THE NEW FARMER BILL: WEIGHING THE ACTUAL GAINERS
- Nepathya Foundation
- Dec 26, 2020
- 2 min read
Updated: Nov 20, 2021
The three new bills put forth in the parliament for increased private investment in agricultural infrastructure are being subjected to continuous resentment of the farmers from various parts of India. The three bills include The Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Bill, 2020 which allows the producers to sell their produce at the mandis-markets without the payment of ant taxes or fees; The Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services Bill, 2020 which allows farming by contract and puts an end to indirect marketing: The Essential Commodities (Amendment) Bill, 2020, which provides a system of free enterprise for production, storage, assembling, distribution and sale of many foodstuffs including edible oil, pulses, cereals, selected vegetables and fruits that shall be followed with a possible exception of extraordinary situations.
On September 24, the bill received an instruction of immediate implementation by President Ramnath Kovind leading to a further gush of rift in the parliament. The protests took a violent form in states like Haryana and Punjab. Huge protests were also held in revolt of the bills in Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar and Karnataka. The cause of the farmer distress hovers around the demand for protecting the Minimum Support Price, that is, the set rate at which the Government purchases the farmers’ produce. There is increasing insecurity towards the dismissal of the MSP with the introduction of the new bill. Farmers fear that the upcoming privatization may lead to the destruction of the long-existing mandi-markets in India, thereby reducing the procurement of produce by the government leading to the subsequent withdrawal of the Minimum Support Price.
In this regard, the concerns faced by the opposition follow around the maintenance of a decentralized structure of agricultural markets. They claim that the legislation on this subject should not be taken up by the center at all as agriculture is a part of the state agenda. Their concerns are based on the loss of revenue from the mandi taxes and fees. The opposition, thereby, termed it as “anti-farmer” bills. More than 12 opposition parties joined hands against the passing of the bills, urging President Kovind not to sign the bill, alleging them to be “unconstitutional” and in “complete disregard” to the parliamentary norms.
Only a small portion of the agricultural markets come under the regulated mandi system with less than 7,000 mandi-markets operating throughout the country. However, the entry of the private players brings along the possibility of reducing bulk purchases and restricted support by the government. At the same time, it also brings the opportunity of the requisite investment in the agricultural markets and much-stabilized earnings in the years to come.
The impending final results of the bill have the ability to bring or snatch the farmer's income. The government needs to provide more than just a verbal agreement on protecting the farmer incomes in this course but a strong support package to cope up with this huge infrastructural change. The agricultural markets in India have been stressed for a long time with increasing fragmentation and diminishing landholdings. Indian farmers thus, need a strong push to protect their incomes in an environment of sustained farming.
Sources :
Comments