Farm Bills 2020- Reforms or Black Laws, Stakeholders Understand Well

Farmers’ agitation has set the narrative clear-- when they say Reforms, they refer to Black Laws. They don’t represent Us

​​
Amid the pandemic and the world’s most insensitive lockdown, various State Governments of India brought about amendments in labor laws that put most workers out of legal protection. Increasing the worker shift from 8hr to 12hr a day is also part of these changes. In September 2020, Central Govt also introduced labor bills without deliberations with labor unions and parliament scrutiny. These give state governments more rights in favor of industries to play around with workers’ basic safety, welfare, and working conditions. Newspapers introduced these laws with the headline- Labour Reforms can help reshape India’s growth trajectory.
 
On September 27, The President gave his consent to the three contentious agriculture bills. The Farm Bills 2020 provides big corporates an unregulated environment to market, sell, and store agricultural produce across the country. The bills were initially introduced in the form of ordinances in June. They were then passed by voice-vote, without any discussion, in both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha during the delayed monsoon session in September, despite vociferous opposition protest. Once again, the News portals displayed consistency in their headlines- Farm Laws Will Usher In Much-needed Reforms in Agriculture. 
 
The Sikh farmers from Punjab were the foremost to identify the ‘reformist’ agenda behind the farm bills. So, the farmers from Punjab are leading one of the biggest protest humankind has ever witnessed. Haryana farmers were the first to join them, followed by UP, Rajasthan, Uttarakhand, Madhya Pradesh, and now the movement has reached almost every Indian state.
 
Every stakeholder (farmer) unequivocally refer to these laws as Black Laws. Repeal of these laws is the foremost demand of the farmers along with the legalization of Minimum Support Price (MSP). The rebuttal by farmers has jolted the Government’s sophisticated propaganda machinery to the extent that every future regulation presented as ‘reform’ shall be viewed under suspicion. Farmers’ agitation has set the narrative clear- when they say reforms, they refer to black laws. They don’t represent us.

​
Ministry of Truth
 
The World Press Freedom Index 2020 has ranked India 142nd out of 180 countries in the annual Reporters Without Borders analysis. Reporting by mainstream news channels that do not cover the mainstream population is nothing short of blatant propaganda. The term Godi Media, coined by Ravish Kumar of NDTV, has become very popular for reducing to a mere spokesperson of the Orwellian Ministry of Truth. Godi is a Hindi word for the lap and also rhymes with Modi. Satirical posters of ‘Boycott Godi Media’ has added more color to the farmers’ agitation.       
 
Pro-corporate economists appear on Godi Media to confuse the public through the use of macro-economic jargon. These economists would list out the range of issues the agriculture sector is ailing with, in the current times, leaving the viewer with the impression that the recently passed Farm Bills are the solution to that. This all, without citing the specific clauses of the laws that would bring about the utopian change in the lives of poor farmers.
 
Professor Ashok Gulati is among the leading economists supporting these three farm bills, calling it the ‘1991 moment’ for the agriculture sector. The argument is that an open market with competition would help build efficiency enabling better price discovery. He always misses informing in which part of the world the farming community has benefitted from the open markets controlled by big corporates. Farmers from Punjab cannot sell their produce to their neighboring ‘enemy’ country, but India’s super-rich can have business interests anywhere, including Pakistan. Farmers work with the constraints of the regional political situation but corporates by the World Trade Organization. Having such prejudicial rules, still, dare to call it the open market?    
 
Gurcharan Das is another renowned economist who appears to be frustrated with farmers’ agitation and finds it “difficult to reform in a democracy.” He does agree that “government resorted to stealth, pushed the farm bills through Parliament without talking to the opposition, states, or farmer organization.” But makes no doubt on government intentions and so call the apprehensions “false rumors” led by a well-funded group of Arthiyas (commission agents) and the “rich farmers of Punjab” with political motives. Narendra Modi’s every masterstroke, be it scandalous demonetization, unplanned GST, or ruthless lockdown, have all ended with the controlled narrative- there may be a flawed implementation, but the intentions were good. 
 
Shekhar Gupta, a self-proclaimed critic of Govt, has come out in full support of the farm bills. Advising Modi Govt not to submit to the pressure of protesting farmers, he writes in his article Thatcher or Anna moment— “Margaret Thatcher faced with her radical shift to the economic Right. She locked horns with it, won, and became the Iron Lady. If she had given in under pressure, she’d just be a forgettable footnote in world history... Unlike Thatcher who fought and crushed the unions and the British Left, Manmohan Singh and his UPA gave in to Anna Hazare, holding a special Parliament session, going down to him on their knees, implicitly owning up to all big corruption charges. Singh ceded all moral authority and political capital.” When a Hindutva agenda is hidden behind the mask of ‘liberal’ journalism, such vicious opinion in the name of reforms is much expected. His advice implies that coming to dialogue with the protesting groups and holding a special Parliament session would display weakness. Though implicitly, this would expose that the laws were indeed made for big corporates, not for farmers.

