<p>The new poverty line recommended by the C Rangarajan Committee on Monday triggered a fresh wave of criticism as the issue echoed inside and outside Parliament, with Union Minister for Water Resources Uma Bharti dubbing it “misleading”.<br /><br /></p>.<p>The Rangarajan Committee has said that a person spending more than Rs 32 per day in rural and Rs 47 per day in urban cannot be described as poor person. Bharti said the fresh poverty figures and assessments were “misleading”. “I will be raising this issue at the appropriate level,” she said. <br /><br />Minister of State for Rural Development Upendra Kushwaha said, “I don’t agree with this. This is not the reality.”<br /><br />The new recommendations evoked criticism similar to the Suresh Tendulkar committee which recommended Rs 32 in urban areas and Rs 27 in rural areas as the poverty line. The Rangarajan Committee was formed to re-look into the recommendations of Tendulkar committee.<br /><br />On the first day of Budget Session of Parliament, the issue figured during speeches of members during a discussion on price rise. <br /><br />CPM’s Sitaram Yechury took a dig at the government, saying the PM himself had tweeted when Tendulkar Committee had fixed poverty line as Rs 32 a day, saying it was ridiculous that Rangarajan Committee has fixed it at Rs 47 a day.<br /><br />During his speech, NCP MP Praful Patel also demanded a clarification from the government on the issue and reminded the BJP that they had opposed the Tendulkar Committee earlier fixing poverty line at Rs 32 a day. <br /><br />The sharpest criticism came from BSP chief Mayawati. “This is nothing but making a joke of poor people. Whatever figure that has been given and the way it has been calculated, our party does not support it,” Mayawati told reporters. <br /><br />Sharad Yadav of JD(U) also echoed Mayawati’s view, saying it was “totally wrong and a cruel joke”. Samajwadi Party MP Naresh Aggarwal said they would give Rangarajan Rs 100 everyday. “Let him show us how to live on this in a village,” he said. </p>
<p>The new poverty line recommended by the C Rangarajan Committee on Monday triggered a fresh wave of criticism as the issue echoed inside and outside Parliament, with Union Minister for Water Resources Uma Bharti dubbing it “misleading”.<br /><br /></p>.<p>The Rangarajan Committee has said that a person spending more than Rs 32 per day in rural and Rs 47 per day in urban cannot be described as poor person. Bharti said the fresh poverty figures and assessments were “misleading”. “I will be raising this issue at the appropriate level,” she said. <br /><br />Minister of State for Rural Development Upendra Kushwaha said, “I don’t agree with this. This is not the reality.”<br /><br />The new recommendations evoked criticism similar to the Suresh Tendulkar committee which recommended Rs 32 in urban areas and Rs 27 in rural areas as the poverty line. The Rangarajan Committee was formed to re-look into the recommendations of Tendulkar committee.<br /><br />On the first day of Budget Session of Parliament, the issue figured during speeches of members during a discussion on price rise. <br /><br />CPM’s Sitaram Yechury took a dig at the government, saying the PM himself had tweeted when Tendulkar Committee had fixed poverty line as Rs 32 a day, saying it was ridiculous that Rangarajan Committee has fixed it at Rs 47 a day.<br /><br />During his speech, NCP MP Praful Patel also demanded a clarification from the government on the issue and reminded the BJP that they had opposed the Tendulkar Committee earlier fixing poverty line at Rs 32 a day. <br /><br />The sharpest criticism came from BSP chief Mayawati. “This is nothing but making a joke of poor people. Whatever figure that has been given and the way it has been calculated, our party does not support it,” Mayawati told reporters. <br /><br />Sharad Yadav of JD(U) also echoed Mayawati’s view, saying it was “totally wrong and a cruel joke”. Samajwadi Party MP Naresh Aggarwal said they would give Rangarajan Rs 100 everyday. “Let him show us how to live on this in a village,” he said. </p>
