The word 바카라reforms바카라 can carry a double meaning. One calls attention to the literal sense, a positive one; the other insists on its exact opposite, a shadow meaning with an edge sharp enough to kill. The Indian farmer reaping acute distress is an age-old one바카라but it was in the post-reforms phase that death formally entered the frame. The grim harvest of suicides began in the mid-1990s. Farm policy has had a schizoid quality to it ever since. It was routine till the mid-2000s for pro-reforms economists to blithely foretell the death of agriculture as the mainstay of India바카라s millions: it was fundamentally unremunerative, and only a mass shift to urbanisation and services could feed India, they바카라d say. At the same time, the realisation that this line was politically unremunerative set in by UPA-I, and so it went hand in hand with 바카라pro-farmer바카라 language. The era of loan waivers was upon us, followed now by talk of 바카라doubling바카라 farm incomes. It바카라s within this frame that the latest bills of reforms ruffle the air.
ALSO READ:
Economic factors are in play here, and deeply political ones too바카라but the space granted within democracy to articulate these is often fraught. Judge by the way these reforms were turned into law: via a voice vote, with a division being disallowed. (Because, as is suspected, the numbers likely didn바카라t suffice.) The Modi government had to turn off the TV cameras and turf out angry Opposition members as it shoehorned three contentious farm bills past the Rajya Sabha. Even a Union minister, from an allied party, submitted her resignation in its aftermath. It was not quite the day for genteel parliamentary discourse: rules, norms, the Speaker바카라s mics바카라none survived particularly intact. The Opposition accused the government of denying MPs the right to vote and ignoring the demand for referring the bills to a select committee바카라eight of the noisiest protesters were suspended. The ruling BJP demanded an apology from Opposition members for 바카라hooliganism바카라 and 바카라goondaism바카라 in the House of Elders. BJP Rajya Sabha MP Bhupender Yadav, who was present in the House, claims the government was ready for a division, but couldn바카라t proceed due to the 바카라Opposition ruckus바카라.
Congress MP Navjot S. Sidhu at a farmer protest.
It was a tragedy, because instead of an illuminating debate on the actual pros and cons, Parliament became an arena for political sub-plots. The deputy chairman who took the call바카라Harivansh Narayan Singh, a senior JD(U) leader바카라is now being offered as a symbol of 바카라Bihari asmita바카라, against whom the Opposition affront was directed. PM Modi, who has been vociferously defending the three bills바카라the Farmers바카라 Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Bill; the Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement of Price Assurance and Farm Services Bill; and the Essential Commodities (Amendment) Bill바카라made it a point to laud the Bihari leader for his 바카라big heart바카라 and 바카라statesman-like conduct바카라 on Twitter, citing his action of taking tea for the suspended MPs sitting on an overnight dharna in Parliament. 바카라For centuries, the great land of Bihar has been teaching us the values of democracy,바카라 he tweeted.
ALSO READ:
Bihar is due for assembly polls within a month, of course, so it바카라s not a bad time to acknowledge the value of democracy. No wonder Congress Rajya Sabha MP Jairam Ramesh tweeted: 바카라The shadow of the forthcoming Bihar elections has fallen over Parliament now.바카라 West Bengal will follow soon after바카라not coincidentally, some of the most aggressive Opposition voices on view were from the Trinamool Congress. BJP leaders, meanwhile, have been told to be aggressive in their defence, explaining the value of the new bills and how they will help 바카라double the income of farmers바카라. Nor is the party trying to woo its old ally, the Akali Dal, whose sole representative in the Union cabinet, Harsimrat Kaur Badal, was the one who quit over the bills. With Punjab바카라s assembly polls also due in less than 18 months, it was politically imperative for the Akalis to choose a side. Their main opponent in Punjab, CM Amarinder Singh of the Congress, called it a gimmick and 바카라too little, too late바카라 to be of any help to the state바카라s farmers.
A demonstration in Chennai.
The 바카라reforms바카라 on offer now seek to deepen a kind of managerial efficiency. It evokes the sense of cleaning up the channels of sale and distribution, being smart about marketing바카라getting business savvy into agriculture. The 바카라market바카라 and the 바카라Indian farm바카라 here are not two polar opposites of a value system, but complementary바카라indeed, conjoined바카라entities. Why, then, is not everyone convinced?
ALSO READ:
Well, that relates not just to what benefits these bills can bring, but who corners those benefits. Amarinder Singh바카라s words cut to the nub of the debate. The bills needed wider discussion precisely because they would throw small farmers to the big sharks, he said. One of the proposed objectives of the reforms is to eliminate the brokers and intermediaries who line the highway of farm produce sale via state-regulated mandis. They are seen to be vital but unaccountable entities who can control and distort the farm economy. In the envisaged future, there will be more platforms for the farmers to sell to. That essentially means big business, which has long smelt a huge opportunity in the extended chains of agriculture. The government offers this as more 바카라freedom of choice바카라 for farmers; those who see it critically spy a move towards 바카라marketisation바카라 that will, over time, enfeeble and replace the system of state procurement. The modicum of financial security farmers enjoy via the Minimum Support Price (MSP) is itself seen to be threatened바카라by implication, if not in actual letter. And the beneficiaries, it is felt, will be big farmers바카라and big business. In short, a deepening of the pro-market logic of reforms that may also deepen the iniquitous cut of profits.
