Bharat Krishak Samaj

Address by Dr. Krishan Bir Chaudhary,Executive Chairman, Bharat Krishak Samaj in 35 th National Convention of Farmers in Erode, (Tamilnadu ), India on 17th & 18th February, 2007

We are meeting here in Erode at a critical juncture in the history of country's agriculture where the farmer is faced with multiple problems in sustaining his livelihood. The rate of farmers' suicide is increasing day by day primarily due to continued experiments of new models being imposed.

Farmers fighting every odds are increasing the production, but not getting remunerative prices for their produces. The cost of production has increased phenomenally due to the introduction of capital-intensive unsustainable agriculture. The use of costly chemicals has not only degraded the soil health and factor productivity. There is an increasing demand for organic food across the world and Indian farmers are missing this opportunity.
The minimum support prices (MSPs) of different crops estimated by the Commission for Agricultural Costs & Prices (CACP) and subsequently endorsed by the government are low and not remunerative.
There is a need for up-gradation of the methods for estimation of real cost of production and arriving at the real remunerative prices. The process should be transparent and open to farmers Farmer has almost lost his sovereignty over the tools of farming. Today he has to depend upon profit-making corporate houses for supply of chemical pesticides, chemical fertilizers and farm implements and machinery at high costs. He is also dependant upon the supply of hybrid seeds by seed companies and multinationals. Whatever little sovereignty the farmer has over his seeds is now sought to be eroded by the proposals in the new Seeds Bill. I appeared before the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Agriculture and pleaded for restoration of farmers' rights.
The Parliamentary Standing Committee has incorporated many of my views in its report. If the government wants to re-introduce this new Bill, it should incorporate the recommendations of the Parliamentary Standing Committee. Further there is no need for a separate Act for regulating the seed sector.
The Plant Varieties Protection & Farmers Rights (PVP&FR) Act is sufficient to regulate the seed sector and should be the only law in the country. The old Seed Act should also be repealed. The PVP&FR Act should be further amended to provide greater protection to farmers' rights. The PVP&FR Act is already TRIPS consistent and there is no need for a patent regime on micro-organisms, genes and other life forms. "

1]The minimum support prices (MSPs) of different crops estimated by the Commission for Agricultural Costs & Prices (CACP) and subsequently endorsed by the government are low and not remunerative. There is a need for up-gradation of the methods for estimation of real cost of production and arriving at the real remunerative prices. The process should be transparent and open to farmers

Farmer has almost lost his sovereignty over the tools of farming. Today he has to depend upon profit-making corporate houses for supply of chemical pesticides, chemical fertilizers and farm implements and machinery at high costs. He is also dependant upon the supply of hybrid seeds by seed companies and multinationals. Whatever little sovereignty the farmer has over his seeds is now sought to be eroded by the proposals in the new Seeds Bill.

I appeared before the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Agriculture and pleaded for restoration of farmers' rights. The Parliamentary Standing Committee has incorporated many of my views in its report. If the government wants to re-introduce this new Bill, it should incorporate the recommendations of the Parliamentary Standing Committee.
Further there is no need for a separate Act for regulating the seed sector. The Plant Varieties Protection & Farmers Rights (PVP&FR) Act is sufficient to regulate the seed sector and should be the only law in the country. The old Seed Act should also be repealed. The PVP&FR Act should be further amended to provide greater protection to farmers' rights. The PVP&FR Act is already TRIPS consistent and there is no need for a patent regime on micro-organisms, genes and other life forms.

The governments of Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu have asked Mahyco and Monsanto to reimburse the farmers' losses. The dispute is pending before the MRTP. The failure of Bt cotton is also reported across several cotton-growing states. Worldwide there are reports of farmers being put to heavy losses on account of cultivation of GM crops. The GM crops developed so far claim for reducing pesticide use and not for actual increase in productivity. India should learn lessons from the failure of GM crops across the world. Recently the US court has called for a review of the approvals of GM crops in that country. In India in response to a PIL, the Supreme Court has ordered a ban on fresh approval of GM crops for field trials.

There is a conspiracy being hatched against farmers in the name of increasing production for food security by forcibly introducing genetically modified (GM) crops.
The failure of the first non-food GM crop – Bt cotton – is before us. Due to failure of Bt cotton, some varieties have been banned in Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu. The governments of Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu have asked Mahyco and Monsanto to reimburse the farmers' losses. The dispute is pending before the MRTP.

The failure of Bt cotton is also reported across several cotton-growing states. Worldwide there are reports of farmers being put to heavy losses on account of cultivation of GM crops. The GM crops developed so far claim for reducing pesticide use and not for actual increase in productivity. India should learn lessons from the failure of GM crops across the world. Recently the US court has called for a review of the approvals of GM crops in that country. In India in response to a PIL, the Supreme Court has ordered a ban on fresh approval of GM crops for field trials.