​Minimum Support Price
 
One trait shared among ‘pro-reformists’ economists and ‘anti-corruption’ politicians; they all appear, if not pretend, genuinely concerned about farmers’ welfare. They all wish for better prices for the farmers’ produce yet are the antagonist of Minimum Support Price (MSP). The pretensions for farmers’ welfare become more apparent with their critic against MSP. Ashok Gulati argues, “(The Opposition) is asking MSP to be made legal, implying that all private players buying below this price could be jailed. That will spell disaster in the markets, and private players will shun buying,” In other words, farmers to fetch better prices is on the wishlist, but private player be armed with impunity to exploit for lesser prices. Who triumphs, wishlist or legality, should not be a difficult guess.              
 
The arguments against MSP have been so vociferous that an ordinary news consumer assumes it to be some sort of luxury for farmers paid from their taxes. It must be noted, MSP literally means MINIMUM Support Price. The minimum price below which farming is unviable. It is akin to the minimum wages. How can someone deny the price for survival and still pretend to be working for the farmers’ welfare? If giving a better deal is the intention, legalizing MINIMUM Support Price should not be a concern. Why can’t the Government of the people, by the people, for the people, guarantee them the minimum survival?
 
MSP making Indian crops non-competitive in the international markets is another ridiculous argument. MSP is calculated basis input cost. India, with one of the highest taxations lowest subsidies, making crop uncompetitive is someone else fault. How can you deny the minimum price of survival for the faulty policies of the Government? Diesel is among the costliest in the world. The river waters are diverted to the poorly planned cities of concrete, and a farmer is left with no option but to pull out underground water with expensive submersible pumps. Devinder Sharma highlights this fact- “On an average, an American farmer gets a subsidy of USD 62,000 every year. Compared with this, an Indian farmer gets a paltry USD 282. If you take a look at the Producer Subsidy Equivalent (PSE) index, it gives you a clear idea as to how the rich country farmers continue to be subsidised. Besides, as I said earlier, there are numerous other ways farming is protected in developed countries, and farmers receive a number of other privileges too. For instance, Swiss farmers receive family allowance and also get rebate on petrol and diesel costs.”    
 
The glut of wheat and rice is a favorite topic to blame Punjab farmers. This, too, is not the farmers’ fault but of the authorities who only procure two crops on MSP. The precise farmers’ demand is to legalize MSP on 23 crops, which will ensure diversification. These 23 crops contribute more than 80% of agricultural produce. “Why blame the farmers for growing two crops only. Punjab’s farmers are growing more wheat and paddy because MSP is only available for two crops. Government is compelling them to grow only two crops. They should cover more crops under MSP. That’s why Punjab farmers are not able to increase their income,” says Dr Varinderpal Singh, chief soil chemist Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, who refused to accept a Gold Medal from Fertiliser Association of India (FAI) to show solidarity with the farmer protests.
 
Despite being the leading producer of pulses (diversified high-value crop), Madhya Pradesh also leads in farmer suicides. The core of agrarian distress remains rising debt because farmers are forced to sell at much lesser prices than the MSP.
 
National Commission on farmers, head by M.S Swaminathan, recommended a 50 percent margin over Comprehensive Cost of Production (C2), which is also the farmers’ demand. The same was promised in the election manifesto of BJP in 2014. But Govt is pushing the new regulations which were neither promised nor demanded.
 
The Government has categorically denied the MSP demand citing an additional burden of 17 lakh crore on the exchequer. Devinder Sharma has refuted this argument on several occasions, saying govt would also earn by selling the crops, some at higher than procured price and some might be lower. The net amount would be much lesser. He shares an example of Kerela- “It has fixed a floor price of 20 percent above the production cost for 16 vegetables. It has also made a provision of Rs 35 crore for the purpose but hasn’t yet utilised a single penny out of it. The reason is simple. Market prices so far are prevailing higher than the floor price announced. The Government will only enter when prices fall below the floor price.
This is exactly what will happen when MSP is legalised for 23 crops. It is only when prices fall below MSP that the Government will be expected to intervene.”
 
