text:
Fact Checking Government claims on improving Safety in Railways
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
January 7, 2019
The BJP government published an infographic on the 48-months portal that makes 3 claims about improving safety in Indian Railways, i.e., reducing railway accidents & elimination of Unmanned Level Crossings. This article is a fact check of the claims.
The BJP government published an infographic on the 48-months portal that makes 3 claims about improving safety in Indian Railways. This article is a fact check of the claims.
Have accidents in Railways reduced during the current government?
The first claim is that 2017-18 is the is the best ever year of safety record for the railways and less than 100 accidents were recorded in that year. The claim also states that 118 accidents were recorded in 2013-14 whereas only 73 accidents were recorded in 2017-18.
As per the definition of Indian Railways, the term ‘accident’ envelopes a wide spectrum of occurrences with or without significant impact on the system. On the other hand, Consequential train accidents include mishaps with serious repercussion in terms of loss of human life or injury, damage to railway property or interruption to rail traffic of laid down threshold levels and values. Such consequential train accidents include collisions, derailments, fire or explosion in trains, road vehicles colliding with trains at level crossings, and certain specified types of ‘miscellaneous’ train mishaps. In other words, not all accidents/incidents involving trains or at level crossings are counted as consequential train accidents. The data mentioned in the claim is consequential train accidents and these usually cover most of the serious accidents.
According to the data available in the annual statistical publication & the year book of the Indian Railways, there were 118 consequential train accidents in the year 2013-14 and 73 such accidents in the year 2017-18.  While these numbers are true, this is only half the story. The number of consequential train accidents have been declining continuously since 2003-04 except for 2014-15 when the number of accidents increased sharply compared to the previous year. It remains to be seen whether this decreasing trend continues in the years to come.The data also shows that the year 2016-17 saw the highest number of deaths in 7 years when 238 people lost their lives though the number of accidents reduced to 104.
Claim: 2017-18 is the is the best ever year of safety record for the railways and less than 100 accidents were recorded in that year.
Fact: There were 118 consequential train accidents in the year 2013-14 and 73 such accidents in the year 2017-18.  While these numbers are TRUE, this is only half the story. The number of consequential train accidents have been declining since 2003-04 except for 2014-15 when the number of accidents increased sharply compared to the previous year.
How many unmanned level crossings have been eliminated?
The second claim is that 5,469 unmanned level crossings were eliminated and the average pace of elimination is 20% more than that of 2009-14.
As stated in an answer in the Lok Sabha, ‘as on 01st April 2018,, there were 5792 unmanned level crossings (UMLCs) out of which 3479 were on Broad Gauge (BG), 1135 on Meter Gauge (MG) and 1178 on Narrow Gauge (NG).’
Based on data collated from the answers to Lok Sabha questions 5443, 1001 & 1121 and answer to Rajya Sabha question 4636,  the following is observed regarding the elimination of unmanned level crossings each year. During UPA-2 (2009-14), a total of 5687 UMLCs were eliminated, an average of 1137 a year. During the current government, a total of 5469 UMLCs were eliminated during 2014-18, an average of 1367 a year.It is true that the average number of UMLCs eliminated per year during the current government is 20% more than what were eliminated during UPA-2 (2009-14). It is also true that a total of 5469 UMLCs were eliminated between 2014-15 and 2017-18.
Claim: 5,469 unmanned level crossings were eliminated and the average pace of elimination is 20% more than that of 2009-14.
Fact: During UPA-2 (2009-14), a total of 5687 UMLCs were eliminated, an average of 1137 a year. During the current government, a total of 5469 UMLCs were eliminated during 2014-18, an average of 1367 a year. It is true that the average number of UMLCs eliminated per year during the current government is 20% more than what were eliminated during UPA-2 (2009-14). It is also true that a total of 5469 UMLCs were eliminated between 2014-15 and 2017-18. Hence the claim is TRUE.
What about complete elimination of UMLCs?
The third claim is that, ‘all unmanned level crossings on broad gauge routes targeted for elimination by 2020.’
‘Under Mission Zero accident, it was announced to eliminate all unmanned level crossings (UMLCs) over Broad Gauge system in a phased manner’ as stated is a Lok Sabha answer in February 2017.   According to an answer provided in the Lok Sabha in December 2018, ‘Elimination of UMLCs has been a top priority for Railways as level crossings are a safety hazard for both rail and road users more so for road users. As on 01st April 2014,  there were 8948 UMLCs on BG. It is submitted that all UMLCs on BG have now been eliminated except 28 UMLCs which have also been planned to be eliminated by closure, merger, subway and manning.’
But this assertion by the government is rather surprising since there were 3479 UMLCs on BG as of 01st April 2018 and as per government’s admission in the Lok Sabha, only 28 such UMLCs are not eliminated yet. This would mean that more than 3400 UMLCs on BG were eliminated between April & December 2018, more than double the number eliminated in the entire year of 2017-18. Hence one needs to wait and see the numbers for the entire year of 2018-19.
Another response in the Lok Sabha states that,  ‘It is the endeavour of Railways  to eliminate all unmanned level crossings in a phased manner by either of the following;
Claim: All unmanned level crossings on broad gauge routes targeted for elimination by 2020.
Fact: As per government’s response in the Lok Sabha in December 2018, all UMLCs on BG have now been eliminated except 28 UMLCs. Hence, the claim remains UNVERIFIED as all the UMLCs on BG are targeted to be eliminated by 2020.
This story is part of a larger series on the 4-years of the Modi government. This series has been made possible with the flash grant of the International Fact Checking Network (IFCN). Read the rest of the stories in this series here

created: January 7, 2019


text:
Fact Checking Government claims on increase in Scholarship amount to SCs & OBCs
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
October 24, 2018
The government claimed in an infographic that the scholarship amounts for SCs & OBCs have been increased. Here is a fact check of the claim.
In an infographic titled empowering through education for an inclusive society, the government  made four claims regarding the scholarship amount and stipend provided to SC and OBC students. As a part of the larger set of claims about the government’s commitment to social justice, this infographic was published on the government’s 48- months portal.
Has the stipend for SC students been increased?
The first claim is that stipend for day scholars has been raised from  ₹150 to ₹225 and for hostellers raised from ₹350 to ₹ 525. The stipend/scholarship is paid to the students belonging to the Scheduled Caste (SC) community studying in the class IX & X,  under the pre-matric scholarship scheme. The scheme was amended in September 2017 and the amount of scholarship has been increased. The amendment includes revision of maintenance allowance for Day Scholars from ₹150 per month to ₹225 per month and for Hostellers from ₹ 350 per month  to ₹525 per month.
Claim: Stipend for day scholars has been raised from ₹150 to ₹225 and for hostellers from ₹350  to ₹525.
Fact: Revision of maintenance allowance for Day Scholars from ₹150 per month to ₹225 per month and for Hostellers from ₹350 per month to ₹ 525 per month was done in September 2017. Hence this claim is TRUE.
Has the income eligibility been increased for SC and OBC students for availing free coaching?
The second claim is that for free coaching for SC and OBC students, income eligibility raised from ₹4.5 lakhs to ₹6 lakh. The objective of this scheme is to provide quality coaching for economically disadvantaged Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Other Backward Classes (OBCs) candidates to enable them to appear in competitive examinations and also succeed in obtaining a  job in Public/Private Sector. For students to be eligible under this scheme, the total family income from all sources should be less than or equal to  ₹6 lakh per annum. This was noted in the 2017-18 annual report of the Ministry of Social Justice.  Further, a press release of the ministry in February 2018 notes that the income eligibility has been raised from ₹4.5 lakhs to ₹6 lakhs.
Claim: Free coaching for SC and OBC students, income eligibility raised from ₹4.5 lakhs to ₹6 lakh rupees
Fact: For Free coaching for SC and OBC students, the income eligibility has been raised from  ₹4.5 lakhs to ₹6 lakhs. This revision was made in 2016. Hence, the claim is TRUE.
Has the stipend been raised for SC and OBC students availing free coaching?
The third claim is that stipend has been raised from  ₹1500 to  ₹ 2500 for local students and from ₹3000 to ₹5000 for outstation students. The 2017-18 annual report of the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment notes that, ‘monthly stipend of ₹ 2500 per student will be paid for local students for attending the coaching class. Similarly, ₹5000 per student will be paid per month for outstation students.’
Further, a press release of the ministry in February 2018 notes that the stipend has been raised from  ₹1500  to ₹2500 for local students and from ₹3000 to ₹5000  per month for outstation students.
Claim: Stipend has been raised from ₹1500 to ₹2500 for local students and from ₹3000 to ₹5000 for outstation students.
Fact: Stipend has been raised from  ₹1500 to ₹2500 for local students and from ₹3000 to ₹5000 per month for outstation students. Hence, the claim is TRUE.
Have the rates of Pre-Matric scholarships increased for OBCs?
The fourth claim is that for pre-matric scholarship of OBCs, the rates of scholarship increased substantially. According to a press release of the ministry in February 2018, ‘the earlier rates of scholarships of day scholars from Class I to V, Class VI to VIII and Class IX to X of ₹25, ₹40 and ₹50 respectively for 10 months has been revised to ₹100 per month for 10 months from Class I to X.  Earlier rates of scholarships of hostellers from Class III to VIII and Class IX to X of ₹200 and ₹250 respectively for ten months has been revised to ₹500 per month for 10 months from Class III to X.’ The scheme has been revised with effect from 2017-18.
Claim: For pre-matric scholarship for OBCs, the rates of scholarship increased substantially.
Fact: The rates have been doubled in certain cases and more than doubled in other cases. Hence, the claim is TRUE.
This story is part of a larger series on the 4-years of the Modi government. This series has been made possible with the flash grant of the International Fact Checking Network (IFCN). Read the rest of the stories in this series here.

