The new draft of the Seeds Bill has enough loopholes which can be exploited by multi-nationals
IIPM, GURGAON
Agriculture: Seeds of discontent
The third draft of the Seeds Bill has been presented in the Parliament for consideration. The bill was first drafted in 2004. Prior to this, after much criticism and protest from several farmer groups, the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Agriculture (PSCA) had made a few amendments in the draft and had presented the new bill for consideration in 2008. However, it did not come to fruition as the 14th Lok Sabha was dissolved. Now its third draft is under deliberations. Sadly, this new draft too has ignored several recommendations by the PSCA. It appears that the Agriculture Ministry is unwilling to temper with the clauses which are in the interest of multinational seed firms.
When in 2004 the draft of Seeds Bill was being made to replace the old Seeds Act of 1996, the impression was given that the new bill would open the way for importing good quality high yield seeds. Slyly, a clause was inserted which allowed seeds to be exported too. The entire game plan was to utilise the cheap Indian labour for producing seeds in India and to export them, and then again import the same on much higher price. To make all this process hassle free for multinationals, the government had planned to recognise and permit any Seeds Standard Authority to carry it. It was to be done under the pretext of the recommendations by the PSCA.
The present bill has included horticulture, lumbering, medicinal plants etc under agriculture only. So any kind of seed or plant product that is manufactured for the market will need to be registered. For registration, the bill has the provision to set up a National Seeds Committee. The president and other members of the committee will mostly be drawn from among government employees. There will be token representation of farmers too, but in reality, bureaucrats will dominate the committee. Although agriculture is a state subject, the seeds committees of the states will only have advisory roles.
While the farmers will continue to buy and sell seeds traditionally and need not register, the branded seeds will have to go through multilevel tests. The brands that will conform to the standards set in the test can only be registered. The seeds for the types of crops that are annual and biannual will be registered for 10 years and those of multi-years use for 12 years.
In between these years, the seed can be tested only once to confirm the characters that it originally had. New standards have been set for labelling the seeds that will give details of the procedure through which these seeds can be utilised properly and optimally. For example, on the label of a particular wheat seed, it will be clearly mentioned that after watering it so many times, applying so much fertilizers and protecting it from weeds and pests, it will lead to so much yield.
The seed examiners will have the duty to enforce and implement all the laws and provisions of the Seeds Bill 2010. They will have the right to raid and confiscate the premises and stock of a particular seeds seller, with permission from the District Magistrate, if the particular seller is caught selling unregistered, adulterated seeds, or seeds that do not conform to the set standards. However, these are ideal situations. The reality is, every state in this country has sellers selling adulterated and sub-standard seeds, right under the nose of government officials. Nobody cares about complaints from the farmers and compensation to them in case of bad quality seeds is almost unheard of.
The biggest problem in this bill is the lack of transparency in the entire registration process. There is no provision under which one can know the name of the person who has developed a particular seed, the place where it has been developed or the current ownership of a particular variety. Numerous cases have come up where poor farmers are duped and the ownership is fraudulently taken away by someone else and a third person starts producing and selling it. For example, Bikaner Narma, a particular variety of cotton was developed by a farmer in Bikaner, Rajasthan, but was later used by somebody else for commercial purposes. Similarly, Mahico, the country’s biggest seed firm, started by selling sawani bhindi, a variety of ladyfinger grown by Pusa Institute. Mahico bought the seeds from Pusa and kept on producing and selling them year after year without giving Pusa the royalty or license fees. Today they have their own scientists, laboratories and other infrastructure and have partners like Monsento, and virtually rule the Indian seeds business.
The onus now lies on the Indian parliamentarians to take steps which are in the interests of the farmers. The MPs need to amend all the anti-farmer clauses before passing the bill. That’s the only way the exploiter multi-nationals and their bureaucrat henchmen can be stumped in their own game.
The views expressed by the author are personal
For More IIPM Info, Visit below mentioned IIPM articles.
IIPM ranks No 1 in International Exposure in the 'Third Mail Today B-School Survey'
Management Guru Arindam Chaudhuri Dean Business School IIPM
IIPM Excom Prof Rajita Chaudhuri
Kapil Sibal’s voters want Jan Lokpal, not Government-proposed Lokpal Bill
IIPM: What is E-PAT?
"Thorns to Competition" amongst the top 10 best sellers of the week.
