. 1688 earmarked under the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana, it said. Not bad, you would imagine - till you get to the next line that mentions the actual physical target achieved. Against a target of 3, 96, 102 houses, it built – hold your breath – just 343 during the whole year! If you think it is not very keen on the PMAY and is instead focused on achieving the targets under Biju Pucca Ghara Yojana (BPGY), its own scheme to build dwelling units for the poor, you are mistaken again. It has utilized 57% of the financial target (Rs. 397 crores out of Rs. 700 crores) during 2017-18 but managed to build a paltry 4% of the physical target: 2636 houses against the target of 62, 416. Now you know why the state government has made it a habit to place the CAG report on the table only at the fag end of an Assembly session!