source: news-factly

created: October 24, 2018

license: Creative Commons - Attribution - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

author: Sai Krishna Muthyanolla


text:
Fact Checking Government claims on initiatives related to Agriculture – Part 1
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
May 6, 2019
Here is a 2-part series
on the claims made by the current government on the initiatives related to
Agriculture.
The BJP government has published an infographic on the 48-months portal. The info-graph is a part of a larger sub section on the government’s commitment to farmers. It makes seven claims about the government’s focus on doubling farmers’ incomes. This article is a fact check of the claims made in the infographic.
What is the PMKSY?
‘The Pradhan Mantri
Krishi Sinchai Yojana (PMKSY) was launched in July 2015 for providing end-to
end solutions in irrigation supply chain, viz. water sources, distribution
network and farm level application’ states a response in Lok Sabha.
According to the PMKSY website, ‘It
has been conceived amalgamating ongoing schemes viz. Accelerated Irrigation
Benefit Programme (AIBP) of the Ministry of Water Resources, River Development
& Ganga Rejuvenation (RD&GR), Integrated Watershed Management Programme
(IWMP) of Department of Land Resources (DoLR) and the On Farm Water Management
(OFWM) of Department of Agriculture and Cooperation (DAC). The scheme will be
implemented by Ministries of Agriculture, Water Resources and Rural
Development. Programme architecture of PMKSY will be to adopt a ‘decentralized
State level planning and projectised execution’ structure that will allow
States to draw up their own irrigation development plans based on District
Irrigation Plan (DIP) and State Irrigation Plan (SIP). It will be operative as
convergence platform for all water sector activities including drinking water
& sanitation, MGNREGA, application of science & technology etc. through
comprehensive plan. State Level Sanctioning Committee (SLSC) chaired by the
Chief Secretary of the State will be vested with the authority to oversee its
implementation and sanction projects.’
A response in the Lok Sabha further stated that, ‘the program is composed
of three components namely Accelerated Irrigation Benefit Programme (AIBP),
River Development and Ganga Rejuvenation (RD & GR), PMKSY (Per Drop More
Crop, Cooperation and Farmers Welfare and (Watershed Development) PMKSY.
Ministry of Agriculture is the nodal ministry for implementing PMKSY.’
Has there been a special focus on irrigation?
The first claim is that there is a ‘special
focus on irrigation with the aim of ‘per drop more crop’.
The report of the committee for doubling farmers’ income states that ‘water source creation, conservation and efficient use
(by a blend of systems like micro-irrigation and technology like crop
alignment) can promote more crop per drop. PMKSY is based on this principle.
There could be a lifesaving or supplementary irrigation during post rainy or
fall months which would possibly sustain productive potential of crop through
alleviation of moisture stress under conservation agriculture (CA). Local water
harvesting by constructing small ponds and using the water via a sprinkler has
demonstrated the useful in protecting pulse, crops, during periods of monsoon withdrawal
or delay in Karnataka’.
The volume on strategies for sustainability in agriculture provides the strategies for improving irrigation inrain-fed agriculture areas. A response in LokSabha from December 2017 states that ‘Rs. 1550.00 crore and
Rs. 1990.00 crore were allocated under the Per Drop More Crop component of
PMKSY in the year 2015-16 and 2016-17 respectively’.
Claim: Special focus on irrigation with the aim of ‘per drop more crop.’
Fact: Water source creation, conservation and efficient use (by a blend of systems like micro-irrigation and technology like crop alignment) can promote more crop per drop. PMKSY is based on this principle. However, the scheme itself is an amalgamation of existing schemes, implying that there is not a new focus, but continuation of existing programs. Hence, the claim is MISLEADING.
Have quality seeds and nutrients been provided based
on soil health cards?
The second claim is thatthe government is enabling ‘provision of
quality seeds and nutrients based on soil health of each field’.
The website of thesoil health cards describes that the ‘National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture(NMSA) will be implemented
during 12th Plan with the objectives to make agriculture more productive,
sustainable and climate resilient; to conserve natural resources; to adopt
comprehensive soil health management practices; to optimize utilization of
water resources; etc. Soil Health Management (SHM) is one of the most important
interventions under NMSA. SHM aims at promoting Integrated Nutrient Management
(INM) through judicious use of chemical fertilisers including secondary and
micro nutrients in conjunction with organic manures and bio-fertilisers for
improving soil health and its productivity; strengthening of soil and
fertiliser testing facilities to provide soil test based recommendations to
farmers for improving soil fertility; ensuring quality control requirements of
fertilisers, bio-fertilisers and organic fertilisers under Fertiliser Control
Order, 1985; upgradation of skill and knowledge of soil testing laboratory
staff, extension staff and farmers through training and demonstrations;
promoting organic farming practices etc.’
According to a response in Lok Sabha, ‘the Government has introduced Soil Health
Card (SHC) Scheme during 2015 to assist State Governments to provide Soil
Health Cards to all farmers across the country’. Another answer states that ‘Soil Health Card Scheme plays a vital role
in enhancing agricultural production in a sustainable manner. The Government
has introduced Soil Health Card (SHC) Scheme to assist State Governments to
provide Soil Health Cards to all farmers across the country once in a cycle of
2 years. Soil Health Card provides information to farmers on nutrient status of
their soil along with recommendations on appropriate dosage of nutrients to be
applied for improving soil health and its fertility, which results in enhanced
agricultural productivity’.
So, while the governmentis providing soil health cards and giving recommendations, there is no evidenceto prove that it is not providing seeds and nutrients based on the soil health.It also has to be noted that soil health cards are being provided to farmersfor a long time now.  Soil Health Cards(SHCs) were also distributed during the previous UPA government. According toan answer provided in the Rajya Sabha, the UPA government had setup1206 Soil Testing Laboratories across the country and issued 5.69 crore SHCs byMarch 2013.
Claim: Provision of quality seeds and nutrients based on soil health of each field.
Fact: Soil health is being analysed and soil health cards are being provided by the government to the farmers by the state governments and this is being supported by the central government. However, there is no provision of seeds and nutrients based on these cards. Hence, the claim is FALSE.
Have there been large investments in warehousing and
cold chains?
The third claim is thatthere is ‘Large investments in
warehousing and cold chains to prevent post-harvest crop losses’.
Report of the Committee for Doubling Farmers’ Income in Volume III titled ‘Post-production Agri-logistics: maximising gainsfor farmers’ states that ‘the primary
development focus for agricultural post-production infrastructure, has been in
the form of warehousing and cold stores, for holding inventory for extended
durations’. The same report also provides data regarding the stock of riceand wheat held in central pool over the years. It shows that there has been aconsistent increase in the central stock since 2011 except for a dip in theyear of 2015.
A response in Lok Sabha from 2013states that ‘generally horticulture
produce require cold storages while grains require warehouses. Development of
cold storages is promoted in the country under the schemes of the Government,
namely, National Horticulture Mission (NHM), Horticulture Mission for North
East and Himalayan States (HMNEH), Capital Investment Subsidy for
Construction/Expansion/Modernisation of Cold Storage and Storage for
Horticulture Produce Scheme of National Horticulture Board (NHB) and
Development/Strengthening of Agricultural Marketing Infrastructure, Grading and
Standardization (AMIGS). Godowns/Warehouses are developed in the country under
the Scheme of Construction of Rural Godowns (RGS), in addition to Food
Corporation of India (FCI). Under AMIGS, total number of projects
sanctioned so far are 8087 involving subsidy of Rs.782.14 crore. Under RGS,
total number of projects sanctioned so far are 30574 with capacity of 383.62
lakh Metric Tonne (MT) involving subsidy of Rs.1294.42 crore. Under the Scheme
of NHM, total number of projects sanctioned so far are 652 with capacity of
401.26 lakh MT involving subsidy of Rs.446.12 crore. Under the Scheme of NHB,
total number of projects sanctioned so far are 2792 with capacity of 180.63
lakh MT involving subsidy of Rs.789.39 crore’.
Another response in Lok Sabha fromJanuary 2018 states that ‘warehouse
Infrastructure Fund (WIF) was constituted in National Bank for Agriculture and
Rural Development (NABARD), out of the priority sector lending shortfall by
Commercial Banks, with a corpus of Rs.5,000 crore for the year 2013-14.
Further, a corpus of Rs. 5,000 crore was allocated for the financial year
2014-15. There was no corpus allocated towards WIF for the year 2015-16,
2016-17 and 2017-18. Thus the cumulative allocation towards WIF was Rs.10,000
crore as on 31.03.2015. Since inception, the cumulative sanction under WIF is
Rs.7,332 crore and the disbursement made is Rs.4,029 crore. Out of this, an
amount of Rs.250.76 crore was sanctioned in 2017-18’.
Claim: Large investments in warehousing and cold chains to prevent post-harvest crop losses.
This story is part of a larger series on the 4-years of the Modi government. This series has been made possible with the flash grant of the International Fact Checking Network (IFCN). Read the rest of the stories in this series here