Procurement of 23 crops at MSP will “usher in much-needed reforms in the agriculture” and “can help reshape India’s growth trajectory.” But who’s going to make such headlines? The country with the most impoverished people needs enormous money to run one of the world’s costliest elections. In return, the funding partners require open markets, which are open for a few and closed for millions. Assured income to farmers ensures the distribution of wealth, and this goes against the politico-capitalist unholy alliance.

​
Devil is in the detail
 
Anyone who genuinely wishes to see democracy flourish in India would support repealing the laws simply because they were pushed brutely in the most authoritarian way. It also becomes unconstitutional considering ‘agriculture’ being a state subject, and the center can not make laws on it. So Govt arbitrarily passed these laws under ‘trade and commerce,’ an attack on the state powers challenging the country’s federal structure. For those who have digested the pill of ‘too much of democracy,’ it becomes imperative for them to read the three bills in some detail— the information is not expected from the Ministry of Truth.
 
The Farmers’ Produce Trade And Commerce (Promotion And Facilitation) Bill, 2020 is touted to build “one nation one market.” One of its contentious clauses says: “No market fee or cess or levy, by whatever name called, under any State APMC Act or any other State law, shall be levied on any farmer or trader or electronic trading and transaction platform for trade and commerce in scheduled farmers’ produce in a trade area.”
 
Instead of building one market, it actually creates two— one regulated under the existing APMC act and the other unregulated under the new Bill. The existing APMC model is bound to collapse while competing with unregulated corporates with political patronage. Under the APMC Act in Punjab, a tax of 8.5 percent is levied, which includes six percent by the state (3 percent APMC market fee + 3 percent rural development cess), and 2.5 percent commission for the arhatiyas (commission agents). Punjab has one of the best rural infrastructure built through rural development cess. The new law makes no provision to take control of rural infrastructure.
 
If Punjab and Haryana’s successful APMC model is nourished with the legal MSP guarantee on 23 crops, it becomes a panacea for the agriculture sector. The existing network of 7000 mandis needs to be scaled to 42000 mandis to replicate this model all across. What’s stopping to extend the richness as displayed by “rich farmers of Punjab”? Instead of developing the already tested model, the law throws the baby out with the bathtub.
 
Under the pretext of faster resolution for any dispute arising out of a transaction between the farmer and a trader, the parties can approach the Sub-Divisional Magistrate. The law further withdraws all legal recourse with poor farmers. It says: “No suit, prosecution or other legal proceedings shall lie against the Central Government or the State Government, or any officer of the Central Government or the State Government or any other person in respect of anything which is in good faith done or intended to be done under this Act or of any rules or orders made thereunder.
No civil court shall have jurisdiction to entertain any suit or proceedings in respect of any matter, the cognizance of which can be taken and disposed of by any authority empowered by or under this Act or the rules made thereunder.”
 
P Sainath, while interpreting this colonial-era rule writes, “And you thought it’s only about farmers? The new farm laws disable the right to legal recourse of all citizens, not just farmers – to an extent unseen since the 1975-77 Emergency. The farmers at Delhi’s gates are fighting for the rights of us all.” The Bar Council of Delhi goes on to term the transfer of judicial powers to the executive as “dangerous and a blunder.” In an interview with Karan Thapar, Ashok Gulati dismissed these concerns with a smile and sly remark, “I’m happy that they still have faith in the civil courts.”
 
The Essential Commodities (Amendment) Act, 2020 in the name of ‘stock limit’ actually promotes inflation and hoarding. It says— “Any action on imposing stock limit shall be based on price rise and an order for regulating stock limit of any agricultural produce may be issued under this Act only if there is-- (i) hundred percent increase in the retail price of horticultural produce; or (ii) fifty percent increase in the retail price of non-perishable agricultural foodstuffs, over the price prevailing immediately preceding twelve months, or average retail price of last five years, whichever is lower.”
Theoretically, this implies govt will interfere only when the price of X commodity gets inflated by 100% or more, say, from Rs100 to Rs200. If it remains at Rs199 in the first year and up to Rs397 in the second year, govt will allow big businesses to hoard without interference. Isn’t this law against every consumer who eats?
 
The Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services Act, 2020 also referred to as the ‘Contract Farming bill.’ It, too, has a number of clauses that can be interpreted arbitrarily in favor of “any other person.” One of the clauses reads— “A farming agreement may be linked with insurance or credit instrument under any scheme of the Central Government or the State Government or any financial service provider to ensure risk mitigation and flow of credit to farmer or Sponsor or both.” This gives the sponsor right to take credit on the land of the farmer. But who pays back after the expiry of the contract or in case of dispute got missed out ‘inadvertently.’ What if, sponsor himself is the “any service provider.” Why the farmers’ apprehensions of their land being taken away by “any service provider” not be taken seriously?
 
