The ordinances were issued on June 5, 2020, after the complete lockdown of the country ended on May 1, and Unlock-1 began from the next day. The government was being haunted by the prospect of failure of Modi’s flagship programme ‘Doubling the farmers’ income by 2022’. On May 12, Modi had already announced a multi-tranche economic package to leverage the ongoing COVID-19 crisis into an ‘opportunity’ for progress toward a “Self-Reliant” India, following which Finance Minister announced a revival package of 20.97 lakh crore rupees.

The ‘opportunity’ as announced by the Prime Minister has many dimensions, and the government is exploiting it in every possible way. The supply chain disruption during the lockdown period had exposed the critical infrastructure gaps and governance issues. Understanding that COVID-19 has provided the government an opportunity to cover up its own faults, it came out with these three ordinances at the time when farmers were struggling to overcome the crises arising out of COVID-19, lack of medical facilities and cash in hand, lockdown, and other government’s policy decisions. However, farmers have finally stood up, though it took three months, against these ordinances in several states including Haryana and Punjab. They are demonstrating in large numbers, even when physical distancing norms are yet operational. It is ethically wrong on the part of the government to work in this manner.

Government has claimed these steps ‘historical’ and said that these would liberate existing market restrictions, eliminate free trade barriers in agricultural production, and empower farmers to engage directly with potential buyers in advance of harvest. The agitating farmers believe it otherwise. They claim that contract farming will harm their interest. It has been experimented in sugarcane crop. Crores of rupees are unpaid to the farmers, and there is no one listening to them.

It is claimed by the government that the Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Ordinance, 2020 will create an environment where farmers and traders will have the ability of free choice of sale and purchase of agricultural products. It will also eliminate barriers to inter and intra state trade and commerce outside physical market premises, which are normally regulated by state government Agricultural Produce Committees (APMCs). The ordinance aims to create additional trading opportunities outside APMC market yards to help farmers get more competitive prices due to additional competition.”

However, the market realities are different. The same traders, who are functioning under the government regulated marketplace, will then be unbridled with dismantling of the present mechanism. In that scenario, farmers will be compelled to sell their produce at the price fixed by the cartel of traders. The condition of sugarcane growers is an example. Farmers usually wait for months or years to get payment for their sold sugarcane. Anyone who needs immediate cash for their crops, is compelled to sell their papers of sold crops. The farmers have reasons to suspect the efficacy of the proposed system.

Farmers are very simple and mostly innocent people. They don’t have the knowledge and capacity to deal with the players in the new situation as envisaged in the Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services Ordinance, 2020. Government has said that this ordinance would empower farmers to engage with processors, wholesalers, aggregators, large retailers, and exporters on a level playing field without any fear of exploitation. No one but naïve would believe this because no level playing field is possible between a person having all the capabilities of shrewdness and a person having almost no acumen to deal with even simple things. Farmers will be at receiving end when the present system of government protection in the marketplace will be dismantled.

Government claims that this ordinance will transfer the risk of market unpredictability from the farmer to the sponsor and also enable the farmer to access modern technology and better inputs. It is also claimed that it would reduce the cost of marketing and improve farmers’ incomes. All these are but temptation. How can a farmer access the modern technology when they don’t have technological knowledge? They will certainly fall into the hands of unscrupulous elements with increased dependence on others.

The third is the Essential Commodities (Amendment) Ordinance 2020 under which basic food items including cereals, pulses, oilseeds, edible oils, onions, and potatoes will be removed from the list of essential commodities. It will help address private investor’s concerns of excessive regulatory interference in their business operations. The ordinance has specified that these commodities can only be regulated through stock limits under situations such as war, famine, extraordinary price fluctuations, or natural calamities. However, agricultural processors and exports will remain exempted from stock limit impositions even under these “catastrophic” conditions. Anyone can see the impending danger for the common people, not only for the farmers. No one can evade hike in prices if it is enacted.

Private sector operators in agri-business are thus liberated by these three ordinances. Similarly, government protection to farmers is done away with. Production, supply, trade and storage of essential commodities will have new laws. Hoarders and profiteers will have more ‘opportunity’ to earn money. Exploitation of farmers and end users of agricultural produce is on the cards. To prevent this, all the three bills must be either scraped or suitably amended. What we really need is to eliminate the huge difference between the selling price of agricultural goods at the farmers’ end, and the purchase price at the consumers’ end. We do not need to help the middle men in the name of farmers’ welfare who are already earning huge profits. (IPA Service)