Kavitha Kuruganti Profile picture
Sep 14, 2020 13 tweets 4 min read Read on X
Disconnect from ground, ambiguities and deficiencies galore in the APMC Bypass Bill 2020.
*farmers' freedom was not curtailed earlier either in state APMC Acts
* trader to trader transactions are being regulated now - that cannot be farmers' produce
#APMCBypassBill 1/13
It is unclear why separate definitions and clauses have been included for Farmers’ Produce (Sec.2(a)) and Scheduled Farmers’ Produce (2 (j)) when the intention is to de-regulate both, but one category now put under state APMC Act discretion!!? #APMCBypassBill 2/13
Sec 2(d) Farmer means a person engaged in production of farming produce by self or by hired labour or ...and includes FPOs! FPOs not engaged in production & cannot be equated with Farmer. Why regulate decisions within autonomous farmers’ body with decisions made by farmers? 3/13
FPOs now put on par with existing traders & big Cos to compete in the market space. It's unclear why such over-regulation when FPO movement itself is in a nascent stage in the country, requiring the government to announce separate investments and enabling measures for them. 4/13
Govt abdicating all oversight responsibility since it is not prescribing system of registration of all traders of all farmers’ produce. Nor does it want to build a price intelligence system even as it weakens mandis. How and when will it intervene then??? #APMCBypassBill 5/13
The Bill says Central government MAY develop a price information and market intelligence system – without such a data system, can the government intervene at all and will it intervene at all? How will we know if prices are crashing significantly for farmers? #APMCBypassBill 6/13
Exploitation of farmers is understood to be only around prompt price payment without acknowledging that it is around price realisation also, and critically so as far as farmers are concerned. There are also several non-price related matters on which farmers are exploited. 7/13
The entire grievance redressal system is visualised only around prompt payments, that too based on a ‘receipt of delivery’. The entire dispute resolution/grievance redressal depends on this receipt – how many farmers will get it in “trade areas”? 8/13
How will same day payment happen for inter-state trade since dis-intermediated trade is unlikely for inter-state trade, that too without the buyer looking at samples of produce delivered. 9/13
Electronic trading like in e-NAM is riding on top of physical mandi structure in the country, not as a parallel system – if Mandis are destroyed without much trading, will e-NAM happen with farmer participation? #APMCBypassBill 10/13
Fragmented markets –many electronic platforms disconnected from each other –what will offer reference price then? Fragmented markets also mean monopsonistic markets + Fragmented regulatory structures are going to create more uneven playing field for farmers.#APMCBypassBill 11/13
In fact, the most advantaged, trade-ready and well-equipped who will operate now outside the regulated mandi and also without paying a fee in the trade area, will be the existing local traders and commission agents! They have liquidity/infra, they know the producers. 12/13
Ultimately this is going to lead to replication of old structures outside mandis. Creating 2 market spaces with 2 completely different sets of rules is a recipe for disaster. Govt will not know anything. NOT KNOWING WILL GIVE THE EXCUSE NOT TO ACT! Farmers fear this, rightly so.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Kavitha Kuruganti

Kavitha Kuruganti Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @kkuruganti

Oct 1, 2020
I just found APMC Bypass Bill has: 2(n) TRADER means a person who BUYS farmers’ produce by way of inter-State or intra-State trade ... for purpose of wholesale trade, retail, END USE, value addition, processing, manufacturing, export, CONSUMPTION or for such other purpose!!! 1/4
Trade is not explicitly defined other than buying and selling of farmers' produce, and defined in the context of inter-state or intra-state in the Act. 2/4
It means that CONSUMERS buying from farmers (let us say in rural haats or in rural India generally etc.) have been equated with traders. And now, as per Sec.4(1) all these consumers who are = traders have to have PAN cards!! Otherwise, penalties under Sec.11 (1) will apply. 3/4
Read 4 tweets
Sep 14, 2020
Now, to the APMC BYPASS BILL 2020. It seems to be about replacing current local traders' monopsonies with big business monopolies without government addressing the basic issues around protecting farmers. 1/7 Image
Farmers’ freedom was not curtailed legally in APMCs Act. It's also important to note that only 35% of produce traded in regulated markets. Many things going wrong in these APMCs. However, APMCs provide space for farmers' collective bargaining on price & non-price issues. 2/7 Image
While non-Mandi trade needs to be de-criminalised, that is NOT to be made de-regulation which will b callous neglect of farmers’ interests. Farmers’ woes with markets & low prices are due to many inter-locked factors incl. agri-credit & dumping from unequal international trade3/7
Read 7 tweets
Sep 14, 2020
CONTRACT FARMING BILL 2020 AKA Farmers (Empowerment & Protection) Agreement of Price Assurance and Farm Services Bill, 2020. THERE IS NO ‘PRICE ASSURANCE’ OR ‘FARMERS’ EMPOWERMENT’ –
title of Bill is a misnomer. Is this allowed in law-making?
