Sharad Pawar said that agriculture is a rural phenomenon and requires consultation with states
New Delhi:
The head of the NCP and former agriculture minister, Sharad Pawar, today accused the Center of demolishing three new agricultural laws without consulting the states and claimed that agriculture cannot be managed “sitting in Delhi” as it involves farmers working in distant villages.
As the farmers’ protest on the Delhi borders against these laws has entered its second month and the five rounds of talks so far have failed to resolve the crisis, Pawar also raised questions about the composition of the three-member ministerial group negotiating. with the unions, saying the ruling party should have presented leaders with a “deep” knowledge of agriculture and farmers’ problems.
In an interview with the Press Trust of India news agency, Sharad Pawar said that the government must take the protests seriously and that it was “unfair” of Prime Minister Narendra Modi to blame opposition parties for the agitation of the farmers.
He said opposition parties will take a call on their future course of action tomorrow if the government does not resolve the farmers’ issue at the next scheduled meeting with representatives of 40 protesting unions.
On the assertion by the Union Minister of Agriculture Narendra Singh Tomar that Sharad Pawar, as then Minister of Agriculture during the UPA government led by Manmohan Singh, also wanted agricultural reforms, but did not do so due to political pressure The PNC leader said that he certainly wanted to introduce some reforms in the sector but “not in the way” that the BJP government has done, and said they were different from the current ones.
Pawar said he consulted all state governments before initiating reforms and did not move forward until all his reservations were resolved.
“Manmohan Singh and I also wanted to bring about some reforms in the agricultural sector but not in the same way as the current dispensation did. On that occasion the Ministry of Agriculture held lengthy discussions on the proposed reforms with agriculture ministers from all states and industry experts, “Pawar said.
Ministers in some states had some strong reservations about the reforms and before making a final decision, the Ministry of Agriculture at the time wrote again to state governments seeking their opinion, he said.
Sharad Pawar, who has served as the Union agriculture minister twice, said agriculture is a rural phenomenon and requires consultation with states.
“Agriculture cannot be managed sitting in Delhi, as it involves hard-working farmers in the villages and a greater responsibility in this matter falls on the state governments. So when most agriculture ministers had some reservations It was the duty of the central government and mine to take them in confidence and solve their problems before moving forward, ”he said.
By comparison, Pawar argued, the Center did not consult with states this time, nor did it convene any meetings with state agriculture ministers before preparing these bills.
He said that the Center has passed agricultural bills on the basis of its own strength in Parliament and that is why all the problems started.
“In politics and democracy, dialogue must take place,” Pawar said.
Emphasizing that the dialogue should have happened earlier, he said that the government should have spoken earlier to resolve farmers’ reservations about these laws.
“How can a government say in a democracy that it will not listen or that it will not change its line? In a way, the government demolished these three bills. If the Center had consulted the state governments and taken them in confidence, then such a situation would not have arisen, “said Sharad Pawar.
He said farmers are concerned that these laws will end the MSP’s procurement system and that the government must do something to “address those concerns.”
“And for the talks, they should have put the BJP leaders at the forefront who better understand the agriculture sector. If those with deep knowledge of agriculture, farmers’ issues and agroeconomy were negotiating with farmers, they could have found a way to solve this problem. “
“I don’t want to name anyone … but then there are those who don’t understand the sector that well,” Pawar said.
Claiming that farmers are not a priority for the Modi government, he said it is inappropriate to suggest that only farmers from 2 or 3 states are protesting these laws and there are a considerable number of people who are not happy.
“If farmers had been the government’s priority, this problem would not have continued for that long. So they say there are only farmers from Haryana, Punjab and western Uttar Pradesh who are protesting. Have they not contributed to overall food security? from the country?” he said.
He said the farmers do not want any political party to be associated with their upheaval, but the government has been continuously blaming opposition parties for the protests.
“The prime minister says that some political parties are behind this … No political party is behind this agitation and the farmers have clearly told the political leaders not to come to their places of protest as representatives of any political group and that if anyone wants to join the agitation, they must come as farmers. “
“They don’t want the political or opposition parties to be associated with their agitation, but for no reason, the prime minister and others are blaming the political parties and that is unfair,” Pawar said.
Speaking of his tenure as agriculture minister, Sharad Pawar said that when he took office in 2004, the first file that came to him for his signature was related to the import of wheat and that he was very upset.
“But then we accepted the challenge, that too with the help of the farmers only, giving them a better price for their products, instilling trust and interacting with them, and India became the second largest exporter of wheat, cotton and sugar and the largest rice exporter. All this was done by farmers in our country, “he said.
On the future course of action of the opposition parties, Pawar said: “We are waiting for what will happen on December 30. My only suggestion is that the government should engage in a serious dialogue with the farmers who are protesting shivering in the cold. highway”.
.
