Though the Covid-19 pandemic has crippled socio-economic activities, resulting in drastic decline in state GDP to -2.6%, the agriculture sector has surprisingly marked an outstanding growth of 6.4% during the period. Instead of acknowledging the immense contribution of the toiling masses in this critical period, the government took the risk of introducing far-reaching changes to major farm laws that attracted the wrath of farmers in the state. Instead of pacifying the farmers, and instilling an element of hope in them, it resorted to routine shortcut routes for which the Yediyurappa-led BJP government in the state may have to pay a heavy political cost in the future.
It is a joke to claim 10%reservation, on the pretext of International Women’s Day, for women entrepreneurs in APMCs, while virtually dismantling their very structure through the recent amendment. The government’s hurry to digitise land records while destroying the very spirit of the Land Reforms Act, on the other hand, is a clear indication of facilitating easy takeover of farm land by the moneyed class. Under the current situation, the budget, as an effective policy formation tool, could have been used to address the real problems faced by farmers shrewdly.
Tur farmers needed a comprehensive production scheme coupled with an empowered Tur Board rather than mere focus on increasing production. Similarly, it would have been appropriate to establish a separate board to look into all aspects of arecanut cultivation rather than picking up mundane issues like control of YLD disease. Instead of making a huge allocation of `900 crore to the existing Fasal Bima Yojana, that is severely criticised as being more beneficial to private insurance companies rather than farmers, a separate pro-farmer crop insurance scheme in line with neighbouring states like Andhra Pradesh, would have been ideal.
With more than 65% of the cultivated being rainfed, 62% of holdings are uneconomical. Karnataka farmers definitely needed a better deal. Farmers’ organisations are unequivocal in their claim for legal recourse to ensure that transaction of all farm commodities should be at prices not below the government-declared MSP. The Karnataka Agricultural Prices Commission, in this backdrop, had proposed in 2018 a Statutory Minimum Purchase Price based on either MSP or cost of cultivation for all farm commodities along with penalty and punishment to ensure that no purchase from farmers takes place below SMPP anywhere in the state. A budget allocation of around B10,000 cr as Price Stabilisation Fund is needed to undertake timely procurement in this regard. All these are conspicuously absent in the current budget.
It is time to look at the unique features and diverse socio-economic profiles of Karnataka farmers while framing comprehensive policies and programmes. An independent survey undertaken during the lockdown by the author highlights that 65% of farmers have education of higher secondary level and above and almost 30 per cent are in the age group of less than 40 years. Of the 78 farm families surveyed, nearly 30% are from Lingayat community, around 28%from Vokkaliga, Reddy and Bunts, and another 9% are Brahmins. Instead of approaching these social groups as farming classes, the CM felt that appeasing them through their caste identity is the “safe route” and granted liberally to various Boards created for the welfare of these caste groups, that may prove costly politically in the course of time.
Dr TN Prakash Kammardi
Agri economist and former chairman, Karnataka
Agricultural Prices Commission