Contract farming bill also has the topping of faster dispute resolution service through Sub-Divisional Magistrate without the legal recourse of approaching civil courts against “any other person in respect of anything which is in good faith.”
 
The agriculture minister has offered reluctantly to make amendments to the laws, only after thousands of farmers blocked the Capital with temporary camps on borders. Farmer leaders have firmly stuck to the total repeal of the laws, Black Laws. Dilution to poison remains a poison. Farmers see these laws as their death warrant, which does not qualify even for the discussion on amendments.       
 
India’s Super-Rich: Ambani & Adani   
 
The two names that have appeared consistently in the press conferences of farmer leaders are Ambani and Adani. They are known as friends of PM. One may argue what’s wrong with making friends, but the masses interpret friends as financiers. This interpretation challenges sloganeering ‘Main Desh Nahi Bikne Doonga’- I will not let the country be on sale. In Sept 2016, a friendly company Reliance Jio issued full-page ads in the leading dailies with PM Modi’s picture posed as a brand ambassador. Paytm followed this in November. This stirred public debate, and later Jio and Paytm apologized for the ‘inadvertent mistake.’
 
Farmer leaders have given a call to boycott all the products and services offered by these corporates- Super-markets, Jio telecom, petrol pumps by Reliance, and Fortune range of products and mega storage godowns by Adani. The boycott call is well accepted by the people of Punjab, followed by Haryana. Malls, petrol pumps, and silos are closed for the past more than two months, lakhs of Jio subscribers have ported to other networks, more than 1500 Jio towers are reported vandalized.   
 
India’s super-rich are uncomparable. “Across the country, millions continued to live in squalor, trapped in sunbaked villages or labyrinthine slums, even as the titans of Indian industry enjoyed lifestyles that the rajas and moguls of old would have envied,” Obama writes in his memoir The Promised Land. A January 2020 study by rights group Oxfam India suggests that India’s richest 1 percent hold more than four-times the wealth held by 953 million people who make up for the bottom 70 percent of the country’s population. The report says the richest have cornered a huge part of the wealth created through crony capitalism and inheritance. Here must be noted that the 1 percent richest primarily belong to the upper-caste Hindus. “What is particularly worrying in India’s case is that economic inequality is being added to a society that is already fractured along the lines of caste, religion, region, and gender.” Professor Himanshu, Jawaharlal Nehru University.
 
For India’s richest person, Mukesh Ambani, the pandemic year proved to be a boon. Since the Oxfam study was from January 2020, it does not capture the economic devastation caused by the coronavirus pandemic. An International Labour Organisation (ILO) report predicts that 40 crore Indians could be pushed into poverty. Whereas the tycoon added $37.3 billion, bringing his fortune to $88.7 billion, a rise of 73 percent. Ambani secured more than $20 billion in investment from the likes of Google and Facebook Inc. for his Jio platform. Mukesh Ambani also owns or has stakes in several media houses. Network18 Group is an Indian media conglomerate owned by Reliance Industries. Network18’s portfolio includes VH1, Nickelodeon, MTV, CNBC TV18, and a range of other local language channels, as well as news portals such as Firstpost and Moneycontrol and news channels CNN-News18 and CNBC TV18. No wonder these channels are referred to as Godi Media, and their viewers see farmers as ‘misguided.’
 
Infrastructure magnate Gautam Adani retains the second spot on the list by boosting his net worth 61 percent to $25.2 billion in 2020. Forbes said unfazed by the pandemic-induced travel slowdown, Adani, who aspires to be India’s airport king, acquired a 74 percent stake in Mumbai airport, the country’s second-busiest. The video went viral of a 100-acre storage capacity ‘secretly’ under construction near a railway track in Naultha Village (Haryana). The Food Corporation of India (FCI) has partnered with private investors to commission high-tech silos for food grains, and Adani Group happens to be the leading private investor. Adani is seeking to build the world’s biggest new coal mine in central Queensland’s Galilee Basin, Australia. Adani’s coal mine is facing a lot of resistance from the local population for its sheer scale, and for the damage, it will cause to the Great Barrier Reef. India might be having ‘too much of democracy,’ but Australia has a better democracy index. #STOPADANI aims to build the biggest grassroots movement in Australia’s history. GetUp, an independent campaigning community, has released Adani Files with startling details on the devastation his projects have caused to the local communities and environment worldwide, including India. The report boldly summarizes, “Adani has a documented history of corruption, bribery, and human rights abuses across the world… Media reports from India reveal Adani is using police intimidation, bribery and threats to dispossess people of their land in Jharkhand -- where the company want to build two power plants… It operates with a vicious mentality where human or environmental damage are par for course.”