IIPM RANKED NO.1 in MAIL TODAY B-SCHOOL RANKINGS
'Thorns to Competition' - You can order your copy online from here
Agriculture: Seeds of discontent
The third draft of the Seeds Bill has been presented in the Parliament for consideration. The bill was first drafted in 2004. Prior to this, after much criticism and protest from several farmer groups, the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Agriculture (PSCA) had made a few amendments in the draft and had presented the new bill for consideration in 2008. However, it did not come to fruition as the 14th Lok Sabha was dissolved. Now its third draft is under deliberations. Sadly, this new draft too has ignored several recommendations by the PSCA. It appears that the Agriculture Ministry is unwilling to temper with the clauses which are in the interest of multinational seed firms.
When in 2004 the draft of Seeds Bill was being made to replace the old Seeds Act of 1996, the impression was given that the new bill would open the way for importing good quality high yield seeds. Slyly, a clause was inserted which allowed seeds to be exported too. The entire game plan was to utilise the cheap Indian labour for producing seeds in India and to export them, and then again import the same on much higher price. To make all this process hassle free for multinationals, the government had planned to recognise and permit any Seeds Standard Authority to carry it. It was to be done under the pretext of the recommendations by the PSCA.
The present bill has included horticulture, lumbering, medicinal plants etc under agriculture only. So any kind of seed or plant product that is manufactured for the market will need to be registered. For registration, the bill has the provision to set up a National Seeds Committee. The president and other members of the committee will mostly be drawn from among government employees. There will be token representation of farmers too, but in reality, bureaucrats will dominate the committee. Although agriculture is a state subject, the seeds committees of the states will only have advisory roles.
While the farmers will continue to buy and sell seeds traditionally and need not register, the branded seeds will have to go through multilevel tests. The brands that will conform to the standards set in the test can only be registered. The seeds for the types of crops that are annual and biannual will be registered for 10 years and those of multi-years use for 12 years.
In between these years, the seed can be tested only once to confirm the characters that it originally had. New standards have been set for labelling the seeds that will give details of the procedure through which these seeds can be utilised properly and optimally. For example, on the label of a particular wheat seed, it will be clearly mentioned that after watering it so many times, applying so much fertilizers and protecting it from weeds and pests, it will lead to so much yield.
The seed examiners will have the duty to enforce and implement all the laws and provisions of the Seeds Bill 2010. They will have the right to raid and confiscate the premises and stock of a particular seeds seller, with permission from the District Magistrate, if the particular seller is caught selling unregistered, adulterated seeds, or seeds that do not conform to the set standards. However, these are ideal situations. The reality is, every state in this country has sellers selling adulterated and sub-standard seeds, right under the nose of government officials. Nobody cares about complaints from the farmers and compensation to them in case of bad quality seeds is almost unheard of.
The biggest problem in this bill is the lack of transparency in the entire registration process. There is no provision under which one can know the name of the person who has developed a particular seed, the place where it has been developed or the current ownership of a particular variety. Numerous cases have come up where poor farmers are duped and the ownership is fraudulently taken away by someone else and a third person starts producing and selling it. For example, Bikaner Narma, a particular variety of cotton was developed by a farmer in Bikaner, Rajasthan, but was later used by somebody else for commercial purposes. Similarly, Mahico, the country’s biggest seed firm, started by selling sawani bhindi, a variety of ladyfinger grown by Pusa Institute. Mahico bought the seeds from Pusa and kept on producing and selling them year after year without giving Pusa the royalty or license fees. Today they have their own scientists, laboratories and other infrastructure and have partners like Monsento, and virtually rule the Indian seeds business.
The onus now lies on the Indian parliamentarians to take steps which are in the interests of the farmers. The MPs need to amend all the anti-farmer clauses before passing the bill. That’s the only way the exploiter multi-nationals and their bureaucrat henchmen can be stumped in their own game.
The views expressed by the author are personal
For More IIPM Info, Visit below mentioned IIPM articles.
IIPM ranks No 1 in International Exposure in the 'Third Mail Today B-School Survey'
Management Guru Arindam Chaudhuri Dean Business School IIPM
IIPM Excom Prof Rajita Chaudhuri
Kapil Sibal’s voters want Jan Lokpal, not Government-proposed Lokpal Bill
IIPM: What is E-PAT?
"Thorns to Competition" amongst the top 10 best sellers of the week.
IIPM RANKED NO.1 in MAIL TODAY B-SCHOOL RANKINGS
'Thorns to Competition' - You can order your copy online from here
Labels: AGRICULTURE, IIPM, Lok-Sabha
Rashmi Bansal Publisher of JAMMAG magazine caught red-handed, for details click on the following links.
posted by Surender @ 10:34 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home