Suresh Sambandam, the new found poster boy of the DMK who was recently caught peddling half-truths and lies, is at it once again. This time, the ‘tech entrepreneur’ has peddled blatant lies about the farmer empowerment laws.

Suresh on December 28 tweeted that the “farm bills infringes into state rights” and claimed that the laws “eliminate Minimum Support Price” (MSP) and “excludes key farm items from essential commodities”.

However, all these statement made by Suresh Sambandam are baseless and are in contradiction to the what the farm laws are.

Here is an explainer busting each and every claim made by the DMK sympathizer:

Claim 1:  MSP will be scrapped

Truth: Time and again, the Government of India has clarified that procurement through Minimum Support Price (MSP) will continue and  farmers can sell their produce at MSP rate.

In fact, in the ongoing Kharif Marketing Season (KMS), Government of India continues to procure Kharif crops at MSP rates from farmers as per existing MSP Schemes.

Procurement has been going on smoothly across different states in India that includes Punjab, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Kerala and Tamil Nadu to name a few. 462.88 LMT of paddy has been procured up to December 28 registering a 24.90% increase against the corresponding purchase of 370.57 LMT last year.

About 57.47 lakh farmers have already been benefitted from the ongoing procurement operations with MSP value of ₹87391.98 crore.

The Central Government, based on the proposal from the States, approved for the procurement of 51.66 LMT of Pulse and Oilseeds for the 2020 Kharif Marketing Season for the States of Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Telangana, Gujarat, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Odisha, Rajasthan and Andhra Pradesh under Price Support Scheme(PSS).

Claim 2: State rights will be infringed

Truth: The two bills that have been passed will not lay a finger on the State Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC) Acts as they are state Acts. The Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Bill, 2020 seeks to create more avenues for farmers to sell their produce. It will promote barrier-free inter-state and intra-state trade and commerce outside the physical premises of markets notified under State Agricultural Produce Marketing legislations.

Under the new system, farmers will have the option to sell their produce at other places in addition to the mandis. In simple words, it empowers the farmers by giving them the choice to sell their produce where they get a better price.

In fact, the contract farming laws enacted by the Centre is modelled on Tamil Nadu’s contract farming laws that was passed in the year 2019, making Tamil Nadu the first state in the country to have a law on contract farming.

Claim 3: Excludes key farm items from Essential Commodities

This is just an outright lie peddled by Suresh Sambandam. Nothing has been removed from any list. Even a layman would know the difference between ‘deregulation’ and ‘exclusion’. The amendments to the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 deregulates agricultural commodities like cereals, pulses, oilseeds, edible oils, potato, etc from state controlled production, supply, and distribution. The amendment states provides that the central government may regulate the supply of certain food items including cereals, pulses, potatoes, onions, edible oilseeds, and oils, only under extraordinary circumstances like war, famine, extraordinary price rise and natural calamity of grave nature and let the price be determined by the market in normal circumstances.

For all his claims about being an ‘entrepreneur’ and having and ushering in a ‘masterstroke’ for Tamil Nadu’s growth, the man is opposing something that exactly seeks to do that. But it is not surprising given the fact that the man is a DMK sympathizer.

This is not the first time Suresh Sambandam has been caught peddling lies. Earlier, he exposed his shallow knowledge on history, politics and economy in an interview with ‘Neeya Naana’ Gopinath to Behindwoods YouTube channel. Back then, he had proved to be nothing more than a Murasoli reader who is wise enough to fabricate data in order to portray DMK as the pioneer of development politics.

To know more about the farm laws and the surrounding protests, click here.

The post DMK’s unofficial brand ambassador and data fabricating ‘tech entrepreneur’ peddles fake news on farmer empowerment laws appeared first on The Commune.

Following the passage of the three new Farm Acts passed by the centre, FPCs in Maharashtra are now increasingly bypassing APMC Mandis that once had control over the price. The farmers now are selling directly to private players and that has resulted in profits to the farmers, Financial Express has reported.

The Farm Bills that were passed by the Centre recently seems to have ended the monopoly of APMC and middlemen who had the power to dictate the price to the farmer for the produce. The protests staged by the opposition parties fizzled out owing to the grassroot level changes happening as many Farmer Producer Companies (FPCs) are bypassing APMC Mandis to directly deal with private buyers in the open market.

“We decided to share some of the profit with the farmers who had sold their maize to us and distributed a bonus of Rs 10 per quintal to the farmers. The amount is small but is a gesture of appreciation”, the FPC’s founder Ashish Nafade has been quoted as saying.

