Skip to main content

On repealing of farm laws

The farm laws have been repealed. Government's decision to repeal hints that accusations of agitators about farm laws are intended to end the MSP regime and hurt the big farmers might have been true. And there is no surprise. The farm laws were about easing the fiscal burden government faced due to procurement based on MSP. If government is not planning to ditch this route, then why it was not ready to make a law for using it? - The repeal seems to vindicate the doubt.

Government failed to communicate the potential trajectory of changes the laws could have generated. One reason why government would have chosen not to reveal it is because it might have revealed some unpleasant possibilities, like some big businesses benefiting or section of farmers losing out and large section of farmers having no gain – no loss from it. But there is another reason why government chose to not communicate. It did not because it is extremely paternalistic towards Indians. The approach of Modi government is like a parent to an adolescent kid: I have your interest at heart and I hold the power to take decision. I need not explain it to you.

The coterie of economists, formal and voluntary, that government has at its disposal did not bring forth roadmap of how the farm laws would work. The absence indicates either the unclear possibilities or unpleasant possibilities. I think it is later than former. Government maintained the opacity over future of MSP. Its reluctance to grant legal status to MSP was seen government’s desire to manipulate the MSP or even do way with it.

BJP concluded that such an opacity is better than clearer communication that MSP based procurement is an institution bound to disappear and it is going to hurt the section of farmers, but the net gains for the country will be positive. The calculation shows that urban middle-class India, which would have been the beneficiary of the reforms, could not be relied upon to cover for electoral damages. That either because it is already consolidated in support of BJP and there are no further gains or even fraction of this support base was swayed by the emotional turbulence invoked by agitation. Notion of farming still has huge emotional value for most of the urban Indians. The ‘Annadata’ agitating for his demands, sitting on asphalt in sun and rain was too powerful an image to be erased with cost-benefit calculation.

It also be noted that no farmer group rose in support of farm laws. BJP managed some token expressions of support, but small and marginal farmers, which were highlighted to be beneficiary of the reforms have not rallied behind reforms. It also be noted that barring the Delhi borders, no other places saw agitations as well. What it tells us is the fact that farm laws could not have helped or harmed the non-agitating farmers.

The fact that small and marginal farmers have not rallied behind BJP hints at several possibilities. Simplest of these possibilities is where this class finds political activism too costly. But considering BJP's ability to organize, either through themselves or through choosing right regional allies, if there would have been a farmer group which is going to receive considerable benefits through reforms, BKP would have brought it forward. If it hasn’t despite there being one, it is a serious failure.

More likely possibility, as hinted earlier, is that reforms would have led to loss to farmers through MSP dismantling. But gains to non-farmers (if prices fall) and government (fiscal space) would have been more than compensating. It is amusing to expect that introducing competition can help farmers realize higher prices. MSP helps all farmers, even those not selling in Mandi, since MSP provides a basis to market price at which farmers sell. In the absence of such basis, farmers will have to sell to cartel of intermediaries which is unlikely to lead to higher prices. The optimistic scenarios of firms competing to procure and in that attempt reaching to farms bidding higher and higher prices are very likely to be untrue. If such would have been the case, we would have seen it happening. When there are gains, hardly anyone stops from realizing them because they are yet to become legal. There were no gains for farmers – that’s perhaps the right implication.

As pointed by Roshan Kishore, retreat shows that BJP can push the socio-political reforms and if not outright implementation, can achieve the status-quo where reform stays. (E.g. CAA) But pushing the economic reforms which will have differential gains for different interest groups is still not the game it can play. The implication is obvious. BJP is a party of proud guys who nourish every hurt to become force for future action. The retreat on farm laws will eventually become a forward push somewhere, very likely to be a frontier where BJP knows the game better. My pick is NRC.

