Nothing has bestirred the green acres of Punjab in recent days as much as the Centre’s move on FDI in multi-brand retail. It is fast pitching mainstream farm organisations and progressive farmers against the ruling Akali Dal-BJP government that publicly opposes FDI. But the ruling dispensation—or at least the Akalis, who have a base in rural areas—knows that withstanding pressure from their constituency will not be easy. Signs of a wavering Akali leadership are already visible.
One of the first to pitch for FDI in multi-brand retail has been Ajmer Singh Lakhowal, an Akali supporter who heads the Bharatiya Kisan Union, and the Punjab State Agricultural and Marketing Board. Deviating from his party’s stand, he believes “big MNCs can build agricultural infrastructure in rural areas like cold storage chains”, which will enable farmers to cut wastage and sell more. “We missed the IT revolution due to militancy and there is no major industry in Punjab; we just cannot afford to miss the FDI bus now,” he says. Except left-leaning groups, other farmer organisations too have joined the pro-FDI chorus.
The State Farmer’s Commission also supports the policy. It has been advocating diversification from the paddy-wheat agricultural cycle to pull the state out of its agrarian crisis. “We would expect these companies to pick up the produce directly from the farmers. It will open new opportunities and help them diversify from the existing cycle that is bringing diminishing returns,” G.S. Kalkat, the Commission’s chairman, told Outlook. With newer areas in the country growing foodgrain, Punjab’s output is no longer as indispensable as earlier.
Farmers in Punjab have already had a taste of what organised private enterprise can do for agricultural practices. Though initiatives like Pepsico, ITC Mahindra and Reliance Fresh did not make much headway because of inadequate planning and no supporting government policies, the state government did allow Bharti Walmart to enter the market in 2008. The group has five wholesale cash-and-carry ‘Best Price’ stores in five towns, which also supplies the 70 ‘Easyday’ retail outlets of Bharti Retail. Bharti Walmart is permitted to purchase produce directly from the farmers for its wholesale operations, though the state has still to amend its Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee Act for retail trade.
Consequently, the company buys much of its agricultural produce, like vegetables, fruit, spices, food grains, pulses etc, from the northern agrarian states. It has set up a direct farm programme at Malerkotla, near Ludhiana, where farmers are provided with latest varieties of seeds and educated in international crop management techniques and agricultural practices, particularly those that do not result in pesticide residue. Daljit Singh, an agronomist and former employee of Bharti Field Fresh in charge of its contract farming programme in north India, says, “My own experience is that our farmers do not have basic knowledge of international practices, which is why their produce gets rejected. FDI will have a ripple effect because the benefits of conforming to international standards will begin to attract others.”
Presently, Punjab’s rural economy is based on support price structures in traditional rice and wheat, which does not invite much experimentation in other crops due to uncertain marketing. Those advocating the entry of foreign retail feel it can motivate farmers to grow other crops and vegetables once they are assured of remunerative returns and export avenues. Hope for positive change has infected a countryside that is simmering with excitement. The political leadership will ignore it at its own peril.
The article on the enthusiasm for fdi in Punjab (Anti-Anti-People?, Oct 15) made interesting reading. But benefits would accrue to rich farmers if fdi is allowed. The landless will be further alienated. To be sure, licences of cold storage chains would only be allotted to rich hoarders.
Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.
1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.
2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.
To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.
Benefits will accrue to rich farmers in punjab if FDI is allowed.Ruling party is favouring landed class and merchant elite.Foreign companies are bound to bring more moolah.Landless farmers will be further alienated.They will have to depend on the mercy of local potentates to secure livelihood.Licenses of chain of cold storages will only be allotted to rich hoarders.Punjab must first work to bring equity through extensive land reforms.FDI is only going to marginalise Dalits,landless farmers and other small entreprenuers.
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT