First Lok Sabha Post-JNNURM election

15th Lok SABHA MP's must debate JNNURM

1. In 2005 before the JNNURM launch, OUR MP's never debated the mandatory and optional conditions which were part of reforms package.
2. Since these conditions were thrust upon the states who needed to enter a tripartite MoU with the Union, State and City governments being signatories, there is a need to debate the conditions of the reforms.
3. These reforms were essentially a sop to the lobbies of Finance, Insurance and Real Estate (FIRE) who had been demanding the same for a long time and still continue to do after 5 years of huge profits.
4. The 15th Lok Sabha MP's must undertake a wide ranging public consultation process on the success/ failure of JNNURM !
5. Urban areas have been developed in extremely inequitous manner.
6. Costly and expensive Facilities are being provided to rich and elite people who get massive tax concessions (www.cbgaindia.org) in excess of Rs 300,000 crores / year for the last 4 years 2004-08.
7. Projects must be prepared on priority to fulfil the essential needs services of the masses, the urban poor and the lower middle class.
8. Funding for the same should also be provided adequately.
9. Property taxes must not be escrowed to give an opportunity to payback investors THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. They must be invested in basic needs of the electorate such as drinking water, proper roads, air quality maintenance and pollution control.
10. Social Audit and monitoring that the funds must not be misused is to be introduced as a peoples initiative.
11. The GoI's 11th Plan document pushes back the date for achieving the urban drinking water targets to 2012. This needs to be relooked at and targets must be fulfilled earlier.
12. Development cannot happen for the rich only leaving the poor behind.

Development needs in Urban India

How is it possible for successive ruling Indian Union Govts to continue to spend large sums of money every year without fulfilling the goal of providing basic amenities to all?
It is because there are various advocates who want a priority allocation of funds and who want to ensure that funds are diverted to INFRASTRUCTURE.
Does this really boil down to a fight for funds between essential services and subsidies for the cement, steel, sand, concrete and construction industry?
Will a poor citizen not get the basic needs like food and drinking water if he cannot afford it? Can a policy which is formulated like this be constitutionally correct even if it violates fundamental rights?

The right to food and right to water should be the main first priority for all who vote and also all who are elected.