Before Shushant's death, all private media channels were running the news of Amitabh Bachchan being Corona positive in prime time. Consider that Amitabh Bachchan is the only person from all over India who suffers from Corona. Bachchan sahab is a great actor, he has made a mark in the hearts of his fans by leaving an indelible mark of his acting for almost five decades. I myself admire his performance. But to show the news of an actor being corona positive in such a way that he is everything is condemnable.No matter which channel was watched, when he was hospitalized, every ten minutes he had breakfast, even the news of his going to the bathroom was used in the headlines of these channels. But I want to know from you all your opinion on whether such reporting is right. At the time of Corona, when the country is fighting the economic situation on one side and the brave soldiers of our country are getting martyred from China and Pakistan on the other side, what is the importance of showing such news at that time.
When all these private channels were busy investigating Shushant's death, at the same time our farmers were struggling on one side of our country, lathias were being run over them and they were being brutalized. Now maybe the country's media does not consider this issue as big, maybe it does not seem necessary to give news on this issue. Even today, there are many private channels who are still engaged in investigating the truth of Shushant's death only and only because it is the main source of TRP for him.But the social media of the country i.e. you and us, through internet can sit in any corner of the country to know about any news and analyze it and discuss it. I remember when I was running Instagram about a month ago, I saw a photo that was probably from a village in Haryana in which lathiya was running over those villagers or farmers. I was surprised to see all this and wanted to explore it further.Upon investigation, it was found that the farmers are protesting against the agricultural bill passed in the Lok Sabha.
Now this bill has also been passed in Rajya Sabha. Let's know about this bill, what is it that farmers are opposing so much in this law. Are these bills really anti-farmer?
Shortly before, these agricultural bills were passed in the Parliament of India. When these Bills were proposed in the Rajya Sabha, there was a lot of uproar in this, you must have seen in many channels how it was opposed in the House. Even the Deputy Chairman's mic was broken. But finally, ignoring the opposition, this bill was passed with sound votes. But the President's signature has not yet been put on these bills.Most of the protest against this bill is going on in whole of India including Punjab, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka and West Bengal. Opposition to this bill / law is being done by the parties supporting the government itself, such as the Akali Dal and Bharatiya Kisan Sangh.
These three bills are: -
1. The Farmers Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Bill, 2020
It is clearly written in this bill that any farmer can sell his produce anywhere, there is no inter-state and intra-state obstruction. Earlier, whatever crop was produced was bought or sold in large scale on wholesale market or market. There are about seven thousand mandis across the country which are operated by the APMC. Each mandi had a licensed middleman who used to set bids to buy or sell the crop from the farmers and used to buy the crop from the farmers at lower prices and give it to the big traders.
Now the provision of private market has also been given in this bill. Now after the introduction of new law, farmers will be able to replace those licensed middlemen and sell their crop directly to big traders like direct buyers and the price will be fixed between the farmer and the merchant. But the farmers' organization is concerned that those who are big corporate will have more opportunities to negotiate and this will harm small and medium farmers.For almost 85% of the farmers who have less than two hectares of land, it will become a problem for them to negotiate directly with big buyers.
The second biggest disadvantage which the farmers feel is that these private markets will get the APMC mandis closed because the government will close them if there is no purchase inside the market. If the market is closed then the farmers will have to sell all their produce to big companies.
In the existing APMC mandis, about 3% or 4% tax is levied for making purchases, but in this new provision which will not be charged any tax of any kind in the private market. That is why private companies will try more and more that they buy the produce outside the APMC mandis as it will save their money.
In this provision, there is a talk of removing a geographical ban, it is being said that farmers no longer have any kind of restriction, wherever they can sell their grain. But it is worth understanding that even before, there was no ban of any kind on the farmers, where they could sell their grains at a reasonable price. But it will incur a lot of expense in coming and at the same time a huge price has to be paid to keep the grain safe at that place.That is why these bills / laws look very good on the pages, but there are many difficulties at the ground level.
The state governments also have income due to the APMC mandis and if they are closed, the income of the state governments will also be greatly affected. And not just the state government, but all the workers working in those APMC mandis, and the accountants who keep accounts will also lose their jobs.
2. The Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services Bill ,2020
Under this Act, farmers will be encouraged to enter into agreements with large companies, so that they will have to sell their produce crops to those companies at already determined prices. Prices will be decided before crop yields. The farmers are worried that after this law the minimum support price will be removed or to say that now the government will not fix the price of the produce of the farmer.That is why it is requested by the government of the farmers that the minimum support price should be combined with the prices written in the contract, so that the government will monitor the purchase of the produce of all these farmers and if any company, if it buys the crop at a price below the minimum support price If there is strict action on that company from the government.
3 The Essential Commodities (Amendment) Bill, 2020
The third law emphasizes hoarding. Under this law, the people who are economic agents, they can store food stuff without any hoarding action, i.e., no legal action will be taken against them. Due to unlimited hoarding, the market will get artificial price fluctuations. And because of the low price the farmer gets at the time of harvesting, he will suffer the most.
"The reason for the real opposition of the farmers is that these three bills are in support of the company and not the farmers. Farmers feel that the minimum support price should be strengthened in any way and it should be implemented properly on all crops. The minimum support price should be made the right of farmers. There is more need to improve the APMC than to remove it. Even after the new law, the middlemen will not be completely finished. Investment in agriculture should be done by the government and not by any private company."
👍
ReplyDeleteThanks for your responses..❤❤
Delete