text:
Fact Checking Government claims on initiatives related to Agriculture – Part 2
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
May 7, 2019
Here is a 2-part series
on the claims made by the current government on the initiatives related to
Agriculture.
The BJP government has published an infographic on the 48-months portal. The info-graph is apart of a larger sub section on the government’s commitment to farmers. Itmakes seven claims about the government’s focus on doubling farmer’s incomes.This article is a fact check of the claims made in the infographic. (ReadPart-1 here)
Is there promotion of food processing?
The fourth claim is thatthere is ‘Promotion of value addition
through food processing’.
A response in LokSabha from February 2019 states that ‘an innovative umbrella scheme, ‘Pradhan Mantri Kisan
SAMPADA Yojana (PMKSY)’ has been launched in 2017 to promote modernisation and capacity
enhancement of food processing industries in the country in all aspects
including infrastructure and environment friendly packaging. The implementation
period of the scheme is 2016-2020 with a total allocation of Rs.6000 crores.
The PMKSY has seven component schemes viz; (i) Mega Food Parks, (ii) Integrated
Cold Chain and Value Addition Infrastructure, (iii) Infrastructure for
Agro-Processing Clusters, (iv) Creation of Backward and Forward Linkages, (v)
Creation/Expansion of Food Processing & Preservation Capacities, (vi) Food
Safety and Quality Assurance Infrastructure and (vii) Human Resources and
Institutions. The PMKSY is implemented in all the States of India and is not
any region specific. The schemes under PMKSY are demand driven. The objectives
of PMKSY are to create modern infrastructure with efficient supply chain
management from farm gate to retail outlet, to give a major boost to the growth
of food processing sector in the country and help government’s initiative in
doubling of farmers’ income, create huge employment opportunities especially in
the rural areas, reduce wastage of agricultural produces, increase the
processing level and enhance the export of the processed foods’.
Under the scheme, grants-in-aid @ 35%of the eligible project cost is provided in General Areas and 50% of theeligible project cost in North Eastern States including Sikkim and Difficultareas including Himalayan States (Himachal Pradesh, J&K & Uttarakhand),notified ITDP areas and Islands subject to a maximum of Rs.5.00 crore. The foodprocessing units can be setup in Mega Food Parks (MFPs), Agro ProcessingClusters (APC) and Designated Food Parks (DFPs) notified by the Ministry fromtime to time. However, in States / UTs having no MFP, APC or DFP, the foodprocessing units may be setup anywhere in the State / UT. Further, theunits having majority stake of SC / ST promoter(s) and with an eligible projectcost of more than Rs. 5 (five) crore can be set up at any location in thecountry. To meet the credit demand of the food processingsector, the food and agro-based processing units and cold chain infrastructurehave been brought under the ambit of Priority Sector Lending (PSL) by theReserve Bank of India (RBI) with effect from 23.04.2015. A special foodprocessing fund of Rs.2000 crore has been created with the National Bank forAgriculture and Rural Development (NABARD) in 2014-15 for providing affordablecredit to designated Food Parks and Agro Processing Units located in thedesignated Food Parks. Further, under various schemes of the PMKSY, subsidy isprovided to the investors in food processing sector to enhance their credit worthinessfor bank loans to set up various food processing industries. However, it has tobe noted here that the Ministry of Food Processing Industries has beenimplementing Mega Food Park Scheme since 11th Five Year Plan to create moderninfrastructure for the food processing.
Lastly, it has been stated that ‘with a view to promoting food processing industries in the country, Ministry of Food Processing Industries (MoFPI) has sanctioned 42 Mega Food Parks, 234 Integrated Cold Chain and Value Addition Infrastructure, 17 Agro Processing Clusters, 32 Backward and Forward Linkages and 83 food processing units under various schemes of the Pradhan Mantri Kisan Sampada Yojana (PMKSY)’. The following table shows the number of food processing industries registered in the country over the years as per data shared in the parliament.
Claim: Promotion of value addition through food processing.
Fact: The government has taken steps to promote the food processing industry in the country. However, some of these steps have been initiated long before the BJP government. The impact of the policies has not officially been evaluated. However, the claim is TRUE.
Was a national farmers market created?
The fifth claim is thatthere is a ‘creation of a national farm
market, removing distortions and e-platform across 585 stations’.
As per a response provided by the government in the Lok Sabha in March 2018, ‘National Agriculture Market (eNAM) is a
pan-India electronic trading portal which networks the existing APMC Mandis to
create a unified national market for agricultural commodities’.  The official eNAM website states that ‘the
NAM Portal provides a single window service for all APMC related information
and services. This includes commodity arrivals & prices, buy & sell
trade offers, provision to respond to trade offers, among other services. While
material flow (agriculture produce) continues to happen through mandis, an
online market reduces transaction costs and information asymmetry’. The website of e-NAM lists 585mandis.
Claim: Creation of a national farm market, removing distortions and e-platform across 585 stations.
Fact: National Agriculture Market (eNAM) has been launched in 2016. It has 585 mandis listed as on date. Hence, the claim is TRUE. However, if this initiative has removed distortions and enabled large scale market access is not yet verified.
Has a new crop insurance scheme been introduced?
The sixth claim is that ‘introduction of a new crop insurance scheme
to mitigate risks at an affordable cost’.
A response is the Lok Sabha from2016 states that ‘the existing crop
insurance scheme namely, National Crop Insurance Programme (NCIP) with its
three component schemes viz. Modified National Agricultural Insurance Scheme
(MNAIS), Weather Based Crop Insurance Scheme (WBCIS) & Coconut Palm
Insurance Scheme (CPIS) and National Agricultural Insurance Scheme (NAIS) have
been comprehensively reviewed and Government of India has recently approved the
Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) which would replace the existing
schemes of National Agricultural Insurance Scheme (NAIS) & Modified
National Agricultural Insurance Scheme (MNAIS) from ensuing Kharif 2016.
Government has also circulated the Operational Guidelines of the new scheme on
the basis of which the scheme would be actually implemented by all the
stakeholders including States/UTs, insurance companies, financial institutions etc.’.
Claim: Introduction of a new crop insurance scheme to mitigate risks at an affordable cost.
Fact: The Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana is not a new scheme per se. The existing schemes have been all combined to form PMFBY after their comprehensive review. Hence, the claim is MISLEADING.
Is there a promotion of ancillary activities?
The last claim is thatthere is a ‘promotion of ancillary
activities like poultry, beekeeping and fisheries’.
As per the informationshared in the Lok Sabha, the Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying andFisheries (DAHDF) implements a number of schemes.  Further, for sustainable and continuous growth of livestock sector by emulating the success achieved in dairy andpoultry sectors, across species and regions, the National Livestock Mission waslaunched in 2014-15 with an approved outlay of 2,800 crore during the 12 five year plan. The government is encouraging rural back yard poultrydevelopment and transforming backyard poultry to commercial economic model.
Foreseeing high potential, the BlueRevolution with its multi-dimensional activities, focuses mainly on increasingfisheries production and productivity from aquaculture and fisheries resources,both inland and marine. The department’s annual report also states that thescheme was restructured by merging all the ongoing schemes under an umbrella ofblue revolution.
The website of the National Bee Board states that ‘the Ministry of
Agriculture  launched a Central Sector
Scheme titled ‘Development of Beekeeping for Improving Crop Productivity’
during the VIII plan (1994-95). The scheme had various components covering
R&D, production & distribution of honey bee colonies, organizing
trainings and awareness programmes and support for setting up honey processing
plant, etc. A Beekeeping Development Board also functioned to coordinate the
Beekeeping activities. The Scheme was approved for continuation during the IX
Plan. However, the scheme got subsumed under the Macro Management Scheme, with
effect from October, 2000. The Department facilitated efforts by providing seed
money through Small Farmers’ Agri-Business Consortium (SFAC) for enabling the
private sector to join hands in forming the National Bee Board as a Registered
Society in July, 2000 & promoted by the Small Farmers’ Agri-Business
Consortium (SFAC). In May 2005, Beekeeping has been included as a supplemental
activity under National Horticulture Mission (NHM) for promoting cross
pollination of Horticultural Crops. In view of the tremendous scope for
increasing productivity due to cross pollination and increase in income through
Apiculture, it was proposed to revive Beekeeping activity in the country,
exponentially by pooling the resources of the Department of Agriculture and
Cooperation with other organization, including private sector. Accordingly, the
National Bee Board (NBB) was reconstituted in June, 2006. The main objective of
the National Bee Board (NBB) is overall development of Beekeeping by promoting
Scientific Beekeeping in India to increase the productivity of crops through
pollination and increase the Honey production for increasing the income of the
Beekeepers/ Farmers’.
Claim: Promotion of ancillary activities like poultry, beekeeping and fisheries.
Fact: It can be seen that successive governments have made efforts to promote ancillary activities such as poultry, beekeeping and fisheries. The schemes that already existed have been brought together under one umbrella by the BJP government. Hence, the claim is MISLEADING.
This story is part of a larger series on the 4-years of the Modi government. This series has been made possible with the flash grant of the International Fact Checking Network (IFCN). Read the rest of the stories in this series here


