Agriculture Engineering

In December 1996, the then Speaker of the Lok Sabha, Mr. P.A. Sangma, had expressed his view at a convention of the Confederation of Indian Industries (CII) in Kolkata that the Union Ministry of Agriculture should be disbanded because “agriculture is a State subject in the Constitution.”.

Little had he realized then, it appears, that although agriculture does occur in List II (State List) in the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution under entry numbers 14,15 and 16,the Centre has more than a decisive role to play in the conduct of agricultural operations in the country. Although placing agriculture in the State list is actually a legacy of the Government of India Act, 1935 (as is water, entry No.17), it is obvious that leaving the States to their fate in agriculture would tantamount to inviting starvation and famines.

Apparently convinced that the Centre has to play a far greater role in agriculture, which is facing a grave crisis these days, the National Commission on Farmers headed by world famous agricultural scientist Prof. M.S. Swaminathan has recommended in its fifth and final report that The Constitution of India should be amended in order to place agriculture in the concurrent list under power conferred on the Centre vide Article 246.

In its report, presented to Union Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar on October 4,2006,the Commission stated:” Important policy decisions like those relating to prices, credit, and trade are taken by the Government of India. Also, several pieces of legislation including Protection of Plant varieties and Farmers’ Rights Act, the Biodiversity Act, the Food Bill, etc. are administered by the Government of India. Substantial funds are provided by the Government of India for rural infrastructure development including irrigation, village roads and markets. By placing agriculture in the Concurrent List, serving farmers and saving farming becomes a joint responsibility of the Centre and the States, i.e. a truly national endeavor in raising then morale, prestige and economic well being of our farm women and men”.

The National Commission for farmers, originally set up in 2004 with Mr. Sompal, a former member of the Planning Commission, was reconstituted in December that year with Dr. Swaminathan as the chairman and Mr. Atul Sinha, a former I.A.S. officer as Secretary. The other members were: Dr. R.B. Singh former Director of the Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI),New Delhi, Mr. Y.C. Nanda, Dr(Mrs) Chandra Nimbkar, Mr. Atul Kumar Anjan, Mr. Jagdish Pradhan and Dr. R.L. Pitale. The last four were part-time Members of the Commission.

The main emphasis in this report is on farmers and not agriculture as such. The first report was presented on Dec.29,2004,the second on August 11, 2005,the third on Dec.29,2005, the fourth on April 13,2006 and the fifth and final on Oct.4.2006. It is now for the Government of India to accept the recommendations partly or fully. Essentially farmer-friendly, the Commission says that there has to be a policy for farmers, instead of a policy for farming. The report’s executive summary lays down that the objective of the proposed policy “is to ensure that the economic viability of farming is improved by enabling farmers earn a minimum net income. The policy should stimulate attitudes which will result in assessing agricultural progress in terms of the net income of farm families, rather than just in million tones of farm commodities produced. And it will place faces before figures”

Dr. Swaminathan said: The Commission believes that the desperation of farmers who are driven to commit suicide points to a larger agrarian crisis, which can be corrected through policy intervention”. The Commission recommended that prime farmland must be conserved for agriculture and should not be diverted for non-agricultural purposes and programmes. The compensation provisions of the existing land acquisition act should be reviewed and made pro-farmer. The NCF also pitches for allocation of land for landless agriculturists, he said.

The Commission advocated a four per cent rate of interest for crop loans and said that since the Banks could not provide loans at this low rate the Government had to subvent the banks for this purpose. The Commission also suggested a four to five year period for repayment of loans from drought-affected farmers. It also made the suggestion that the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD) should function like a National Bank for Farmers.

On agriculture-specific recommendation, The NCF said the heartland of green revolution, Punjab, Haryana and Western Uttar Pradesh should be protected from land degradation and other infirmities such a lowering of ground water level. At the same time, it stressed the need for arousing the “sleeping giants” of Bihar and eastern India including Assam and West Bengal. For attracting rural youth to farming, making it intellectually stimulating and economically attractive, it recommended curriculum reform in agricultural and animal sciences universities so that “every scholar becomes an entrepreneur”.

“Food imports are temporary measures and cannot lead to food- nutrition security”, Dr. Swaminathan said. “We cannot get rid of hunger without strategies of nutrition security of farmers’ he added. The NCF chairman also stressed the critical role of the mass media in creating a climate of confidence in India’s agricultural capabilities.