When you read the fine print of the farm laws-you realise the loopholes and gaps in these reforms. There are three mistakes in the approach here :
1. Not doing a focused parliamentary debate - an issue that affects 65% of country’s labour force, 3-4% of its GDP merited that 1/5
1. Not doing a focused parliamentary debate - an issue that affects 65% of country’s labour force, 3-4% of its GDP merited that 1/5
https://twitter.com/kaushikcbasu/status/1354253328792870913
2. When farmers from some states supported and from some opposed the Govt should have realised that it was passing an ad hoc reform without understanding that you can’t apply rules of grains to pulses and those of pulses to fruits and vegetables. 2/5
3. In a democracy to pass reforms without public debate is hazardous & unnecessary. The process takes time but not doing it paralyses the functioning of it. The 1991 reforms were given much room for debate. Those who opposed it eventually became its ambassadors & benefited 3/5
4.Agriculture is not an industry. It’s a culture. A way of life. No question that reforms are needed in creating better access to market but some parts of these new laws give no recourse to civil courts to farmers in case of disputes & give immunity to Govt for future failure 4/5
If We have a bias for reforms in our heads we will miss these points. A parliamentary and public debate would have addressed them. That’s why means are important not just ends. @kaushikcbasu @PramitWorld @nebuer42 @govindethiraj @suhasinih @Karma_Paljor @calamur @horror06
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