text:
Fact Checking Government claims on Jan Suraksha
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
October 31, 2018
The government has published an infographic that makes certain claims about financial inclusion and insurance. Here is a fact check of these claims.
The government has published an infographic that makes certain claims about financial inclusion and insurance.  This infographic is published on the 48-months portal of the government. Here is a fact check of these claims.
What is the Jan Dhan Yojana and how is it performing?
The first claim is that a bank account has been opened for every family in just four years. It also claims that 31.52 crore Jan Dhan accounts have been opened, equivalent to the population of USA.
In an answer  provided in the Lok Sabha, the current finance minister mentioned about the PMJDY and how it is different from the earlier financial inclusion schemes. He said, ‘The Pradhan Mantri Jan-Dhan Yojana (PMJDY) envisages universal access to banking facilities with at least one basic banking account for every household, financial literacy, access to credit, insurance and pension. The beneficiaries would get a RuPay Debit Card having inbuilt accident insurance covers of Rs 1 Iakh. In addition, there is a life insurance cover of Rs. 30000 to those people who open their bank accounts for the first time between 15/08/2014 and 26/01/2015 and meet other eligibility conditions of the Yojana. PMJDY is different from the earlier financial inclusion programme (Swabhimaan) as it seeks to provide universal access to banking services across the country and focuses on coverage of all households (both rural and urban) while the earlier Financial Inclusion Programme was limited to provide access point to villages with population greater than 2000. Further, PMJDY focuses on interoperability of accounts which was not there earlier; has simplified KYC guidelines and involves the Districts and States for monitoring and follow-up.’
In the year 2005, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has directed banks to make a basic, ‘no-frills’ account available to all the citizens.  In the year 2012, the RBI issued detailed guidelines to banks about the Basic savings bank deposit account, which was also a financial inclusion scheme. Information about the number of such accounts is not available in the public domain.
As far as PMJDY is concerned,  as per an answer provided by the government in  March 2018 in the Lok Sabha, 31.34 crore accounts were opened. As per another answer provided in August 2018,  the government mentioned that 32.17 crore accounts have been opened under PMJDY. The government also stated that out of the total accounts, 59% are in rural/semi-urban centers and 53% have been opened by women beneficiaries. As on 29th October 2018, the PMJDY website shows that there are 32.99 crore beneficiaries of the scheme.
According to the Census of India’s population enumeration data collected in 2011, there are 24.7 crore households in India. Hence, the number of bank accounts opened under PMJDY is more than the total number of households (32.99 crore). However, it cannot be verified if every family has a bank account (despite assuming a household as a proxy for a family). The Census Bureau of the United States shows that there were 32.88 crore people in the country as on 28th October 2018.
Claim: A bank account has been created for every family in just four years.
Fact: 32.99 crore accounts have been opened under PMJDY but it is not possible to verify if each & every family has a bank account. Hence, the claim remains UNVERIFIED.
Claim: 31.52 crore Jan Dhan accounts have been opened, equivalent to the population of USA.
Fact: A total of 32.99 crore accounts have been opened under PMJDY till date. The latest population of the USA is 32.88 crores. Hence, the claim is TRUE.
Is social security ensured to all citizens?
The next claim is that social security has been made a nationwide phenomenon with Jan Suraksha. It also claims that more than 19 crore people have been insured against life and accident risk or ensured pension.
As per an answer provided by the government in Lok Sabha, “Three social security schemes were launched in May 2015 pertaining to the Insurance and Pension Sectors namely Pradhan Mantri Jeevan Jyoti Bima Yojana (PMJJBY), Pradhan Mantri Suraksha Bima Yojana (PMSBY) and the Atal Pension Yojana (APY) in a move towards creating a universal social security system, targeted especially for the poor and the underprivileged. The schemes provide essential and affordable social protection to all citizens in a convenient manner linked to auto-debit facility from bank accounts. These schemes address the issue of low coverage of life or accident insurance and old age income security in the country.”
PMJJBY was launched in May 2015 and it offers life cover of Rs. 2 lakh to all subscribing bank account holders in the age group of 18 to 50 years, covering death due to any reason, for a premium of Rs.330 per annum per subscriber.  The scheme is administered through LIC and other Life Insurance companies willing to offer the product on similar terms. PMJJBY covers death by any cause including suicide and murder. According to the latest progress report on the Jan Suraksha website, a gross enrollment of 5.3 crore has been reported by banks.
Also launched in May 2015, the PMSBY offers a renewable one-year accidental death cum disability cover of Rs. 2 lakh to all subscribing bank account holders in the age group of 18 to 70 years for a premium of Rs.12 per annum per subscriber. The scheme is administered through Public Sector General Insurance Companies (PSGICs) and other General Insurance companies willing to offer the product on similar terms. According to the latest progress report of the scheme, 13.5 crore is the gross enrollment reported by banks.
The Atal Pension Yojana (APY), is focused on all citizens in the unorganized sector, who join the National Pension System (NPS) administered by the Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority (PFRDA). Under the APY, the subscribers would receive the fixed minimum pension of Rs. 1000 per month, Rs. 2000 per month, Rs. 3000 per month, Rs. 4000 per month, Rs. 5000 per month, at the age of 60 years, depending on their contributions, which itself would be based on the age of joining the APY. According to an answer provided by the government in the Lok Sabha, nearly 1.08 crore enrolled for APY till July 2018.
Similar to the APY , the NPS or  National Pension Scheme was in existence. It was a contribution scheme launched by the Indian government. The NPS was launched  in January 2004. The NPS was made open to every Indian citizen between the age of 18 and 60.  Further, the UPA government had announced Swavalamban Scheme in the Union Budget 2010-11 to address the longevity risk of poorer sections of the country. Under the Swavalamban, the Government of India shall contribute a sum of Rs. 1,000 to each subscriber account of the New Pension System (NPS) during 2010-11 and the next three years provided the subscriber contributes any amount between Rs. 1,000 to Rs. 12,000 per annum. With the introduction of the APY, the enrolment under Swavalamban has been closed and the eligible subscribers under Swavalamban Scheme are being automatically migrated to the Atal Pension Yojana unless they opt out.
Claim: Social security has been made a nationwide phenomenon with Jan Suraksha
Fact: This is a very subjective claim. However, there have existed similar schemes before 2014 as well. Hence, the claim is MISLEADING.
Claim: More than 19 crore people have been insured against life and accident risk or ensured pension.
Fact: 5.3 crore people under PMJJBY, 13.5 crore under PMSBY and 1.08 crore people under APY have been covered. Hence, the claim is TRUE.
This story is part of a larger series on the 4-years of the Modi government. This series has been made possible with the flash grant of the International Fact Checking Network (IFCN). Read the rest of the stories in this series here.

created: October 31, 2018


text:
Fact Checking Government claims on MGNREGS
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
March 14, 2019
The BJP government published an infographic on the 48-months portal making two claims relating to timely payments & women participation in the MGNREGS. This article is a fact check of these claims.
The BJP government published an infographic on the 48-months portal making two claims relating to timely payments & women participation in the MGNREGS. This article is a fact check of these claims.
What is the MGNREGS?
The document of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) along with its amendments states that ‘for rural development,  major focus of planning had been productive absorption of under-employed and surplus labour force of the rural sector. In order to provide supplementary wage-employment to the rural poor through public works, many programmes were initiated by the government of India, namely, National Rural Employment Programme, Rural Landless Employment Guarantee Programme and Jawahar Rozgar Yojna. Currently, Sampoorna Gramin Rozgar Yojana is being implemented all over the country. Though this yojana is providing some relief to the rural poor, its reach has been inadequate in view of the dimension of the unemployment in rural areas. Therefore, an urgent need was felt to ensure at least some minimum days of employment in the shape of manual labour to every household in the rural areas. Accordingly, the government resolved to enact a suitable act which will provide legal guarantee for at least 100 days of employment every year at minimum wages for at least one able-bodied person in every rural poor house-hold. To achieve this objective, the National Rural Employment Guarantee Bill was introduced in the Parliament’.
The act was notified in 200 districts in the first phase with effect from February 2nd, 2006 and then extended to an additional 130 districts in the financial year 2007-2008 (113 districts were notified with effect from April 1st 2007, and 17 districts in Uttar Pradesh were notified with effect from May 15th 2007). The remaining districts have been notified under MGNREGA with effect from April 2008. Thus the MGNREGA covers the entire country with the exception of districts that have a 100% urban population.
Has the payment of wages to workers become more efficient?
The first claim is that ‘payment of wages to workers within 15 days in 85% of the cases as compared to long delays in the past’.
The answers provided to various questions in Lok Sabha have shown a progressive improvement in the time taken to make payments to MGNREGA workers. However, there is a catch here. The government clarified in 2017 that the delays are calculated only until the Funds Transfer Order (FTO) is generated at the block/panchayat level. It does not take into account the actual receipt of the payment by the worker.
Hence the available data on delay is only regarding the generation of the FTO at the block/panchayat level. As per the data available in the Programme Management Information System (MIS), the payments amounting to Rs. 12673.14 crore were delayed beyond the stipulated period of 15 days under the MGNREGA in 2013-14. The payment of wages under MGNREGA is delayed beyond the stipulated period of 15 days due to lack of adequate administrative and technical staff, absence of bank/post offices branches, lack of connectivity, etc. as per the government’s response in the Lok Sabha in 2014.
While the system of payment of compensation for delays exists (under which compensation @ 0.05% per day of delay beyond the 15th day since the closure of the muster roll, would be paid to the wage seekers), it is rarely implemented. For instance, against a total payable amount of compensation in 2018-19 of Rs. 40.1 crores as of 10th March 2019, only Rs. 3.9 crores is approved so far and only Rs. 1.88 crores is paid.
As per the Government’s MIS system, timely payment of wages has been made in 84.52% cases in 2017-18. However, a research paper by Azim Premji University that analysed a large sample of this data concludes that only 32% of the wage payments have been made on time (payments reaching the wage seeker) contrary to the claims of 85%.
Claim: Payment of wages to workers within 15 days in 85% of the cases as compared to long delays in the past.
Fact: As per the Government’s MIS system, timely payment of wages has been made in 84.52% cases in 2017-18. However, a research paper by Azim Premji University that analysed a large sample of data concludes that only 32% of the wage payments have been made on time (payments reaching the wage seeker) contrary to the claims of 85%. Moreover, the government clarified in 2017 that the delays are calculated only until the Funds Transfer Order (FTO) is generated at the block/panchayat level. It does not take into account the actual receipt of the payment by the worker. Hence the claim is PARTLY TRUE.
Did 2016-17 have the highest participation of women?
The second claim is that ‘program has seen highest ever participation of women in 2016-17 at 56%’.
A response in Lok Sabha from 2016 states that ‘rural women are employed in all types of works/ projects permitted under Schedule-I of the Act. The Ministry has issued guidelines to the States from time to time to facilitate women participation by providing worksite facilities such as crèches, drinking water, shade, etc. as per provisions of the Act. It has also been suggested that at least 50% of the worksite supervisors(Mates) at all worksites to be women and special works which require less effort and those that are close to their houses are to be given to pregnant women and lactating mothers’.
The percentage of women person days generated since 2011 can be seen in the following graph. The data for the graph has been collated from Lok Sabha answers to question no. 2208, question no. 1135, question no. 2660 and question no. 4198.  While it is true that the year 2016-17 saw the highest participation of women (56.2%) ever since the inception of the scheme, it has since declined in both 2017-18 and 2018-19.
Claim: Highest ever participation of women in 2016-17 at 56%
Fact: The claim is TRUE that the year 2016-17 saw the highest participation of women (56.2%) ever since the inception of the program. However, it has since declined in both 2017-18 and 2018-19.
This story is part of a larger series on the 4-years of the Modi government. This series has been made possible with the flash grant of the International Fact Checking Network (IFCN). Read the rest of the stories in this series here


