Competitive populism at play

Most of the national and some regional parties’ election manifestos are in public domain. Nyuntam Aay Yojana (NYAY or minimum income scheme) mentioned in the Congress manifesto is a big-ticket promise which covers most of India’s poor. The manifesto states that decisive and focused intervention has the capacity to eliminate poverty by 2030. 

It claims that during its 10-year rule, the UPA pulled 14 crore people out of poverty. On the other hand, the BJP manifesto is mostly about rejigging ongoing schemes of the government like the doubling of farmers’ income by 2022 or extending the PM-Kisan scheme to all landowners. The question that arises from this extension of PM-Kisan is that if 85 per cent farmers are in need of this kind of support in 2019, what happens to the doubling of farmers’ income project which does not seem to be on course to achieve its target. The Trinamool Congress (TMC) manifesto claims farmers’ income has tripled in West Bengal in seven years. The Congress manifesto only promises to double the value of dairy and poultry output in five years.

The NYAY scheme is proposed to be implemented jointly by the Centre and the states. The assumed participation of the states may not happen as expected, which is unlike the PM-Kisan scheme wherein the entire scheme is implemented by the Union Government. The major question this scheme faces is: if, in the next few years, poverty is likely to decline in terms of proportion of BPL families as claimed in its (UPA’s) performance record for the previous terms, why should each family get it for five years? Importantly, the PM-Kisan scheme targets only landowning marginal and small farmers (not even all rural poor) and therefore, is limited in its coverage, unlike NYAY, which has larger and more relevant coverage of poor households (both urban and rural) and higher amounts paid per family (Rs 6,000 per month compared with Rs 6,000 per year under PM-Kisan).When it comes to the exclusion of the landless from PM-Kisan, strengthening of Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS) is suggested as an alternative.

Both PM-Kisan and NYAY move towards direct cash transfers instead of product or service subsidies. It is debatable whether the poor, especially small producers, need only cash as that would reduce the leakage, or access to adequate and quality services/products if these subsidies are merit subsidies. 

MSP, farm loans & crop insurance

It is interesting to note that the Congress and BJP manifestos avoid even a mention of MSP or any such measure for ensuring better farmers’ income. Like the Congress, the DMK is also evasive on the MSP promise, saying that efforts would be made to fix MSP in a manner that farmers get their product cost plus fair profit. It is very vague and not even like the NDA promise, which at least stated the minimum percentage of profit over cost of production — though it did not deliver the same adequately. The DMK is very specific about the MSP for paddy and sugarcane crops and mentions the desired minimum support price for both. The BJD states that it would press  the Union Government for paddy MSP of Rs 2,930 per quintal .

The TMC promises appropriate procurement price for rice, wheat, jute and other major crops. However, on farm loan waivers, it just says ‘small land marginal farmers unable to pay their debts would be in our thoughts for some suitable relief’. It also promises to enhance the livelihoods of landless labourers, though no measures are spelt out, and to review the national livestock policy from the small holder’s perspective.

The CPI and CPM manifestos are very clear and detailed about the agrarian issues and their take on these. They more or less adopt the All India Kisan Sangharsh Coordination Committee (AIKSCC) resolutions on farmer issues like implementation of the Swaminathan Committee recommendations on the prices of farm produce, loan waivers and seeking a special session of Parliament to discuss agrarian issues. Interestingly, the CPI asks for MSP for milk. It is a different matter that no one has ever examined and questioned whether 50 per cent is the logical margin over the comprehensive cost of production. The CPM promises to make the MSP a legal right of the farmers, as demanded by the AIKSCC. But, we saw the implications when it was imposed on private traders in Maharashtra through an amendment to the APMC (Agricultural Produce Market Committee) Act recently; it had to be withdrawn within a week. The question which should be thought through before taking such hasty and problematic decisions is: The MSP is promised, declared and implemented by the government which can be made legally bound to buy at this price. Why should a trader be penalised without any fault of his as he never committed to buy at the MSP? Such measures can kill private trade in Indian agriculture.

The BJP manifesto also promises populist measures of interest-free credit up to Rs 1 lakh up to five years under the Kisan Credit Card (KCC) on timely payment. The CPM mentions (like the BJP) low or minimal interest credit for farmers. Similarly, the DMK manifesto states that it would urge the Centre to waive all crop loans and provide subsidy on farm inputs.  The BJD manifesto, which is targeted at Odisha’s farmers, promises that all farmers and landless workers would be brought under KALIA (Krushak Assistance for Livelihood and Income Augmentation) and a commission set up to monitor the implementation of the scheme and recommend revised rates every three years. 

