NEW DELHI: Government offer to speak, reiterated by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, couldn’t cut ice with farmers unions opposing the new agricultural laws as they continued to press for their central demand of “repeal of three laws” and alleged that the Center aimed to frustrate farmers without offering anything concrete.
“We are in no rush and we are here to stay on the roads until the (agricultural) laws are repealed,” the unions said, underlining that they have never refused to dialogue, but at the same time making it clear that the agenda includes their main demands, including a legal guarantee on Minimum support price (MSP).
They seemed inflexible after a discussion about the third letter from the Ministry of Agriculture and Modi’s leadership, where he highlighted why the core laws were important to the well-being of farmers and how certain politically motivated people are propagating a false narrative around agricultural reforms.
On Thursday, the ministry even agreed to discuss the MSP issue even though it didn’t seem logical to pummel it with the issues of the new agricultural laws.
“Farmers want a legal guarantee for MSP and this is the only logic that will work,” said Avik Saha, national coordinator of Jai Kisan Andolan and secretary general of AIKSCC, while articulating the collective position of peasant leaders.
Leaders within the farmers’ umbrella body, AIKSCC, continued to hold the view that there can be no meaningful discussion unless the government specifies the terms under which farm laws can be repealed and MSP can be legally guaranteed while the new legislation is kept on hold.
They will meet on Saturday morning to draft their written response to the ministry letter. “We can send our response to the government on Saturday night,” said a peasant leader.
Meanwhile, the task force of the coordinating body asked all units to observe on December 26, the occasion of the end of a month of protests, such as “Dhikkar Diwas”, as well as the “services and products of Ambani and Adani directed against corporate agitation. ” .
.