text:
Fact Checking Government claims on Minimum Wages & EPF contribution
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
March 12, 2019
The BJP government published an infographic on the 48-months portal that makes 3 claims about labour welfare under the present government. This article is a fact check of the claims.
The BJP government published an infographic on the 48-months portal that makes 3 claims about labour welfare under the present government. This article is a fact check of the claims.
Has minimum wage increased by 42%?
The first claim is that ‘Minimum wage increased by 42%, directly benefiting 55 lakh workers’.
The annual report (2017-18) of the Ministry of Finance states that ‘the employment sector in India poses great challenge in terms of its structure which is dominated by informal workers, high levels of under employment, skill shortages and labour markets with rigid labour laws and institutions. In this context, the Government has undertaken the exercise of rationalization of the 38 Labour Acts by clubbing them into 4 labour codes viz Code on Wages, Code on Industrial Relations, Code on Social Security and Code on Occupational Safety, Health and Working conditions’. This is still work in progress as the relevant bill has not been passed by the Parliament.
The annual report (2017-18) of the Ministry of Labour and Employment states that ‘by simplifying, amalgamating and rationalizing, the relevant provisions of the minimum wages Act, 1948, the payment of bonus Act, 1965 and the equal remuneration Act, 1976. The draft code on wages bill, 2017 has been introduced in the Lok Sabha in August 2017 and referred to standing committee on labour’.
The report also states that  ‘the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 was enacted to safeguard the interests of the workers mostly in the unorganised sector. Under the provision of the Act, both the Central Government and State Governments are the appropriate governments to fix, revise, review and enforce the payment of minimum wages to workers in respect of scheduled employments under their respective jurisdictions. There are 45 scheduled employments in the Central Sphere and as many as 1709 in the State Sphere. The enforcement of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 is ensured at two levels. While in the Central Sphere, the enforcement is done through the Inspecting officers of the Chief Labour Commissioner (Central) commonly designated as Central Industrial Relations Machinery (CIRM), the compliance in the State Sphere is ensured through the State Enforcement Machinery’.
A response in Lok Sabha states that ‘according to the provisions contained in the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, the appropriate Government revises the minimum wages in all the scheduled employments under its jurisdiction at an interval not exceeding five years. Recently, Central Government has revised the basic minimum wages in January 2017 for Agriculture, Construction, Non-Coal Mines, Stone-Mines, Sweeping and Cleaning, Watch & Ward and Loading/ Unloading, after consultation with the Minimum Wages Advisory Board. However, in the Central sphere, wages are revised on half yearly basis effective from 1st April and 1st October every year by addition of Variable Dearness Allowance’. What this essentially means is that the central government can only revise minimum wages for employment under its jurisdiction. It cannot exercise control or revise minimum wages of any employments under the jurisdiction of the respective state government.
The following table shows the differences between the last revised minimum wages  of the UPA and the latest one of the BJP government.  The comparison is for the semi-skilled (skilled workers are taken where the category is not existing) in A category places including the variable dearness allowance (VDA).
While the central government exercises control over the eight sectors mentioned above, the states are responsible for a lot more. For example, in the state of Telangana , the Government of Telangana have fixed minimum rates of wages in (73) Scheduled employments under Minimum Wages Act, 1948 in which 65 employments (industry related) are covered under part-I and 8 (Agriculture related) Scheduled employments under part-II of the said Act. Presently, the wages have been fixed to each and every category under the above specific employments and as a result wages are fixed covering nearly for 20 to 40 categories of workers in each employment’.
While this points to the fact that the claim itself is misleading, in the budget speech of 2019-20, the finance minister stated that ‘during the last five years, the minimum wages of labourers of the all categories have been increased by 42%, which is the highest ever’.
Finally, it can be said that the minimum wages for sectors under the central sphere have increased by varying amounts where as the claim makes a blanket statement about minimum wages having increased across the board.
On the other hand, there is no publicly available data on how many people have actually benefitted from this revision in the central sector.
Claim: Minimum wage increased by 42%, directly benefiting 55 lakh workers.
Fact: Firstly, the central government has very limited jurisdiction to determine wages (as compared to state governments) since only a few sectors are under in the central sector. Secondly, no comprehensive data is available to verify how many people have benefitted from the increase in wages. Hence the claim is MISLEADING.
How many people benefitted from the seventh pay commission?
The second claim is that ‘Seventh pay commission benefitted 50 lakh employees and 35 lakh pensioners’.
The report of the  Seventh Pay Commission states that ‘the Government of India has also, from time to time, set up various Pay Commissions for improving the pay structure of its employees so that they can attract better talent to public service. In this 21st century, the global economy has undergone a vast change and it has seriously impacted the living conditions of the salaried class. The economic value of the salaries paid to them earlier has diminished. The economy has become more and more consumer economy. Therefore, to keep the salary structure of the employees viable, it has become necessary to improve the pay structure of their employees so that better, more competent and talented people could be attracted for governance’.
The annual report (2017-18) of the Ministry of Finance  states that ‘the recommendations of the 7th Central Pay Commission in respect of Central Government employees, Armed Forces personnel, Members of All India Services, etc. which were submitted to the Government on 19th November, 2015, were accepted by the Government in respect of matters pertaining to pay and pension in July, 2016. The decision of the Government in regard to the recommendations pertaining to pay and pension entailed an additional financial implication of Rs. 84,933 crores in the year 2016-17’.
The same report goes on to describe that ‘the decisions of the Government on the recommendations of the 7th Central Pay Commission benefited over 1 crore Central Government employees, including Armed Forces personnel and Members of All India Services, comprising approximately 53 lakh pensioners including Armed Forces personnel’.
Hence the numbers reported by the ministry in their annual report are far higher than the numbers in the claim. However, pay commissions are setup on a regular basis and till date, seven pay commissions have been set up to review and make recommendations on the work and pay structure of the central government employees and the army personnel.
Claim: Seventh pay commission benefitted 50 lakh employees and 35 lakh pensioners.
Fact: The decisions of the Government on the recommendations of the 7th Central Pay Commission benefited over 1 crore Central Government employees and Members of All India Services, comprising approximately 53 lakh pensioners including the armed forces personnel. The numbers are far higher than the claim because of the inclusion of the armed forces personnel. Hence the claim is TRUE. However, pay commissions are setup on a regular basis and till date, seven pay commissions have been set up to review and make recommendations on the work and pay structure of the central government employees and the army personnel.
What is the government’s contribution to EPF?
The third claim is that ‘contribution of 12% to EPF for new employees for 3 years by the government in sectors employing large number of people’.
The annual report (2017-18) of the Ministry of Labour and Employment details that the employees provident fund organization (EPFO) is ‘reposnsible for administration of the employees provident funds and miscellaneous provisions Act, 1952. The schemes for provident fund, family pension and deposit linked insurance are implemented by the organization for the benefit of workers covered under the scheme. The organization is also responsible for administration of employees’ pension scheme, 1995’.
The Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, after the latest amendment states that ‘the contribution which shall be paid by the employer to the fund shall be 10%  of the basic wages, dearness allowance and retaining allowance, if any, for the time being payable to each of the employees whether employed by him directly or by or through a contractor, and the employee’s contribution shall be equal to the contribution payable by the employer in respect of him and may, if any employee so desires, be an amount exceeding ten percent of his basic wages, dearness allowance and retaining allowance if any, subject to the condition that the employer shall not be under an obligation to pay any contribution over and above his contribution payable under this section’.
The scheme document of the Pradhan Mantri Rojgar Protsahan Yojana states that ‘in the Budget Speech 2016-17, it was stated that in order to incentivize creation of new jobs in the formal sector, Government of India will pay the Employee Pension Scheme contribution of 8.33% for all new employees enrolling in EPFO for the first three years of their employment. This will incentivize the employers to recruit unemployed persons and also to bring into the books the informal employees. In order to channelize this intervention towards the target group of semi-skilled and unskilled workers, the scheme will be applicable to those with salary up to Rs 15,000 per month. I have made a budget provision of Rs 1,000 crore for this scheme’.
The scheme has been amended in April 2018, where the government will pay the full employer’s contribution (both EPF & EPS).
Claim: Contribution of 12% to EPF for new employees for 3 years by the government in sectors employing large number of people.
Fact: Government of India will pay the full employer’s contribution (both EPF & EPS) of 12%. Hence, the claim is TRUE.
This story is part of a larger series on the 4-years of the Modi government. This series has been made possible with the flash grant of the International Fact Checking Network (IFCN). Read the rest of the stories in this series here