The free entry of corporates and multinationals in agriculture marketing has raised new problems. They purchase produce from farmers slightly higher than the MSP to capture the market and dismantle the government's procurement system. Subsequently they hoard the stock, manipulate the market prices and sell at high prices. This is the major cause for the present rise in prices of essential commodities. The manipulations in the futures market is another cause for price rise. Thus the present rise in prices benefits only traders and corporates, whereas the farmers and consumers buy at higher prices.
With a view to contain rising prices, the government is encouraging import of agro produces. This measure will be detrimental to farmers' interest in the long run and destroy country's food security. With a view to destroy the traditional food habits and culture and to encourage the processed junk food of the MNCs and discourage consumption of fresh food, the Food\n Standard & Safety Act has been brought in. The government does not give any direct subsidy to farmers. Whatever minimum subsidy the government intends to give for agriculture should be given directly to farmers.

The free entry of corporates and multinationals in agriculture marketing has raised new problems. They purchase produce from farmers slightly higher than the MSP to capture the market and dismantle the government's procurement system. Subsequently they hoard the stock, manipulate the market prices and sell at high prices. This is the major cause for the present rise in prices of essential commodities. The manipulations in the futures market is another cause for price rise. Thus the present rise in prices benefits only traders and corporates, whereas the farmers and consumers buy at higher prices.

With a view to contain rising prices, the government is encouraging import of agro produces. This measure will be detrimental to farmers' interest in the long run and destroy country's food security.

With a view to destroy the traditional food habits and culture and to encourage the processed junk food of the MNCs and discourage consumption of fresh food, the Food Standard & Safety Act has been brought in.

The government does not give any direct subsidy to farmers. Whatever minimum subsidy the government intends to give for agriculture should be given directly to farmers.
Unfortunately Indian agriculture has been dragged into the ambit of the WTO and we have given market access for some agro produces at a time when the developed counties have distorted global prices by their huge support to their farm sector. In this situation Indian farmers cannot compete with the farmers in the developed world.
Both EU and US have protected their markets through high tariff barriers and non-tariff barriers. The US through its recent Farm Bill 2007 has increased direct payments to farmers by 10% over the previous years. It has increased direct payments by $ 5.5 billion.
It has extended its support to horticulture crops also and kept its support to dairy sector intact. As the developed countries have not fulfilled their commitments in the agreement on agriculture for reducing their subsidies and support to the farm sector, India should not open up its markets. However, we are surprised to note our commerce minister making an unilateral offer at Davos for flexibility on the issue of Special Products and Special Safeguard Mechanism. For Indian farmers every crop is a Special Product and not a matter for negotiation. If the government wants to save agriculture from any consequent disaster, it should fight for recognition of every crop as Special Product at the WTO and seek for application of special safeguard mechanism. If this is not possible then.

Unfortunately Indian agriculture has been dragged into the ambit of the WTO and we have given market access for some agro produces at a time when the developed counties have distorted global prices by their huge support to their farm sector. In this situation Indian farmers cannot compete with the farmers in the developed world. Both EU and US have protected their markets through high tariff barriers and non-tariff barriers. The US through its recent Farm Bill 2007 has increased direct payments to farmers by 10% over the previous years. It has increased direct payments by $ 5.5 billion. It has extended its support to horticulture crops also and kept its support to dairy sector intact.

As the developed countries have not fulfilled their commitments in the agreement on agriculture for reducing their subsidies and support to the farm sector, India should not open up its markets. However, we are surprised to note our commerce minister making an unilateral offer at Davos for flexibility on the issue of Special Products and Special Safeguard Mechanism. For Indian farmers every crop is a Special Product and not a matter for negotiation. If the government wants to save agriculture from any consequent disaster, it should fight for recognition of every crop as Special Product at the WTO and seek for application of special safeguard mechanism. If this is not possible then
India should ask for restoration of the right to impose quantitative restrictions (QRs) on imports.
- Jai Hind, Jai Kisan 17 February, 2007"

Food Retail Chain - Food Logistics

Consolidated Control of Food Chain
Oakland Institute USA, has released a New Policy Brief Reveals that Consolidated Control of Food Leads to Declining Food Security, Economic Health, and Labor Standards :

Facing Goliath : Challenging the Impacts of Retail Consolidation on our Local Economies, Communities, and Food Security
This new policy brief from the Oakland Institute exposes how corporate consolidation in food retail has put our access to a reliable supply of healthy and affordable food at risk.

The top five food retailers, which now control more than half of all grocery sales in the country, have gained unprecedented market power," said Katy Mamen, Oakland Institute Fellow and author of the Policy Brief. "As a result, cost savings garnered through increased bargaining power are generally not being passed on to the consumer, supermarkets are abandoning low-income communities where profit margins are lower, and labor standards are being forced down."