MPs march outside Parliament against the farm legislation.
The pro-reform lobby in the Congress is scarcely different from that in the BJP in favouring this overall shift. That바카라s why the BJP is accusing it of 바카라hypocrisy바카라. The Congress had itself promised, in its 2019 manifesto, barrier-free trade and facilitation of sale outside the mandis notified under the Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC). 바카라It is opposition just for the sake of it. Just because they are seated on the Opposition benches, they cannot change their stand,바카라 says BJP spokesperson Sambit Patra. The Congress, in turn, cites the caveats and safety valves in their policy.
ALSO READ:
Politically, no party can afford to be seen as antagonistic to farmers, who make up almost 43 per cent of India바카라s workforce바카라indeed, it바카라s natural and right for them to articulate the fears of common farmers. Parties like the Trinamool, CPI, CPI(M), BJD and TRS were all set to vote against the bills in the Rajya Sabha, while YSR Congress favoured them. The issue is unlikely to die down soon; the Opposition believes it has got a firm handle against the BJP after a while, and are planning to organise protests across India. Widespread farmers바카라 protests have already been seen in Punjab and Haryana: the fear of losing MSP support is the rallying point. It바카라s not politics for the sake of it, therefore. The fears are genuine. The RSS-affiliated Bharatiya Kisan Sangh (BKS), too, has expressed reservations about the bills, though it stopped short of joining a bandh call for September 25 by the All India Kisan Sangharsh Coordination Committee (AIKSCC), a pan-India collective of hundreds of farmers바카라 unions. BKS national secretary M.M. Mishra says the government has to ensure private companies don바카라t buy below the MSP. 바카라Farmers are sometimes unable to sell their produce at MSP even in the mandis. So what바카라s the assurance that private contractors will buy at MSP?바카라 asks Mishra.
Seen in their pure sense, agriculture marketing reforms have long been in the making and even longer in implementation. Touted as 바카라the biggest reforms since 1991바카라, the bills affect the rights and revenues of states, with implications for the federal setup. Agriculture, in fact, is a state subject. 바카라When it pushed through the legislation, it became evident the government has given up on trying to control the majority of states,바카라 says Balveer Arora, chairman of the Centre for Multilevel Federalism. 바카라When the Centre exercises its powers of legislation on such subjects, it is taking away the legislative space of the states바카라even if, technically, it바카라s not encroaching on their rights if the subjects are on the concurrent list.바카라 This has been a general trend in recent years, even during the pandemic under the Disaster Management Act.
바카라The reform ideas are not new,바카라 says former agriculture minister Sompal Shastri, one of those who had 바카라initiated, articulated and helped prepare바카라 the Bhanu Pratap Singh Committee report 30 years ago, which contained these seed ideas. Submitted on July 26, 1990, the report was accepted by then PM V.P. Singh and deputy PM and agriculture minister Devi Lal, but the three major reforms it suggested could not be implemented due to the government바카라s short tenure. 바카라So, the three reforms, in this very form, are not the BJP바카라s brainchild. It has pulled out long-pending proposals and taken the initiative to implement them, which is commendable,바카라 adds Shastri.
At the heart of the 바카라reforms바카라 are contract farming, which ties farmers to the big corporates; freeing trade from APMC mandi monopoly; and doing away with the limits and licensing for stocking and trading in items listed under the Essential Commodities Act (ECA). The rationale behind contract farming is that over 96 per cent of India바카라s farmers have less than 10 hectares of land, while 86 per cent have less than 4 hectares. Aggregating the produce, planners feel, could help small farmers get the best price바카라particularly in global markets they otherwise have no access to. Exports of basmati and elite varieties of mustard and wheat are cited as examples of the success of this approach.
Shastri feels India still shies away from exports because of the legacy of food shortages. 바카라That memory still haunts us, as demonstrated by the ECA. But our stocks of wheat and rice have been in continuous surplus since 1996. Our buffer stock norms require us to maintain 20-30 million tonnes, but government godowns have surplus stocks of 60-80 million tones. That바카라s a lot of wastage,바카라 he says. Other experts say the bills will help traders, exporters, processors and corporates to connect farmers with national/global markets, generating higher farm incomes. The diversity of India바카라s produce, particularly in fruits and vegetables, offers plenty scope for aggregating and creating a global market바카라say, for mangoes바카라through brand-building, they say. S. Mahendra Dev, director and vice chancellor, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, is, in fact, disappointed that 바카라the changed ECA바카라 allows the government to intervene when domestic prices spiral or there is a shortage in supplies as seen recently in the case of onions.바카라 He prefers 바카라unfettered freedom바카라 for exports.