text:
Fact Checking Government claims on MUDRA & Corporate Tax rates
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
January 14, 2019
Making certain claims about the MUDRA scheme, the BJP government published an infographic on the 48-months portal. This article is a fact check of the claims.
Making certain claims about the MUDRA scheme, the BJP  government published an infographic on the 48-months portal. This article is a fact check of the claims.
What is the MUDRA scheme?
The Pradhan Mantri MUDRA Yojana (PMMY) is a scheme launched in April  2015 for providing loans up to Rs. 10 lakhs to the non-corporate, non-farm Micro & Small enterprises (MSEs). All such loans are classified as MUDRA loans under PMMY. These loans are extended by Commercial Banks, RRBs, Small Finance Banks, Cooperative Banks, MFIs and NBFCs. The borrower can approach any of the lending institutions mentioned above or can apply online through the portal.
However, it has to noted that the focus on the MSME sector is not a new phenomenon. The first NDA government launched the Credit Guarantee Fund Scheme for MSMEs in August 2000 to provide guarantee cover for collateral free credit facilities extended to micro and small enterprises (MSEs). During the UPA, the Government had constituted a Prime Minister’s Task Force on Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises (MSME) in September 2009, which submitted its report in January 2010. The report had made recommendations in the areas of credit, marketing, labour issues, rehabilitation and exit policy, infrastructure/technology/skill development, taxation and special measures for North-Eastern Region and Jammu & Kashmir.
Among other things, the recommendations of the task force also include advice to the banks to achieve a 20% year-on-year growth in credit to MSEs and a 10% annual growth in the number of micro enterprise accounts.  The banks have also been advised that the allocation of 60% of the MSE advances to the micro enterprises is to be achieved in stages viz., 50 per cent in the year 2010-11, 55 per cent in the year 2011-12 and 60 per cent in the year 2012-13. Many other steps were also recommended and some were implemented during the previous government. PMMY being implemented by the current government is a dedicated scheme for MSEs that led to the establishment of Micro Units Development & Refinance Agency Ltd (MUDRA). MUDRA bank is essentially a refinancing institution and does not directly lend loans to end customers. Rather, the loans are given by Commercial Banks, RRBs, Small Finance Banks, Cooperative Banks, MFIs and NBFCs.
How many Women and SC/ST/OBCs have received these loans?
The first claim is that of the total loan accounts, 76% are of women and more than 50% belong to SCs, STs and OBCs.
The PMMY website has year wise performance reports on the website. Data from these reports suggests that out of a total of 12.27 crore loan accounts under the MUDRA scheme between 2015-16 and 2017-18, 9.03 crore belong to women entrepreneurs and 6.71 crore belong to SCs/STs/OBCs. Hence the percentage of loan accounts belonging to women is around 74% while those belonging to SCs/STs/OBCs is around 55%.
Claim: Of the total loan accounts, 76% are of women and more than 50% belong to SCs, STs and OBCs.
Fact: Data from performance reports of PMMY suggests that out of a total of 12.27 crore loan accounts under the MUDRA scheme between 2015-16 and 2017-18, 9.03 crore belong to women entrepreneurs and 6.71 crore belong to SCs/STs/OBCs. Hence the percentage of loan accounts belonging to women is around 74% while those belonging to SCs/STs/OBCs is around 55%. Hence the claim is TRUE.  However, it has to be noted that focus on the MSE sector is not a new phenomenon.
How many small entrepreneurs were benefitted under the MUDRA scheme?
The second claim is that collateral free loans were provided for 12 crore small entrepreneurs under MUDRA. The annual report available on the MUDRA Yojana page states that, ‘NBFCs have emerged as the most effective and powerful vehicle for delivering financial assistance to the Micro and Small Enterprises which are otherwise not being catered by the conventional banking system due to reasons of weak documentation, lack of collateral security, shortage of capital, etc. Share of NBFCs in credit to MSME sector rose to 18% in FY 2017-18 from 8% five years ago. The NBFC’s share should expand to 22-23% by March 2022. Further with the deteriorating asset quality of Public Sector Banks and invocation of PCA by RBI against 11 Public Sector Banks, MSMEs will become more reliant on NBFCs for their credit needs’.
According to an answer provided in Lok Sabha in August 2018, over 13.47 crore loans amounting to more than Rs. 6.37 lakh crores have been sanctioned under PMMY as of August 2018. Out of these 13.47 crore loan accounts, 12.23 crore loans were provided under the SHISHU category (loans covering up to Rs. 50,000). In other words, close to 90% of the loans under PMMY were provided to small entrepreneurs.
Claim: Collateral free loans for 12 crore small entrepreneurs under MUDRA.
Fact: Out of these 13.47 crore loan accounts under PMMY till August 2018, 12.23 crore  were provided under the SHISHU category (loans covering up to Rs. 50,000). In other words, close to 90% of the loans under PMMY were provided to small entrepreneurs.  Hence, the claim is TRUE.
Has the corporate tax rate been slashed?
The last claim is that corporate tax rate has been slashed to 25% for companies with annual turnover up to Rs. 250 crores from the existing Rs. 50 crores.
As stated in a response in Lok Sabha in July 2015,  ‘The Government has in Budget 2015-16 announced reduction of the rate of Corporate Tax from 30% to 25% over the next four years along with rationalisation and removal of various kinds of tax exemptions and incentives for corporate taxpayers, which incidentally account for a large number of tax disputes. The reduction in Corporate Tax rate along with the removal of existing deductions and incentives for corporate tax payers shall be implemented through appropriate legislative amendments to be carried out through the Finance Bill’.
In a more recent answer in Lok Sabha in March 2018, it has been stated that , ‘the Finance Bill, 2018, introduced in the Parliament on 1st February, 2018, proposes to provide for reduced corporate income tax rate of 25 per cent in the case of a domestic company where its total turnover or the gross receipt in the previous year 2016-2017 does not exceed two hundred and fifty crore rupees’.
The Finance Bill 2018 states that, ‘in the case of domestic companies,  the rate of income-tax shall be 25% of the total income where the total turnover or gross receipts of previous year 2016-2017 does not exceed Rs. 250 crores and in all other cases the rate of income-tax shall 30% of the total income’.
Claim: Corporate tax rate slashed to 25% for companies with annual turnover up to 250 crore rupees from 50 crore rupees.
Fact: The finance bill of 2018 provides for 25% corporate tax rate for companies whose annual turnover does not exceed Rs. 250 crores in 2016-2017. Hence, the claim is TRUE.

created: January 14, 2019


text:
Fact Checking Government claims on National Highways & Roads
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
December 21, 2018
The BJP government uploaded an infographic on the 48-months portal that makes certain claims about highway construction by the current government. This article is a fact check of these claims.
The BJP government uploaded an infographic on the 48-months portal that makes certain claims about highway construction by the current government. This article is a fact check of these claims.
Has the expenditure on read construction increased?
The first claim is that expenditure on road construction was Rs. 32,483 crore rupees in 2013-14 and it increased to Rs. 1,16,324 crore rupees in 2017-18.
As per the government’s budget documents, the actual expenditure on roads & bridges in the year 2013-14 was Rs. 31,588 crores. This includes amount from the Internal and Extra Budgetary Resources (IEBR). As per an answer provided by the government in the Lok Sabha in August 2018, the allocation of funds and expenditure incurred for development of National Highways & roads during 2017-18 was Rs. 1,09,453 crores and Rs. 1,00,179 crores respectively including Internal and Extra Budgetary Resources (IEBR).
In terms of the budget size, the total union budget expenditure in 2013-14 was Rs. 15.59 lakh crores out of which the amount spent on roads is Rs. 31,588 crores or roughly 2% of the total budget expenditure. On the other hand, the revised budget expenditure for 2017-18 is Rs. 22.18 lakh crores out of which the amount spent on roads is Rs 1,00,179 crores or 4.5% of the total budget expenditure. Hence, in terms of proportion of expenditure, the expenditure on roads has more than doubled in the last 4 years.
Claim: Expenditure on road construction was 32,483 crore rupees in 2013-14. It is 1,16,324 crore rupees in 2017-18.
Fact: The actual expenditure on roads & bridges in 2013-14 was Rs. 31,588 crores. In 2017-18, the actual expenditure was Rs. 1,00,179 crores. Though the actual numbers are not exactly right, the proportion of budget expenditure on roads has more than doubled. Hence the claim is PARTLY TRUE.
What has been the increase in the national highway network?
The second claim is that national highway network expanded from 92,851kms in 2013-14 to 1,20,543 kms in 2017-18. According to the annual report (2013-14) of the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH), the length of national highways/expressways was 92,851 km by the end of 2013-14. The annual report (2017-18) states that the length of national highways/expressways is 1,20,543 km. The following graph shows that the national highways network has been increasing steadily over the past years. The percentage increase in the total length of national highways during the last four years of the UPA government is more or less the same for the first four years of the current government.
Claim: National highway network expanded from 92, 851kms in 2013-14 to 1,20,543 kms in 2017-18.
Fact: The length of the national highway network increased from 92,851 km in 2013-14 to 1,20,543 km in 2017-18.  Hence, the claim is TRUE. However, the percentage increase in the total length of national highways during the last four years of the UPA government is more or less the same for the first four years of the current government.
Has the speed of National Highway construction increase?
The third claim is that Speed of highway construction increased from 12 kms/day in 2013-14 to 27 kms/day in 2017-18. Data taken from an answer provided in the Lok Sabha shows that the length of national highways constructed in the year 2013-14 is 4260 km. In a press release, the government stated that 9829 km of national highway was constructed in 2017-18. This implies that 12 km of national highways has been constructed per day in 2013-14 and 27 km per day in 2017-18. The following graph shows the change in average speed of construction over the years based on data gathered from the annual reports of the ministry and answers provided in the parliament. The average speed of construction did increase substantially in the last two years.
Claim: Speed of highway construction increased from 12 kms/day in 2013-14 to 27 kms/day in 2017-18.
Fact: 12 km of national highways have been constructed per day in 2013-14 and it increased substantially to 27 km per day in 2017-18. Hence the claim is TRUE.
What about the Coastal Connectivity roads?
The last claim is that 2000 kms of coastal connectivity roads are identified for construction and development. According to an answer provided in the Lok Sabha, 2000 kms of coastal and port connectivity roads have been approved by the cabinet under the Bharatmala Pariyojana (BMP) Phase I in October 2017.  The roads identified have been synergized with the Sagarmala programme.
Claim: 2000 kms of coastal connectivity roads identified for construction and development.
Fact: 2000 kms of coastal and port connectivity roads have been approved by the cabinet under the Bharatmala Pariyojana (BMP) Phase I. Hence, the claim is TRUE.
This story is part of a larger series on the 4-years of the Modi government. This series has been made possible with the flash grant of the International Fact Checking Network (IFCN). Read the rest of the stories in this series here

