1.
We are thankful to Shri Vyasamoorthy
for starting Open Discussion on this important subject. He is requested to
start some Brainstorming Sessions on Google (+) Hangouts for important urgent
discussions, as and when necessary, as that can be done with 15 persons at a
time. All Senior Citizens & those working for Senior Citizens should give a
brief report to Shri Vyasamoorthy for putting in this site for information and
comments of other Senior Citizens about deliberations held by any Core Group,
Meetings with Local/State/Central Public Authorities etc attended by them. At
present, there is no machinery to disseminate any important matters to Senior
Citizens at grassroots levels. This sight should be made popular for this.
2.
It is very good that S/Shri Mital
& Dr Kinjwadekar have expressed their views before NHRC, Delhi in core
group meeting & thereafter in writing and has invited views of others on
lacunas in the Act, 2007; act of indifference of States and suggestions, if
any.
3.
Act, 2007 is basically
incomplete. It talks about maintenance by children of all but does not speak
about maintenance of parents & Senior Citizens, whose children are not
financially capable of maintaining even their own nuclear family or those, who
do not have children or relatives to look after. Abandonment by such poor
children/relatives cannot be avoided by any stringent punishments, as they have
nothing to lose & they will be burden on public exchequer in jails! Keeping
the expenditure required to be spent on such defaulters in jails, government
should provide in the Act, pension/compensation to such children for keeping
parents with them. Present Indira Gandhi Pension by Ministry of Rural
Development to only those belonging to BPL Families as per incorrect 13 parameters of that Ministry deprives large number of
poor senior citizens. Proper pension/compensation for poor families for keeping
parents should be included in the Act, so that senior citizens can get it
legally. Without any financial help and fear of fine & jail under this Act,
poor citizens have no other alternative but to abandon their parents secretly.
Act encourages/forces such abandonment!! With Society and Government with
anti-elders policies of Finance Ministry and Planning Commission of the
Country, more and more abandonments only can be expected. Finance Ministry
& Planning Commission are required to facilitate budgetary provisions for
implementation of NPOP, 99 as per para 93 but due to their anti-elder policy,
many of provisions for Welfare of Elders laid down in NPOP, 99 have remained
unimplemented. Without providing proper financial help by Finance Ministry to
poor families to keep & maintain their parents and not providing funds by
Planning Commission for sufficient number of Old Age Homes, poor families have
no other alternative than abandoning their parents!! Even provision in para 82
to provide tax relief to encourage children to co-reside with their parents is
not implemented by Finance Ministry even after 15 years!
4.
Society and Government recognize & help
organizations for children; women; SC/ST; Minority; Cows; Animals/Birds (PETA)
etc but do not bother about their Elders required to be treated as ``Matru Devo-Pitru
Devo.`` Elders have not been given any recognition nor any rights to represent!
For indifferent attitudes of States/Centre, our demand before NHRC should be for
our Human Right of Representation & Negotiation, as given to Pensioners by
Ministry of Pension at least, though we should insist on This Right, as given
to serving employees of Governments like Permanent Negotiating Machinry/JCM and
compulsory arbitration in case of disagreement etc. There should be no
hesitation on part of our Associations/Organizations to go for PIL for
implementation of important policies/Acts announced/notified by Government, if
not implemented in reasonable time. At present, we are avoiding/hesitating even
to represent!! Even mother does not feed the Child, if he does not cry!! We
must insist before NHRC for getting State Councils, District Committees, and
Volunteers` Committees at each Police Station etc, as legislated in this Act being
provided within six months to enable local Senior Citizens to get various
benefits of the Act.
5.
We must insist before NHRC to get
provisions of the Act about providing Old Age Home for destitutes/poor senior
citizens in each District/Village implemented by fixing a target of one year or
so. In addition to such provision, Society and Government must lay down that
all religious trusts/institutes (temples, masjids, churches etc) and social &
cultural Trusts etc must provide shelter, food, health care etc to poor elders
by providing Ashrams/Old Age Homes etc compulsorily out of their incomes (at least
50%), just as Corporates have to spend a meager (2%) of their income as CSR. 10%
of CSR Funds must be spent for Senior Citizens. Well-to-do citizens; Private
& Public Merchants/ Malls; Trusts; Hospitals etc should be
encouraged/forced to adopt poor Elders for regular supply of food, medical
care, shelter etc, Stringent punishments, as suggested by our two leaders
should be for those, who, even after having proper income, abandon their
parents.
6.
As
definition of ``Welfare`` in sec 2 (k) includes recreation centres and other amenities necessary for the senior
citizens, all
welfare provisions like NPOP,
99/NPSrC, 2011-14-20(!); IPOP, 2008;NPHCE etc should be provided in this act
instead of as separate policy, approved
by cabinet to claim implementation legally.
7.
In addition to Amendments
suggested by our leaders, the following may also be considered:
i)
Sec 4 (1) to (3): Add suitably ``and having sufficient means``. Provide sufficient government
financial help for parents and senior citizens of children & relatives, who
do not have sufficient means and define the limit for sufficient means to
enable such children/relatives to keep parents with them.
ii)
Sec 19 (1): Replace the word
``may`` with ``must`` in first line. One Old Age Home for 150 destitutes in one
District is not apparently sufficient, looking to the cases of abandonment of
parents by poor children/relatives and total number of poor families in the
Country, not having sufficient means to maintain parents.
iii)
Sec 20 (1): 10% of total beds
should be earmarked for senior citizens. For Defence, Railways etc departments
also, rule of earmarking of 10% of total beds should be laid down, as present
practice is to give preference to serving employees.
iv)
Sec 20(2): Separate ques are
provided only for case papers and not for examination by doctors and giving
medicines. Provision should be elaborated to this extent.
v)
Sec 20 (5): States/UTs and
departments like Defence, Railways etc must provide all facilities included in
NPHCE by special efforts by a target date, as it is reported by Ministry of
Health that though sufficient funds are provided by them, implementing agencies
do not provide these facilities.
vi)
Sec 21 (i to iii): Provide specific
time schedule and lay down periodical ATRs to be given in Media & Ministry
of Social Justice for all three items.
vii)
Sec 22 (1): Provision should be
made here for obtaining monthly/Quarterly ATR from Magistrate, as it is
observed that though these duties are given to Magistrates by States, no
Magistrate has acted on these provisions.
viii)
Sec 23 (1): Restriction of `after
commencement of Act`` should be removed.
ix)
Sec 24: Such provision without
proper provision for financial help will lead to more abandonment secretly.
x)
Sec 31: For periodic review and monitoring the progress of
the implementation of the provisions of this Act by the State Governments, a
Committee of representatives of Senior Citizens from each State/UT and Central
Organization should be nominated.
No comments:
Post a Comment