As the country approaches yet another general election, the atmosphere in the nation’s capital is again heating up, but not because of the usual politics. This time, it’s because thousands of farmers are back to collect on the promise made by the Government of India more than two years ago.
Their primary demand is the establishment of legally-mandated minimum prices for all agricultural produce in India – also known as ‘legal MSP’ or ‘legal minimum support price’.
However, this demand has met with stiff resistance from both the government and industry.
Some of the objections are leveled on practical grounds – such as the paucity of funds and warehouses. For others, this is an ideological and moral question: How can the government guarantee minimum prices only for one category of producers (farmers), while everyone else, such as artisans and industry, are forced to depend on the vagaries of supply and demand for their remuneration and rewards.
To address some of these questions, The New Indian Express caught up with Kavitha Kuruganti, a social activist known for her work related to sustainable farm livelihoods and farmers’ rights.
Kuruganti has over 30 years of experience working in the development sector and is the founder convenor of Alliance for Sustainable & Holistic Agriculture (ASHA), a pan-Indian alliance of more than 400 organisations that have come together to secure India’s ‘Food, Farmers & Freedom’. She has also been an advisor on many government committees and panels.
Q- The primary objection raised by critics – whether from the government side, academia or industry – is one of paucity of funds. In fact, government sources are pointing to an incremental liability of Rs 10 lakh crore to meet the universal MSP that the farmers are demanding. How do you address such concerns, particularly with regard to the funds required?
A – Many of these concerns stem from improper understanding. In fact, they have not even attempted to understand what exactly have been the demands from the farmers’ side. In fact, many critics are interpreting the demands in their own way, with the result that they are equating the deficiencies in the current procurement regime with the kind of universal MSP regime that farmers’ movements are talking about.
First, the universal MSP scheme doesn’t mean the government has to buy everything that all farmers in India produce. What the farmers are looking for is a legal entitlement for a remunerative price that is fixed which gives them a decent margin over and above the cost of production. If the cost of production is 100 rupees, they are saying give me at least 50% above that, and guarantee that as the price in a statutory framework.
There are numerous ways by which the Government can deliver the entitlement to all farmers. We are not saying that it is the responsibility of the government to purchase everything that is being produced by every farmer.
One of the measures (and not the only one) is to ensure that across India, make sure that no purchase happens below MSP in any regulated market. Anyone who wants to buy – let them buy at or above MSP.
Incidentally, state-level traders’ associations, of the ones who operate in APMCs, are telling me that they don’t have a problem with an MSP being the floor price for various commodities all across India. Traders are saying “if it’s the legally enforced floor price, I will only add my margin and move it forward in the supply chain”.
What they are worried about is one state having MSP as a legal right and another state not having MSP as a legal right, because, then, all the produce will come into the state with the MSP and will create a burden on the traders of that state. But if it’s a national level measure, traders are saying they don’t mind.