created: December 21, 2018


text:
Fact Checking Government claims on Pradhan Mantri Kisan Sampada Yojana
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
February 20, 2019
The present BJP government published an infographic on the 48-months portal that makes five claims about value addition and improvement in the supply chain of the agricultural sector. This article is a fact check of these claims.
The present BJP government published an infographic on the 48-months portal that makes five claims about value addition and improvement in the supply chain of the agricultural sector. This article is a fact check of these claims.
What is the PMKSY?
The first claim is that ‘PMKSY launched to modernize supply chain infrastructure.’
PMKSY stands for the Pradhan Mantri Kisan Sampada Yojana. The website of the scheme states that ‘Government of India (GOI) has approved a new Central Sector Scheme – Pradhan Mantri Kisan SAMPADA Yojana  (Scheme for Agro-Marine Processing and Development of Agro-Processing Clusters) with an allocation of Rs.. 6,000 crore for the period 2016-20 coterminous with the 14th Finance Commission cycle. The scheme will be implemented by Ministry of Food Processing Industries (MoFPI). The scheme was approved in May 2017. The following schemes will be implemented under PM Kisan SAMPADA Yojana:
Another response in the Lok Sabha in January 2019 predicts that ‘PMKSY is expected to leverage investment of Rs.31,400 crore, handling of 334 lakh MT of agro-produce valuing Rs. 1.04 lakh crore, will benefit 20 lakh farmers and generate 5.3 lakh direct/ indirect employment in the country by the year 2019-20’.  The progress up to March 2018 is as follows:
While the scheme itself is new and has been launched under the BJP government, it is of interest to note that under the UPA government also, ‘Ministry of Food Processing Industries provided assistance  for development of integrated cold chain and preservation of infrastructure facilities from farm gate to the consumer.’  Most of the components under the PMKSY were already under implementation and have received grants and funding much before the BJP government (2006 in some cases).
Claim: PMKSY launched to modernize supply chain infrastructure.
Fact: Government of India approved a new Central Sector Scheme – PRADHAN MANTRI KISAN SAMPADA YOJANA – (PMKSY) in May 2017. Hence the claim is TRUE. However, most of the components under this umbrella scheme have been in implementation even before the BJP has come into power.
Did budget allocation for food processing industry double?
The second claim is that ‘budget allocation doubled to push food processing industry’.
The claim does not specify the years of comparison. Hence it is difficult to verify the claim. However, the actual expenditure under the Ministry of Food Processing Industries has not followed a particular trend. It has increased & decreased both during the UPA as well as the NDA. If the actual expenditure in 2014-15 is taken as the base, then the revised estimate for 2018-19 is about 70% more than the 2014-15 figure, but not exactly double.
Claim: Budget allocation doubled to push food processing industry.
Fact: The claim does not specify the years of comparison. Hence it is difficult to verify the claim. However, the actual expenditure under the Ministry of Food Processing Industries has not followed a particular trend. It has increased & decreased both during the UPA as well as the NDA. If the actual expenditure in 2014-15 is taken as the base, then the revised estimate for 2018-19 is about 70% more than the 2014-15 figure, but not exactly double. Hence the claim remains UNVERIFIED.
What are GrAMs?
The third claim is that ‘GrAMs, electronically linked to e-NAM, to make direct sale to consumers and bulk purchasers’.
A response in Lok Sabha in February 2019 stated that ‘in the Union Budget 2018-19, Government has announced upgradation and development of existing 22,000 village haats to Gramin Agriculture Market (GrAMs) through convergence of various schemes such as Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS) and others. The GrAMs are to be exempted from Agricultural Produce Market Committees (APMCs) regulations and linked to e-NAM. These GrAMs are intended to facilitate farmers in selling their produce to direct buyers’.
It has to be noted that the village haats were in existence from long before the BJP government came into power but their up-gradation and linking to the electronic market is an innovation.
Claim: GrAMs, electronically linked to e-NAM, to make direct sale to consumers and bulk purchasers.
Fact: GrAMs (Gramin Agriculture Markets) are an up-gradation to the existing village haats through the convergence of different government schemes. These are to be linked to the e-NAM to facilitate farmers in selling their produce directly to buyers. Hence, the claim is TRUE. However, it has to be noted that the village haats have been in existence for a long time.
What is Operation Greens?
The fourth claim is that ‘Operation Greens to address price volatility of perishable commodities like tomato, onion and potato’.
Press Information bureau published in February 2018 that ‘taking Government’s vision ahead, the Finance Minister, in Budget 2018-19, announced the launching of ‘Operation Greens’ to address price volatility of perishable commodities like potatoes, tomatoes and onions, at an outlay of Rs. 500 crores. ‘Operation Greens’, on the lines of ‘Operation Flood’, shall promote Farmer Producers Organizations (FPOs), agri-logistics, processing facilities and professional management in the sector’.
The scheme has since been launched for Tomato, Onion and Potato (TOP) value chain with a budgetary allocation of Rs. 500 crores spread over 2018-19 and 2019-20 with allocation of Rs. 200 crores and Rs. 300 crores respectively.
Claim: Operation Greens to address price volatility of perishable commodities like tomato, onion and potato.
Fact: The Finance Minister, in Budget 2018-19, announced the launching of ‘Operation Greens’ to address price volatility of perishable commodities like potatoes, tomatoes and onions. The scheme has since been launched for Tomato, Onion and Potato (TOP) value chain with a budgetary allocation of Rs. 500 crores spread over 2018-19 and 2019-20 with allocation of Rs. 200 crores and Rs. 300 crores respectively. Hence the claim is TRUE.
Are 22,000 rural haats being developed into GrAMs?
The fifth claim is that ‘existing 22,000 rural haats are being developed into Gramin Agricultural Markets (GrAMs), helping 86% small farmers’.
According to a response in the Lok Sabha, the total number of rural haats in the country is 22711, majority of which are under local institutions of Panchayati Raj of States. Details about how many small farmers are going to benefit from this scheme are not available in the public domain.
Claim: Develop existing 22,000 rural haats into Gramin Agricultural Markets (GrAMs), helping 86% small farmers.
Fact: The total number of rural haats in the country is 22711. But data/information regarding how many small farmers it will benefit, is not available in the public domain. Hence, the first part of the claim is TRUE but the second part of it remains UNVERIFIED.
This story is part of a larger series on the 4-years of the Modi government. This series has been made possible with the flash grant of the International Fact Checking Network (IFCN). Read the rest of the stories in this series here