 

There is a silver lining to repeal of farm laws. Covid-19 pandemic induced precautionary national lockdown revealed the vulnerability of millions of households. Millions of Indian households encountered food insecurity during this period. MSP based rice-wheat agriculture results in surplus which provides potential for food provision in such situation. Repeal of farm laws ensures that MSP system remains in place, ensuring food security to good extent, while generating it’s inefficiencies. Unless it is clear how same food insecurity potential can be generated with market while reducing the inefficiencies, it is a bitter  but prudent pill to continue with current structure.

I had thought that BJP will play the long game of pushing through farm laws, where the simply wait the agitators out while generating social media churn of opinions in support of farm laws. I know that I have lesser grasp of reality than a shrewd political leadership. Hence, the BJP's unexpected retreat has puzzled me. One answer to puzzle is BJP by retreating now has provided itself a space to act accordingly to its choice in remaining 2 years before the next general election. There is no reason to assume BJP will be defensive on other fronts as well, even against the emboldened opposition. In fact, it is very unlikely that spirit of farmer agitation transforms into wider phenomenon. The rural elite group that fueled the agitation will go back to milking the mummeries of welfare state, as they have been doing since green revolution. BJP, wiser by their debacle, will focus on its core : Hindu primacy through democratic majority apparatus.

There is an alternative possibility. Government sounds the field, tell the unpleasant truth, acknowledges the losses even if they are of relatively better off and provides them a medium term compensation mechanism and reforms the agriculture. From what we see, it is likely to be a daydream of an idealist.

Popular posts from this blog

Balia suffers and Mumbai stares

  More than 100 have died in Balia and Deoria district of Uttar Pradesh in last few days . These districts have experienced heatwave conditions. IMD has given orange alert warning (40℃ to 45℃) for these as well as other districts in Eastern Uttar Pradesh. For those who are aware, Kim Stanley Robinson’s Climate fiction ‘The Ministry for the Future’ opens with a stunning description of heatwave related deaths in Uttar Pradesh. What is happening now in Deoria and Balia district has uncanny resemblance to what author has imagined. In some sense, we have been made aware of what awaits us, though we have decided to bury it because it is inconvenient. Even now, these deaths are not officially attributed to heatwave. Here is what I think have happened. It is a hypothesis rather than a statement with some proof. Balia and Deoria are districts near Ganga, a large water body. Rising temperatures have caused greater evaporation of this water body leading to excessive humidity in the surround

4 years of Demonetization: How non-cash payments have fared?

  Kiran Limaye, Himank Kavathekar -----------             On 8 November 2020, it will be four years to an announcement of policy of withdrawal and reissuance of high denomination currency notes, or what we popularly call ‘demonetization’. One of the stated objectives of the policy was encouraging the use of non-cash payment modes. It is generally considered that non-cash payment modes, debit and credit cards, mobile based payment mechanisms like UPI and prepaid payment instruments like mobile wallets are better than cash, for individual as well as for a society. These non-cash alternatives have less risk of theft and both ends of transactions are traced unlike cash which can be used without trace. But these non-cash modes require higher consumer involvement (for example, knowing pins and maintaining their secrecy and ability to operate smartphone beyond routine call receipt and dial) which are not acquired by section of population, mainly due to factors such as age or education. It w

Clash of Egos: Prashant Bhushan versus Supreme court in contempt of court

 Contempt is a notion defined with pre-existence of sense of self. If I do not possess ego, a sense of self, then I will not get offended by any contempt thrown at me. Yet, contempt plays a role in society in terms of a signal. We learn by experiences, but we chose through signals. I decide to buy based on reviews, which are signals. I decide to choose a path of education based on signals. Contempt can change the nature of signals about a person, an organization and an institution and change in signals can bring change in response of clients. This is the logic of reaction of supreme court, that if nature of perception of Supreme court changes due to contemptuous statements about supreme court then it will lead to  harm of the nation as Indians will use the institution of Supreme court in sub-optimal manner. It is a kind of utilitarian or consequential logic. The objection of Prashant Bhushan (PB) remark is not out of the nature of remarks per say, but due to the consequences.  I do not