People's Democracy

V P Singh and Left Parties Demand

‘Enact National Slum Policy Legislation’

FORMER prime minister V P Singh and Left parties have demanded from the UPA government to immediately bring before parliament a National Slum Policy bill for enactment in order to provide speedy relief to the crores of urban poor who provide the backbone to the economy of our cities and towns. They warned that they would be forced to launch a mass campaign to make the UPA government aware of its constitutional responsibilities if it does not act on this issue.

A delegation led by V P Singh met the UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi on October 11 and sought her intervention for early enactment of such legislation. They   submitted a memorandum on this issue. Those who signed the memorandum included V P Singh, CPI(M) general secretary, Prakash Karat, CPI(M) veteran leader and Polit Bureau member, Harkishan Singh Surjeet, CPI(M) Polit Bureau member, Sitaram Yechury, CPI general secretary, A B Baradhan, CPI secretary, D Raja, Forward Bloc general secretary, Debabatra Biswas and RSP leader, Abani Roy.

It was pointed out in the memorandum that the CMP had made several promises regarding improving the conditions of the urban poor, particularly about bringing a comprehensive programme of urban renewal and massive expansion of social housing in the towns and cities. It had also specifically promised that forced evictions and demolition of slums would be stopped. Noting the non-fulfilment of both these promises, the delegation impressed upon Sonia Gandhi to intervene and see that a law is enacted urgently.

They proposed that such a bill should include, among others, the following provisions:

•  All forced evictions must be immediately stopped, and periodic census carried out in all slums to register and provide identity cards to the urban poor.

• In-situ upgradation of slums should be given the top-most priority, with all services being provided at the household level by government agencies.

• For this purpose, the plot size should not be less than 50 square meters, so that the family can build a second storey if required.

• Ownership rights must be provided to both the spouses of the family so that there is incentive for the family to invest in improvements.

• Government facilities for loans for construction of houses must be provided at easy terms against the security of ownership rights.

• Only in legitimate cases of the land being required for a prior genuine “public” purpose, for which budget provisions have already been made, should the slum be relocated, but to a place not further than 2 km from the original site.

• “Public” purpose cannot include the transfer of land by government to private parties for commercial exploitation of any kind – including housing for the rich.

• When communities are relocated, they should not be scattered, but their social ties should be left intact to facilitate the process of rehabilitation.

• Artificial “shortage” of land, created mainly by non-implementation of Development and Master Plans and the arbitrary changes in land use, cannot be used as a pretext for forcible eviction to distant locations.

• The arbitrary declaration of “cut-off” dates, which violate Article 19 of the Constitution, that gives all Indian citizens the right to move freely, reside, and settle in any part of India, cannot be used to deny the urban poor their right to Shelter.

The delegation in its memorandum cited various international and national covenants regarding slums to underline the need for acting on its demands. They reminded that the Draft National Slum Policy of 2001, which is yet to be ratified by the government, recommended a comprehensive listing of all slums and informal settlements. But there has been no systematic census of slims and slum-dwellers since 1991, leaving large numbers of the urban poor without any certification of identity or residence.

They also pointed out how the plot size for a family has been arbitrarily reduced from 80 square yards in the 1960s to as low as low as 15 square yards today, even though the Indian Standard IS 8888 states that the smallest dwelling size in urban areas should not be below 18 square yards, which itself is inadequate.

Among the international covenants cited in the memorandum were the following:

The Indian government accepted the fundamental obligation to protect and improve houses and neighbourhoods, rather than damage or destroy them, when it adopted the United Nations Global Shelter Strategy in 1998 to achieve adequate housing for everyone by 2000.

During the Second Habitat conference in Istanbul in1996, India was party to the definition that, “Adequate shelter means more than a roof over one’s head. It also means adequate privacy; adequate space; physical accessibility; adequate security; security of tenure; structural stability and durability; adequate lighting, heating and ventilation; adequate basic infrastructure, such as water-supply, sanitation and waste-management facilities; suitable environmental quality and health-related factors; and adequate and accessible location with regard to work and basic facilities: all of which should be available at an affordable cost.”

In 2004, at the World Health Organisation’s technical meeting on Housing-Health indicators, the Indian government accepted the consensus that a family requires a minimum of 71.7 square yards of floor space for a dwelling unit. The technical experts clearly stated that they considered less than 9.5 square yards per person to be unacceptable because physical and psychological problems could appear in children.

The delegation made it clear that mere policy guidelines were not enough to provide relief to the urban poor and sought fulfilment of promises made in the CMP for the urban poor.