1/4 Image
IN AN ACT THAT KEEPS THINGS VOLUNTARY (Farmer ‘may’ enter agreement, ‘may’ have written agreement, it ‘may’ have xyz terms & conditions etc.-- It's not about Sponsor SHALL enter written agreement etc.)- THERE SHALL BE A BAR ON CIVIL COURT JURISDICTION (Sec.19)? How & why? 2/4
Isn’t concept of “Production Agreement” in this Bill a proxy for CORPORATE FARMING??
Aren't 'farm services' being equated with inputs?
How are FPOs included in the definition of Farmer? 3/4
Read 4 tweets
Sep 14, 2020
Yes, agri-businesses in post-harvest supply chains need predictable regulation to invest. But that doesn't mean govt can give up on its power to regulate for protection of weakest. So, what's wrong with Essential Commodities Amendment Bill 2020, to be introduced today? 1/7 Image
Preamble says it's for enhancing income of farmers but EC Act was never about Farmers or their incomes. There was no restriction under ECA on Farmers or FPOs from stocking produce/selling it. It's established that during retail price rise, benefit is not passed on to farmers.2/7
Now, restrictions are being removed for all foodstuffs to give Companies freedom to purchase & store any quantities, hence indulge in hoarding. This is “Food Hoarding (Freedom for Corporates) Bill”. Cos like Adani-Wilmar & Reliance will now stock any amount of food stuffs. 3/7
Read 8 tweets
Aug 14, 2020
#PrashantBhushan & Non-existent legal reasoning of SC - Crisp analysis by @gautambhatia88 - "It reminds me of times I used to take a football from halfway line, dribble it across the pitch, and kick it into the goal – without any opposition players on the field.
It stands to reason that if an individual has been accused of CoC because they expressed an opinion about role of 4 CJs in undermining democracy, & that individual has filed a Reply setting out the facts upon the basis of which they arrived at that opinion, ....
a “judgment” holding that individual guilty of contempt cannot pretend that the Reply does not exist. .. "In the 108-page long judgment (the substantive part of which begins at page 93), the Supreme Court refuses entirely to engage with Mr. Bhushan’s reply."
Read 4 tweets
Aug 13, 2020
About @AgriGoI' proposal to ban 27 pesticides. We welcome it. 21 of the 27 pesticides are considered “Highly Hazardous Pesticides”. 17 are “Deemed to be Registered Pesticides) or DRPs. #Ban27Pesticides
When India enacted Insecticides Act 1968, around 71 pesticides that were already in use were deemed to be registered, and 17 of these 27 are DRPs. This then means that they have not been registered after a thorough assessment of biosafety and efficacy. #Ban27Pesticides
3 of 27 are WHO Class Ib pesticides. 13 are Class II (classification based on acute toxicity). In India, several pesticides in WHO’s classification of Class II and III also feature in fact finding reports of acute pesticide poisoning of agricultural workers. #Ban27pesticides
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(