created: February 20, 2019


text:
Fact Checking Government claims on Prices of essential medicines & Operationalization of Pharmacies for generic drugs
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
April 10, 2019
The BJP government
published an infographic on the 48-months portal that makes claims about
affordable healthcare, specifically about essential medicines. This article is
a fact check of the claims.
The BJP government published an infographic on the 48-months portal that makes claimsabout affordable healthcare, specifically about essential medicines. Thisarticle is a fact check of the claims.
Have some essential medicines been brought under price control? What
have been the benefits?
The first claim is that ‘1054
essential medicines brought under price control regime giving consumers total
benefit of more than 10,000 crores’.
The prices of drugs are controlled under the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 where drugs are referred to as per their definition in the Drugs & Cosmetics Act, 1940. At present, the ceiling prices of medicines of various strength/dosageforms as declared by Ministry of Health & Family Welfare and included inthe National List of Essential Medicines (NLEM), 2015, are fixed by National Pharmaceutical
Pricing Authority (NPPA).
National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority(NPPA), an independent body of experts under the Ministry of Chemicals& Fertilizers has the power, under the Drugs (Prices Control) Order, 2013 DPCO, 2013, to fix the prices ofany drugs.  However, the government does not maintain any information on acomparative basis with other countries.
The Government notified the National Pharmaceutical Pricing Policy, 2012 (NPPP-2012) in December 2012 with an objective to put in place a regulatory frameworkfor pricing of drugs so as to ensure availability of required medicines oressential medicines  at reasonableprices.
Pursuant to the announcement of NationalPharmaceutical Pricing Policy, 2012 (NPPP, 2012), Government notified the DPCO2013 in May 2013. All the medicines specified in the National List of EssentialMedicines prepared by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and revisedfrom time to time are included in the Schedule – I of DPCO, 2013 which areunder price control in accordance with provisions of DPCO 2013.
As per para 17 of DPCO 2013, a decision toamend the first schedule (amendments to the list of essential medicines), canbe taken by the Government clearly stating the reasons within 60 days ofreceipt of communication from the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. Oncethe amendments are approved, these changes will be notified and the ceilingprices will be fixed within a period of 60 days from the date of notification.
According to a response in Lok Sabha in  July 2014, ‘all the medicines specified in the National List of Essential
Medicines, 2011 (NLEM, 2011) have been included in Schedule 1 of the Drugs
(Prices Control) Order, 2013 (DPCO, 2013) which contains 348 drugs covering 680
formulations which also include some drugs for cancer and antibiotics. National
Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority(NPPA) has notified prices of 440 scheduled
formulations up to June 2014.  Significant reduction in prices have been
effected on the medicines notified under DPCO, 2013 as compared to the highest
price prevalent prior to that which differs from formulation to formulation’.
As per a response in the Lok Sabha, theGovernment monitors the overall price situation on a regular basis and calibrates its policies on the basis of emergingdemand/supply position on an aggregate as well as disaggregate basis,particularly with a focus on essential commodities. Various representationsreceived on prices and policies relating to price control are dealt bydepartments concerned that deal with the subject matter. The Committee ofSecretaries (CoS) meets periodically and reviews the situation. Ministryof Health and Family Welfare has constituted an expert core committee to review and recommend the revision ofNational List of Essential Medicines (NLEM)-2011 in the context of contemporaryknowledge of use of therapeutic products.
It should be noted that ‘the DPCO 2013 has provisions where prices of
the Scheduled medicines are revised as per the Wholesale Price Index (WPI) and
also as and when the National List of Essential Medicines is revised by the
Ministry of Health and Family Welfare or five years from the date of fixing the
ceiling price whichever is earlier’.
As per information shared by the governmentin the Lok Sabha, the fixation of ceiling prices/MRP is estimated to haveresulted in a total saving of Rs. 11,463 crores to the public afterimplementation of DPCO, 2013. Till June 2018, the Government has fixed the ceilingprices of 851 medicines (including 4 medicaldevices i.e. Cardiac stents, drug eluting stents, condoms and intra uterinedevices) under Revised Schedule – I based on National List of EssentialMedicines, 2015 (NLEM, 2015).
Claim: 1054 essential medicines brought under price control regime giving consumers total benefit of more than 10,000 crores.
Fact: As on June 2018, the government has fixed the ceiling prices of 851 medicines. This has led to a total savings of 11,463 crore rupees since the implementation of DPCO in 2013. Hence, the first part of the claim is FALSE and the second part is MISLEADING because it includes the achievement of the previous government also.
What are the PM Bharatiya Janaushadi Kendras?
The second claim is that ‘affordable medicines with PM Bharatiya
Janaushadi Kendras (PMBJP). More than 3000 stores, resulting in savings of over
50%’.
BPPI (Bureau of Pharma PSUs of India), under the administrative control of the Department of Pharmaceuticalsis the implementation agency for the PMBJP. BPPI has been established with thesupport of all the Pharma CPSUs for coordinating procurement, supply andmarketing of generic drugs through the Pradhan Mantri Bhartiya JanaushadhiKendras.
The annual report (2017-18) of theDepartment of Pharmaceuticals states that ‘the
Jan Aushadhi Scheme was launched in the year 2008 with the aim of selling
affordable generic medicines through dedicated sales outlets i.e. Jan Aushadhi
Stores in various districts across the country’.
It goes on to describe that ‘the first Jan Aushadhi Store was opened at Amritsar
in Punjab in November 2008. The original target of the campaign was to
establish Jan Aushadhi Stores in every district of our country. Recently, Pradhan
Mantri Jan Aushadhi Yojana (PMJAY) has been renamed as Pradhan Mantri Bhartiya
Janaushadhi Pariyojana (PMBJP) and Pradhan Mantri Jan Aushadhi Kendra (PMJAK)
as Pradhan Mantri Bhartiya Janaushadhi Pariyojana (PMBJP) Kendras.”
It terms of the progress of the schemeitself, ‘as on end March 2012, only 112
PMBJP Kendras could be opened. To have an accelerated growth of the campaign, a
New Business Plan was released during August 2013 with an ambitious target of
opening 3,000 PMBJP Kendras by the end of 2016-17. The plan also contained
certain changes in the scheme. Still by the end of previous financial year
2015-16, the number of PMBJP Kendras could reach a level of 269 functional
PMBJP Kendras only’.
In the new scheme, the application processhas been simplified and the an application fee of 2000 rupees has been removed. Number of PMBJP Kendras functioning ason 05.01.2018 has reached 3,041 (spread over 26States/ UTs), out of which 1969 PMBJP Kendras have been opened during  2017-18 (till January 2018). The MRP in the PMBJP kendras issubstantially lesser when compared to the average MRP of the top three leadingbrands selling the same product in open market. However, it is not possible toverify if each and every product is resulting in a 50% saving, because of thehigh number of products available.
Claim: Affordable medicines with PM bharatiya janaushadi kendras. More than 3000 stores, resulting in savings of over 50%
Fact: A total of 3,041 PMBJP kendras are functioning. While the scheme is ensuring that the MRP of products sold in these places is substantially lower than the ones in the market, it cannot be verified if it is 50% lower. Hence, the first part of the claim is TRUE and the second part of the claim remains UNVERIFIED.
What are AMRIT pharmacies?
The third claim is that ‘AMRIT pharmacies provide drugs for cancer
and cardiovascular diseases at a discount of 60 to 90 percent’.
As per information shared in the Lok Sabha,AMRIT (Affordable Medicines and Reliable Implants for Treatment) Pharmacies are being opened and operated by M/s.HLLLifecare Ltd., a Central Public Sector Undertaking (CPSU) of Ministry of Health& Family Welfare, with an objective of providing affordable medicines fortreatment of Cancer, Cardiovascular and other diseases, stents, implants,surgical disposables and other consumables, thereby reducing the out of pocketexpenses. The first AMRIT pharmacy was opened inNovember 2015 at AIIMS, New Delhi.
As informed by HLL Lifecare Ltd., atpresent, 146 AMRIT pharmacies are operational in thecountry.  The average discount that patients can avail at AMRIT storesranges from 50% to 55%.
Claim: AMRIT pharmacies provide drugs for cancer and cardiovascular diseases at a discount of 60 to 90 percent.
Fact: AMRIT pharmacies provide drugs for cancer, cardiovascular and other diseases, stents, implants, surgical disposables and other consumables. The average discount that patients can avail ranges from 50 to 55%. Hence, the claim is FALSE.
Have the prices of cardiac stents and knee implants
reduced by half?
The fourth claim is that ‘prices of cardiac stents and knee implants
reduced by 50 to 70%’.
Ceiling prices of coronary stentshave been notified in February 2017, which resulted in nearly 85% decrease inprices of Bare Metal Stents and nearly 74% decrease in the prices of DrugEluting Stents. NPPA has fixed the ceiling prices of coronary stentsunder two categories i.e. Bare Metal Stent at Rs. 7,260 per unit and DrugEluting Stents (DES) including metallic DES and Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold(BVS)/ Biodegradable Stents at Rs. 29,600 per unit. NPPA is also monitoringthat there is no shortage of Stents in the market and the price capping isadhered to. The Government has notified the ceiling prices of Knee Implants system in August 2017.
The fixation of ceiling prices/MRP isestimated to have resulted in a total saving of Rs. 11,463crores to the public after implementation of DPCO, 2013. This includes thesaving of Rs. 4,547 crores on account of fixation of ceiling price of coronarystents (including re-fixation) and Rs. 1,500 crores on account of pricefixation of Knee implants.
Claim: Prices of cardiac stents and knee implants reduced by 50 to 70%”
Fact: NPPA has fixed the ceiling prices of coronary stents and knee implant systems in 2017. The average price reduction in both cases is in excess of 50%. Hence the claim is TRUE.
This story is part of a larger series on the 4-years of the Modi government. This series has been made possible with the flash grant of the International Fact Checking Network (IFCN). Read the rest of the stories in this series here


text:
Fact Checking Government claims on Scholarship to Persons with Disability
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
October 15, 2018
An infographic published by the government on the 48-month portal makes claims regarding scholarship to persons with disability. Here is a fact check of these claims.
Claim: Scholarship scheme to pursue Technical Education
The first claim by the government is that, scholarship scheme was launched in 2014 to provide scholarship to pursue technical education. The compendium of all the schemes of the Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities has the information on pre-matric & post-matric scholarships. There is no mention of a specific scholarship scheme for those who wish to pursue technical education.
Scholarships were being provided for technical education by NHFDC (The National Handicapped Finance and Development Corporation). The NHFDC which is under the ‘Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities’ functions as an apex institution for extending financial support for education, employment, and entrepreneurship of the persons with disabilities through state channelizing agencies nominated by the state governments.  NHFDC was set up in 1997  as a not for profit company.
The scholarship scheme implemented by the NHFDC has been there for quite some time and was not launched in 2014. The NHFDC implements the Scholarship Scheme (Trust Fund) and Scholarship Scheme (National Fund), for award of scholarship to students with disabilities pursuing Higher and Technical education. This scheme was there even during the UPA government.  There were 2000 fresh beneficiaries of this scheme in 2013-14 and a similar number in 2017-18. Under this scheme, complete tuition fee was provided in case of government institutions and a similar amount for private institutions. The monthly maintenance amount was at least Rs 2500 per month and other allowances for books/stationery were also provided. As per information on the NHFDC website, this scheme was discontinued in December 2017.
However, the NDA government launched a ‘Saksham Scholarship’ scheme in November 2014 under the Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD) to support 1000 differently abled students  to pursue technical education in a year. The amount of scholarship is tuition Fee of Rs 30,000 or at actual, whichever is less and Rs. 2000 per month for 10 months as incidental charges each year. While it is true that the NDA government launched a new scheme for scholarships to the disabled, they have closed down an earlier scheme which was catering to a greater number of beneficiaries with a greater amount of tuition fee & maintenance amount.
Claim 1: Scholarship scheme has been launched in 2014 to provide scholarship to pursue technical education
Fact: The scholarship scheme for disabled people to pursue technical education existed even during the UPA. The NDA government only closed down the existing scheme and launched a new scheme ‘SAKSHAM’ under the MHRD, reducing the number of beneficiaries and the amount of scholarship. Hence the claim is MISLEADING.
Claim 2: 1000 scholarships per annum are available
Fact: The scholarship scheme for disabled people to pursue technical education existed even during the UPA. The NDA government only closed down the existing scheme and launched a new scheme ‘SAKSHAM’ under the MHRD. The new scheme is providing 1000 scholarships per annum. But it has to be noted that this number is less than the number of beneficiaries and the amount of scholarship provided under the old scheme. Hence the claim is MISLEADING.
Claim 3: 30,000 rupees is provided towards tuition fee and 20,000 as contingency allowance.
Fact:  The ‘Saksham’ scheme under the MHRD provides tuition Fee of Rs 30,000 or at actual, whichever is less and Rs. 2000 per month for 10 months as incidental charges each year. However it has to be noted that this amount is less than what was provided under the old scheme. Hence the claim is MISLEADING.
Claim: Establishment of Indian Sign Language Research and Training Centre (ISLRTC)
The fourth claim is that Indian Sign Language Research and Training Centre (ISLRTC) was established. Indian Sign Language Research and training Center (ISLRTC) is an autonomous organization under the administrative and financial control of Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities.
A brief history on the ISLRTC website tells us that the 11th Five Year Plan (2007-2012) acknowledged that the needs of people with hearing disabilities had been relatively neglected and envisaged the development of a sign language research and training center, to promote and develop sign language and training of teachers and interpreters. The Finance Minister announced the setting up of ISLRTC in the Budget speech of 2010-11. In 2011, the government announced the establishment of the Indian Sign Language Research and Training Center (ISLRTC) as an autonomous center of the Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU), Delhi. In 2013, the center at IGNOU was closed.
In April 2015, after the NDA came to power, the government decided to integrate ISLRTC with the regional center of the Ali Yavar Jung National Institute of Hearing Handicapped (AYJNIHH) at Delhi. However, the Deaf community protested this decision due to the different perspectives and goals of ISLRTC and AYJNIHH.
The protests and meetings with the ministers resulted in the Union Cabinet approving the setting up of ISLRTC as an independent society. An order to this effect was issued on 28th September, 2015, leading to the establishment of ISLRTC.
Claim: Indian Sign Language Research and Training Centre (ISLRTC) established.
Fact: ISLRTC was first established as an autonomous center in IGNOU in 2011 which was later closed down. It was established as an independent society in  2015 by the current government. Hence, the claim is only PARTLY TRUE.
This story is part of a larger series on the 4-years of the Modi government. This series has been made possible with the flash grant of the International Fact Checking Network (IFCN). Read the rest of the stories in this series here.

created: October 15, 2018