The Samajwadi Party’s manifesto promises 100 per cent loan waiver and proposes a move to a community-based financing model run by women SHGs (self-help groups) which would be supported by the state on the lines of the Kerala model of farmer debt relief commission. This reflects thinking which goes beyond standard solutions which don’t work as the larger conditions are not recognised and attempted to be changed. But the party does not have any other concrete proposals or promises. 

The BJP also promises to make enrolment under PMFBY (Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana) voluntary. Which way it would take the entire scheme is not difficult to judge, especially when no alternative measures to strengthen crop insurance coverage or reduce production risk are suggested. The Congress manifesto talks of making crop insurance a ‘no profit, no loss’ scheme with the protection of farmers’ benefit. But how it can be done is not spelt out.

Reforming agri markets

The Congress’ proposal to repeal the APMC Act and make trade in agricultural produce, including export, and inter-state trade free from all restrictions is an ill-thought proposal. First, it is not possible to reform markets just by repealing the Act, as seen in the case of Bihar which did it in 2006. Today, there is a free for all in agricultural markets in that state. Surprisingly, the BJP manifesto does not promise anything big on agricultural market reforms, though the NDA has been implementing many initiatives on this front with limited success. Unlike the Congress promise of repealing the APMC Act, the NDA has recently come out with the model APLM (Agricultural Produce and Livestock Marketing) Act-2017 and has not excluded fruits and vegetables from the model APLM Act, though these Acts also move towards more of facilitation and promotion of markets rather than regulation. It would have been advisable for the Congress manifesto to dwell more innovatively on bringing new channels for farmers’ produce like contract farming, direct purchase, private wholesale markets and regulating them for inclusive and effective market linkage.

The CPM manifesto asks for a review of the Contract Farming Act-2018, repeal of the Seed Act, and the APMC Act (like the Congress) but only for its contract farming aspects (like the CPI). It is surprising to note that the TMC manifesto is silent on agri market reforms. It is also important to realise that agriculture and agricultural markets are state subjects and the Union Government can’t enforce any policy or regulation.

Promoting FPOs

Most of the other proposals in the Congress manifesto such as promotion of FPOs (Farmers Producers Organisations), focus on food processing and cold storage and warehousing, encouragement to organic farming and rejuvenation of the extension system are also part of the BJP manifesto and many of these policies are already in place. But, the BJP manifesto is more precise and targeted in these domains and takes the mission mode as seen from the promise to promote 10,000 new FPOs, setting up of 50,000 van dhan vikas kendras (VDVKs), besides providing Rs. 10,000 crore for marketing infrastructure for the fisheries sector and bringing one crore hectares under micro irrigation and 20 lakh hectares under organic farming in hilly, dry and rainfed areas over five years. 

The TMC manifesto talks of emphasising value addition of milk and the promotion of food processing and cold chain infrastructure.  The BJD promises that all panchayats would have storage and warehousing facility. The DMK manifesto talks about the promotion of agri business infrastructure like warehouses and cold chains and promotion of organic farming. It is the only manifesto which addresses the gender gap in wages and minimum wages for agri workers and it is also the only one to promise free power for irrigation to farmers. The DMK expects the Union Government to provide 100 per cent subsidy on paddy harvesting machines to co-operatives at the village level and set up a rural products marketing corporation to help farmers sell their produce without intermediaries. 

The CPM manifesto talks of the promotion of only co-operatives, not other forms like producer companies, unlike the Congress and the BJP, whereas the CPI manifesto is silent on the collectivisation of farmers.

Public Distribution System

The Congress manifesto has sensible proposals like including pulses and millets under the Mid-Day Meal (MDM) scheme and PDS (Public Distribution System), which is much needed and long overdue to change the dominance of wheat and paddy in the publicly funded and driven food production and consumption system of India. The CPI also promises the use of milk in the MDM and ICD (Integrated Child Development) schemes. Like the CPM and the DMK, the CPI asks for universalisation of the PDS and also, additionally, including nutri-cereals and pulses and edible oil in it, without linking it to Aadhaar. It is only the CPM which promises Rs 6,000 allowance under the Food Security Act for pregnant women without conditional ties. It is against cash transfers of any food subsidy.

The manifestos are lofty on promises and compete over standard ongoing schemes but fall short on innovation and deliverables or big-ticket steps, except NYAY, to some extent, and some of the Left’s proposals. It is sad that even the prevailing agrarian crisis has not led political parties towards serious thinking and reflection on the issues of caste, class, gender and environment and the right mix of market and state roles to propose tangible mechanisms for dealing with the crisis and moving toward sustainable livelihoods and inclusive development. 

The author is a professor at IIM Ahmedabad