So much for expanded options, but what about security? Here바카라s where the APMC mandis come in. Their genesis can be traced back to pre-Independence times, but the model APMC Act in force in most states dates to 2003. 바카라There should have been more discussions with states and farmers바카라 organisations바카라 while trying to trim the operations of APMC mandis, Dev admits. The states also fear loss of revenue as there will be no taxes outside the mandis. The buzzword, though, is MSPs. To be sure, no bill talks of doing away with it. But once the trade moves out of the APMC mandis, will government agencies still procure food grains? Food security and other government schemes hinge on that. A big if. Also, will small and marginal farmers be able to cope with the marketing arrangements under contract farming? The experience so far has not been very salutary: the majority could remain vulnerable to market manipulation. The spectre of indirect corporatisation is real; instead of APMC monopoly, it바카라s feared that big players will dominate the market. It will be left to the still-evolving mechanism of Farmer Producer Organisations (FPOs) to protect the interests of small and marginal farmers.
바카라If the government throws out the MSP regime, it would be hazardous,바카라 says Shastri. 바카라It should be retained with greater commitment to buy every grain produced.바카라 Government procurement is currently limited to a few states and hardly benefits 10-15 per cent of farmers there바카라mostly, the more vocal sectors. And hardly two dozen commodities enjoy the benefit of MSP: vegetables, fruits, milk and eggs are out of its ambit, and most headline-grabbing price fluctuations often happen there. But if, in reality, we only replace one form of monopoly (the state바카라s) with another (private), the systems of exploitation may remain바카라whether from the old traders in new garb, or new players.
Noted agriculture economist Y.K. Alagh believes 바카라the legislation is in the right direction바카라, but says the reforms mean nothing without careful protective layers. Will the government set up the first stage in processing infrastructure? Will it provide price information? Will it help frame simple model agreements, in local languages, to help those entering contract farming? At present, the field is being sown with seeds of doubt.
***
Farmers바카라 Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Bill, 2020
How it works
- It allows intra-state and inter-state trade of farm produce outside the regulated wholesale markets. At present there are about 7,000 regulated markets called the Agricultural Produce and Livestock Market Committee (APMC) mandis. Under the new law, the private companies will be allowed to set up their own markets along with these APMC mandis. The state governments will not be allowed to levy market fees or cess outside APMC areas. The government argued that the middlemen/commission agents who worked in APMC mandis formed an extra layer in the supply chain, and that their commission pushed up prices for consumers.
What government says
- Farmers will have the freedom to sell to anyone. Agri-business companies, corporates and traders will be allowed to open their own markets to purchase from farmers. The APMC system will continue and so will be minimum support price (MSP) determined by the government.
What farmers fear
- The biggest fear that it will destroy the level playing field between APMC markets and other traders. Under the bill, trade outside APMC mandis is virtually unregulated. Many believe that if the regulated wholesale markets lose relevance, private buyers could arm-twist farmers to sell at lower rates. If the farmers are not satisfied with the price offered by a private buyer, they cannot return to the mandi or use it as a bargaining chip during negotiations.
- Moreover, farmers argue that commission agents helped them grade, weigh, pack and sell their harvests to buyers. They also ensure timely payments to farmers. Also, farmers could complain about unfair practices to the APMC officers located in the market. However, under the new law, farmers will have to approach the sub-divisional magistrate court in case of any market dispute.
***
Farmers (Empowerment & Protection) Agreement of Price Assurance and Farm Services Bill, 2020
How it works
- It draws a framework for contract farming agreement between farmers and buyers before sowing of a crop. It also prescribes a three-level mechanism for dispute settlement바카라the conciliation board, subdivisional magistrate and appellate authority.
What government says?
- The law will enable farmers to get pre-fixed prices for their produce, but they cannot be bound against their interest by the agreement. Farmers will be free to withdraw from the agreement at any stage, without incurring any penalty.
What farmers fear?
- It does not have any provision to penalise companies in case they deviate from the contracts. It does not prescribe or specify that contract price of the crop should be at least equivalent or above the MSP. It means the contractor/companies can pay whatever price they want to the farmer subjected to latter바카라s agreement. India바카라s experience of the contract farming has been really poor with farmers getting very low rates through contract farming as compared to selling it in government mandis at the assured price.
***
Essential Commodities Act (Amendment) Bill, 2020
How it works
- Through the amendment, the government gave up its power to prevent hoarding and controlling price inflation. The government can now intervene only if there is a 50% price rise over previous year바카라s price in case of non-perishable goods and 100% price rise over previous year바카라s perishable goods.
What government says
- The move will help for better price realisation of essential commodities like food crops, etc and will benefit the consumer.
What farmers fear
- Till now, farmers didn바카라t have any limit for stocking, producing or selling their crops. As a result, they took conscious decision of selling their crops only when the market or the buyer is offering good price. The new law allows companies and traders to store as much quantity of food as they want, which amounts to promoting hoarding. This stockpile could be used to create artificial shortages, enabling the hoarders to push up prices.
