SKM Accuses Centre of Trying to Enforce Farm Laws through Indirect Means, Vows to Protest

GG News Bureau
New Delhi, 2nd Feb. The Samyukt Kisan Morcha (SKM) has criticized the proposals made by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitaraman in the interim budget, claiming that they provide a “back entry” for the three repealed farm laws. The SKM argues that these proposals, which aim to promote private and public investment in post-harvest activities, effectively hand over the agriculture sector to corporate entities, both domestic and foreign.

The SKM emphasizes that India has historically followed a policy of not allowing foreign and Indian monopoly capital to exploit the agricultural sector for profit. This policy has ensured self-reliance and food security for the country. The farmers’ collective opposes the government’s plan to allow corporate houses to take over post-harvesting operations, instead advocating for the strengthening of the public sector, cooperatives, and micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs).

The SKM also criticizes the government for failing to implement the minimum support price (MSP) by the C2+50% formula, despite a written assurance given on December 9, 2021. The budget does not address this issue or provide substantial allocations for employment generation, minimum wage, loan waivers, or price control. The SKM considers this a betrayal of farmers and the general population.

The group calls the budget “anti-farmer” and “anti-worker” and urges farmers to burn copies of the budget in their villages. They also encourage people across the country to participate in the upcoming “Grameen Bandh” (rural strike) and “Industrial/Sectoral Strike” to protest against the budget. Additionally, the SKM objects to the finance minister’s mention of encouraging foreign investment and bilateral partnerships, questioning the status of India as a sovereign country.

The All India Kisan Sabha, a member of the SKM, also criticizes the budget for its lack of substantial support for the rural economy and the agricultural sector. They highlight significant cuts in various areas, including rural development, employment programs, irrigation, education, and health.