The FPCs also have plans to brand their products and also tap into the international market and wants big corporate houses like ITC to sell their produce and are registering on online platforms for a wider market reach.

The post Farmers in Maharashtra bypass state APMC mandis, reap benefits from market appeared first on The Commune.

After receiving the assent of the Lok Sabha, the Rajya Sabha on September 20 passed The  Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Bill, 2020 and The Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement of Price Assurance and Farm Services Bill, 2020.

The two bills are aimed at transforming agriculture in the country and raising farmers’ incomes.

However, a lot of rumours have been going around about the bill saying that it is anti-farmer with the usual rhetoric of that the bill is an attempt to make Ambani and Adani rich.

In this article, we bust some of the rumours and false rhetorics floating around:

Rumour 1:  MSP will be scrapped

Truth: The government has clarified that procurement through Minimum Support Price (MSP) will continue and  farmers can sell their produce at MSP rate. Mandis will continue to function and trading will continue as before. Under the new system, farmers will have the option to sell their produce at other places in addition to the mandis. Since the coming of Modi government in 2014, the MSP for paddy, wheat and pulses have been increased 24, 177 and 75 times respectively.

Rumour 2: State APMC acts will be diluted

Truth: The two bills that have been passed will not lay a finger on the State Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC) Acts as they are state Acts. The Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Bill, 2020 seeks to create more avenues for farmers to sell their produce. It will promote barrier-free inter-state and intra-state trade and commerce outside the physical premises of markets notified under State Agricultural Produce Marketing legislations.

In simple words, it empowers the farmers by giving them the choice to sell their produce where they get a better price.

Rumour 3: Government is conspiring to sell the lands to rich capitalists and industrialists

Truth: The bill provides for contract farming between a buyer and farmers. A contract farming agreement between the farmer and the buyer must provide for a conciliation board as well as a conciliation process for settlement of disputes. The board should have a fair representation of the parties to the agreement.  The bill proposes to create a three-level dispute settlement mechanism: the conciliation board, Sub-Divisional Magistrate and Appellate Authority. At first, all disputes must be referred to the board for resolution. If it remains unresolved for more than 30 days, parties may approach the Sub-divisional Magistrate for resolution. If the parties are not satisfied with the decision of the sub-divisional magistrate, they will have a right to appeal to an Appellate Authority which will be presided by collector or additional collector. Penalty can be levied by the Magistrate or the Appellate Authority on the party contravening the agreement.

However, sale, lease or mortgage of farmers’ land is totally prohibited and farmers’ land is also protected against any recovery.

Rumour 4: Farmers will be disadvantaged in terms of fixing the price

Truth: The farmer will have full power in the contract to fix a sale price of his choice for the produce. They will receive payment within maximum 3 days.

Rumour 5: Buyers will exploits farmers

Truth: The price of farming produce should be mentioned in the agreement.  For items where prices are subjected to fluctuations, a guaranteed price for the produce and a clear reference for any additional amount above the guaranteed price must be specified in the agreement. The process of price determination must also be mentioned in the agreement. Thus, this bill will encourage farmers to engage with processors, wholesalers, aggregators, large retailers, exporters etc., on a level playing field.

Rumour 6: Farmer will be severely hit if there are market fluctuations

Truth: Price will be assured to farmers even before sowing of crops. In case of higher market price, farmers will be entitled to this price over and above the minimum price. It will transfer the risk of market unpredictability from the farmer to the sponsor. Due to prior price determination, farmers will be shielded from the rise and fall of market prices.

If the bills are said to be of benefit to the farmers, why is there opposition to it?

Agricultural produce selling has 3 major stakeholders at play apart from the farmers: commission agents, state mandis and bureaucracy. The local APMC mandis are heavily politicised with the commission agents and middlemen having political influence gulping a major portion of the profit. The existing system leaves the farmer parched with less money. Once these reforms are implemented, those who have been making money at the cost of farmers will stand to lose. The middlemen commission and patronage structure will disappear. It is these middlemen who stand to lose who are against the bill.

Why are these reforms needed?

Agriculture sector though being the biggest employer, does not contribute much in terms of Gross Value Added. This is because the archaic laws and regulations does not provide any incentives for investments in agriculture. Only if there are private investments, farmers will get access to high quality farm inputs. These investments will help the farmer to put use better technology on the farm and increase the productivity. Better productivity will benefit both the businesses and farmer thereby unleashing the potential of the agriculture sector.

The post Farm Bills: Rumours Vs. Truth appeared first on The Commune.