The three laws blur the gap between the ‘sponsor,’ ‘any other person,’ and ‘any service provider.’ Knowing that the super-rich sponsors with documented history are good friends of the policymakers and are also the sponsor of the new political order. The worst outcome are not mere apprehensions but are written on the wall.

Conclusion
 
The devastation that neoliberal capitalists have already caused in India to the environment and to the masses is appalling and unmatched. What differentiates India’s capitalism from the rest of the world, here they have partnered with Brahmanism, also referred to as Hindutva in the new avatar. In fact, Brahmanism has embraced capitalism to fulfill its caste-based goal, backed by three thousand years of experience of infusing discrimination and inequality. Hindutavis, representing the Hindu elite or Swarna, are always seen standing against the rights of Dalits, Tribals, religious minorities, or farmers in this case.
 
The undeniable Sikh factor behind the sustenance of farmers’ agitation makes the movement iconic. Sikhi is anti-thesis to Brahmanism. Sikhs are the micro minority in India but are empowered with an ideology of social justice based on equality. Founder of Sikhi, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji, spent the last 18 years of his worldly life farming on the fields of Kartarpur. An agriculture-based economic model is bestowed and demonstrated by Guru Nanak Sahib Ji himself. The holy book of Sikhs, Guru Granth Sahib Ji, includes verses from all those Bhagats (saints) representing the labor class rejected as Shudra by Brahmanical order. Kabir a julaha or weaver, Namdev a shimpa or tailor, Dhanna a jaat farmer, Ravidas a chamaar or shoemaker, Sadhna a qasai or meat slaughterer, Farid a Sufi, and more, all contribute to the Guru Granth Sahib and are revered equally. All sections of society coming in support of farmers is natural and made possible by the Sikh factor.   

It’s a decisive battle, and stakes are high on both sides. The laws serve as an ultimate weapon for the Brahmanical regime to fulfill the innate desire to further consolidate wealth and power by exuding whatever ‘richness’ is left with the farmers, the biggest non-Swarna community. The ‘Thatcher moment’ would mean the unwanted ‘too much’ is taken away from ‘democracy,’ and rebellious ‘rich’ is taken away from the ‘farmers of Punjab.’ This would ensure no more difficulty in the more ‘reformist’ endeavors in the times to come. Whereas, submitting like ‘Anna moment’ would halt the sadistic Hindutva juggernaut and strengthen the global uprising against politico-capitalist might.
 
On the other hand, farmers are fighting for their bare survival and freedom to plow their fields. They have no option but to fight back. Their victory would uphold democratic and federal structure. Everyone from all corners of the world needs to stand with them as they fight for everyone who eats. Let us make the rightful headlines:
Farmers’ victory can help reshape the world’s political order.
The success of farmers’ agitation will usher-in much need reform— the equitable distribution of wealth.    
 
The drum beats (war cry) have sparked the sky; the precise aim has inflicted the wound (desire for sovereignty) ||
The warrior is he who controls the battlefield; now is the time to fight ||1||
He alone is known as a (spiritual) warrior, who fights for the oppressed ||
He may get cut apart, piece by piece, but he never leaves the field ||2|| (Guru Granth Sahib, Bh. Kabir, Page 1105)       
 
ਗਗਨ ਦਮਾਮਾ ਬਾਜਿਓ ਪਰਿਓ ਨੀਸਾਨੈ ਘਾਉ ॥
ਖੇਤੁ ਜੁ ਮਾਂਡਿਓ ਸੂਰਮਾ ਅਬ ਜੂਝਨ ਕੋ ਦਾਉ ॥੧॥
ਸੂਰਾ ਸੋ ਪਹਿਚਾਨੀਐ ਜੁ ਲਰੈ ਦੀਨ ਕੇ ਹੇਤ ॥
ਪੁਰਜਾ ਪੁਰਜਾ ਕਟਿ ਮਰੈ ਕਬਹੂ ਨ ਛਾਡੈ ਖੇਤੁ ॥੨॥ {ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ, ਭ. ਕਬੀਰ, ਪੰਨਾ 1105}
 
गगन दमामा बाजिओ परिओ नीसानै घाउ ॥
खेत जु मांडिओ सूरमा अब जूझन को दाउ ॥१॥
सूरा सो पहिचानीऐ जु लरै दीन के हेत ॥
पुरजा पुरजा कट मरै कबहू न छाडै खेत ॥२॥ {गुरु ग्रंथ साहिब, भ. कबीर, Page 1105 }

Share

Tweet

Title:
Text:
URL: