From: "Najma Sadeque" <najma.sadeque.ns@gmail.com>
Date: Dec 25, 2013 2:00 PM
Subject: Fwd: What some governments do in the name of the poor
To: "Najma Sadeque" <najma.sadeque.ns@gmail.com>
In the name of the poor
December 25, 2013
How were government's various microcredit schemes -- launched  in 2002 -- doing? They decided to check, and after 6-7 years, conducted a field  study, getting information from the horse's mouth, namely 'beneficiaries'. The  report was sent to both the World Bank and Planning Commission. What was  discovered was unpalatable, so Ms. Shehnaz Wazir Ali constituted a committee to  look into the matter, and the release of funds to all microcredit institutions  was stopped till it took a final decision.
       But the committee, jointly headed by  Mr Shaukat Hameed Khan and Dr Zafar Altaf, was abruptly dissolved by the  Ministry of Finance after meeting only once. But people talk: it became clear  why the report was hushed up.
  All microcredit institutions including NRSP, Khushali Bank, Microcredit Bank,  Kashf Foundation, etc. get their allocations from the Pakistan Poverty  Alleviation Fund (PPAF) which is part of the Ministry of Finance. The World Bank  lends to PPAF at half percent interest, which in turn lends to microcredit  institutions and banks at 15%.
       That's bad enough. The focus is only  on lending and getting the money back with interest. It's not concerned with  questioning how poverty can possibly be alleviated with usurious,  ill-thought-out, unrepayable loans, inevitably inviting ruination. There is no  justification for this exorbitant markup rate when the poor have no collateral.
       Genuine poor-friendly loans  demonstrate this as a lame excuse. The Akhuwat Foundation, a microcredit NGO  created 13 years ago, lends to the poorest without collateral, and charges no  interest whatsoever, just a one-time small fee. It neither borrows from abroad  nor at home, yet attracts philanthropists and donations. It combines  volunteerism with employees to provide interest-free loans, uses no-frill  offices including mosques and churches which otherwise lie unused inbetween  prayers, extends advice, help with business plans, and personalized moral  support.
       To date, AKHUWAT has lent out over six  billion rupees, with recovery rates of over 99% -- because borrowing was made  just and manageable. The founder, Dr. Amjad Saqib, knows what he's doing. A  former civil servant who previously managed the Punjab Rural Support Programme,  he was troubled by the 20% interest it imposed.
       When NRSP lends 10,000 for example,  the borrower is actually left with only 7,500 after insurance, 'savings' and  paperwork charges; yet markup is charged on the full 10,000. To meet criteria,  borrowers become members of community organizations of 12 to 15 members each.  In one area, about 90% of the population – some 3000 individuals, about  one-fourth of them women -- received loans.
       Six months later, on the dot, on  repayment date, NRSP officials arrived to take back. But harvest time had not  arrived! Irresponsibly, NRSP had not timely planned nor properly advised them.  The farmer owed 11,500 for 10,000 borrowed at 30% interest.  They were  unable to pay. NRSP then offered rescheduling of loans …. provided farmers  borrowed from an NRSP-appointed 'investor' so that they could pay back NRSP.
       This was a new twist that smacked  uncannily of IMF: borrowing more from another party at cut-throat rates to pay  back previous dues. But was it even official or legal? Who knows? For 5000 for  one week they had to repay 7000. For 10,000, it was 14,000. After the helpless  villagers borrowed from Peter (the "NRSP investor") to pay Paul (NRSP), it then  obligingly rescheduled loans, this time for 15,000. But 14,000 out of that went  back immediately to the so-called NRSP investor! That left farmers with only  1000!
       This happened a third and a fourth  time when crop failure recurred, and interest payments and bank deductions rose  further. By 2009 most were heavily in debt by one lac or more. They had to sell  their precious livestock, trees, modest jewellery, household effects, and even  the little land they had, in an endless vicious cycle. They were never rich  before, they said, but they were at least self-sufficient. Now they were  destitute: worse off than ever before, unable to educate their children or be  properly fed. Small wonder Islam prohibits Riba.
       NRSP also made false verbal promises  of bringing development – tubewells, grain godowns, turbines, metalled roads,  dairy farms, shops, etc. -- provided enough locals took out loans first. It  never happened.
       There is greater risk and major  difference with agricultural loans – and therefore consideration is necessary –  compared to small entrepreneurial loans. Cultivators are dependent on weather  and rains, among other factors. When a drought hits, they earn nothing that  season. When it persists for several years, they can be wiped out.
       The poorest peasants don't even know  how to handle unaccustomed amounts of money. Cultivating one acre or less needs  3 to 6 thousand rupees. Instead of being given that or a bit more for essential  consumption, one hapless couple was obliged to take a fixed 10,000, but wasted  the rest. Matters were made worse when both husband and wife were needlessly  lent 10,000 each, which scaled up unproductive spending. It led to selling  standing crops cheap before ripening.
       There were complaints of  manhandling, of police being called in, NRSP representatives seizing household  effects until payment was made, and loan sharks pushing families to sell off  their daughters into prostitution to pay off debt.
       An unending cycle of debt started.  Borrowers of eight villages of UC Mehrab Goth ended up owing 30,000,000 to NSRP  which turned subsistence farmers into paupers. It may have worsened rural-urban  migration, crime and even suicide. The situation was as bad in Tharparkar, as  reported by a leading Karachi paper.
       It's hard to comprehend why any  government should take loans from World Bank or any other institution when  money is strictly for local use involving no foreign expenses (unless the World  Bank conveniently considers its very act of unnecessary lending as 'foreign  expertise'), and when the government can allocate it like it allocates fortunes  in non-productive salaries and perks, or the State Bank can create the  necessary money itself.
       The last thing any government should  do is borrow from international loan sharks for lending to national  profiteerers, in turn lending to local profiteerers in cahoots with local loan  sharks. Far from being put out of business, they find their racketeering  streamlined for them. It's a chilling, terrifying experience to find those in  power to be so cold, callous, inhuman.
       If anything requires suo moto  notice, then such institutionalized exploitation does. Because impoverished  victims have no other recourse to justice.
  
  The writer is a former journalist and currently director of The Green Economic  Initiative at Shirkat Gah, a rights and advocacy group.
  
  
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Media Press Pakistan " group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to media-press-pakistan+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
No comments:
Post a Comment