The shift from small and medium scale food stores to big box stores brings broader economic turmoil for many communities. When a retail mega-store enters a community, independent shops that serve the local community are often forced to close. New Wal-Mart stores in a community have been associated with increased poverty levels and a decline in locally owned and operated businesses.
"In the U.S., the independent business owner is held in high regard - but small businesses throughout the food supply chain, from farmers to processors to grocers are being forced out as consolidation continues, undermining the American Dream," said Mamen.

The Policy Brief teases out the architecture of change in the food supply chain, outlines some of the key impacts on local communities, and suggests strategies for bringing balance back to the food retail landscape, including:

* Developing successful and innovative regional distribution and retail models;

* Re-creating real retail diversity that includes both locally-owned outlets that source a majority of their products locally and products that are direct marketed by producers;

* Fostering locally-owned and operated retail outlets in low-income communities;

* Working to balance the public subsidy and support system, which currently disproportionately favors large supermarket chains over independent markets;

* Raising public awareness about the social, economic and environmental benefits of locally owned and operated grocery stores.

Facing Goliath : Challenging the Impacts of Retail Consolidation on our Local Economies, Communities, and Food Security is a publication of the Oakland Institute, a think tank for research, analysis, and action whose mission is to increase public participation and promote fair debate on critical social, economic, and environmental justice issues.

Chennai Schools - Students Discuss GM Food

Indian Schools, Students, GM Debates in Chennai -
The School - KFI, under its Urban Outreach Programme, has arranged three talks on different related themes at Ethiraj College, Loyola College, and the Asian College of Journalism between January 18th and 20th. This series of talks in Chennai city around the issue of Genetically Engineered Crops is the beginning of our effort to take important debates around health and food policies to urban consumers and youth in collaboration with CAG (Consumer Action Group). We consider this debate on GE crops as important, as this is a technology that will affect all of us as consumers of food. Ms. Kuruganti will also be attending the TN - State-level Workshop organised by the Consumer Action Group (CAG) on issues and challenges in agriculture in Tamilnadu, as part of CAG's Trade and Livelihoods programme, on the 19th of January.

GM Contamination Free Foods

"Decision-making on GE crops should be democratized"
Debates form the cornerstone for democratizing technology,decision-making and policy formulation in the country.
Very often, the primary stakeholders of such technologies are not informed fully on various nuances and details of the technology being thrust upen them in a top-down decision-making model. Much decision-making is often driven by funding rather than scientific facts and long term vision for the agriculture of this country. Genetic Engineering (GE) in agriculture is one such technology which will directly affect millions of farmers in the country and all of us as consumers of food.
This is something which people should engage themselves on and be clear about acceptance or rejection and the reasons thereof.
Genetic engineering in cultivation is permitted by only 21 countries around the world, despite the introduction of the technology on a commercial basis more than a decade ago in the USA.
Around 70% of the area cultivated with GE crops is in just the USA and Argentina. That speaks volumes about the acceptance and adoption of this so-called "frontier technology".
More and more countries, provinces andcommunities are declaring themselves GE-Free and several suchdecisions have been taken after understanding / experiencing the technology and its ramifications.
Unlike other hazardous technologies like chemical pesticides, Genetic Engineering in agriculture is an irreversible process, once released into the open environment, since the technology involves the modification of living organisms whichreproduce, contaminate, spread, impact eco-systems and so on.
There is growing evidence of the potential environmental and health hazards associated with this technology from across the world. There are fundamental questions unanswered on the very science of GE and its unpredictability and imprecision.
This is true in India too, where the only commercially cultivated GMcrop is Bt Cotton – here, even official reports now indicate that there are changes being witnessed on a large scale in cotton farm ecology.
There are newer pests and diseases emerging as major problems for the cotton farmers each year. The claims of higher yields and better economics have been proven wrong over the past five years for many Bt Cotton farmers, despite claims to the contrary by theindustry.

There is much hype that has been created around the many benefits that are supposed to have accrued to farmers who have adopted the technology. Much of such data has been generated with the industry's funding and unfortunately, the regulators have not made any efforts for systematic and scientific monitoring on the ground. Serious and unacceptable regulatory failures have been compounding the situation related to GE crop development and introduction in India.

In recent times, major farmers' groups, traders and even political parties have stated their rejection of the notion of GE technology being a solution to problems in Indian farming and the deep agrarian crisis being witnessed all around today.
Elsewhere in countries like the UK, Netherlands, Norway, Germany etc., decisions related to such technologies in general and GE in particular, are guided by deliberative democratic processes like citizens' juries, 'consensus conferences', referendums etc. and India has much to learn from such processes in relation to S & T policy making in this country.
- With thanks to Samanvaya, Sumitra. - Press release from Kavitha Kuruganti