Farmers’ organisations have expressed disappointment over “the lack of initiatives” in the State Agriculture Budget to ensure remunerative prices for farm produce.
Farmers organisations also took a dim view of the ruling party’s failure to fulfil its election promise of hiking the procurement price of sugarcane to ₹4,000 a tonne and that of paddy to ₹2,500 a quintal.
“There has been no initiative to ensure remunerative prices for agriculture produce through value addition or strengthening market linkages. There is no plan to stabilise prices of horticulture produce through the year. Nor has there been any announcement on promoting food processing industries. Farmers seem to be condemned to remain eternally dependent on subsidies,” observed Mahadhanapuram V. Rajaram, president, Cauvery Irrigation Farmers Welfare Association.
P.R. Pandian, president, Coordination Committee of All Farmers Associations of Tamil Nadu, and Sundara Vimalnathan, secretary, Thanjavur District Cauvery Farmers Protection Association, were critical of the absence of any indication on hiking the procurement price of paddy and sugarcane as promised by the DMK.
“The government cannot deceive the farmers by just projecting the Agriculture Budget while remaining silent on the election promise,” Mr .Pandian observed.
“It is highly condemnable that there is still no sign of the government increasing the procurement price of sugarcane and paddy as promised. The meagre hike of ₹20 [per metric tonne] in the special incentive for sugarcane is an insult to farmers,” said Mr. Vimalnathan.
Mr. Pandian claimed that the Agri Budget had failed to inspire confidence among farmers for want of adequate financial allocation for the schemes being announced. Though it was welcome that the State government had sustained the practice of presenting a separate Budget for Agriculture, mere announcements without making financial allocations would not yield any results. Adequate funds had not been allotted for the Kalaignarin All Village Integrated Agricultural Development programme over the past couple of years. There was no allotment for the Cauvery-Vaigai-Gundar river inter-linking project or any other special initiative to desilt rivers, drainages and tanks.
However, Mr. Pandian appreciated the introduction of a scheme to protect soil health but felt that it would not succeed unless steps were taken to curb the unrestricted sale of pesticides and weedicides in the open market.
Mr. Vimalnathan criticised the government for failing to allocate funds for check dams that were proposed to be built across the Cauvery and Kollidam rivers during the previous AIADMK regime. He also expressed disappointment over the government’s failure to concede the demand for sanction of monthly assistance of ₹4,000 to farmers above the age of 58.
Both Mr .Pandian and Mr .Swaminathan urged the government to stop the sale of palm oil through the public distribution system and instead supply coconut and gingelly oil so as to protect the interest of oil seed growers.
