Kgg-mp/1A/11. 00 The House met at eleven of the clock, mr. Chairman in the Chair obituary reference to justice V. R. KRISHNA IYER mr. Chairman

(समाप्त)

Though the present Agreement with the U.S.A. is an improvement over the WTO, the Bali Agreement, there are many issues remaining which are not good for India. For instance, the formula for calculating support for public stockholding called ‘food security’ is unreasonably loaded against the developing countries. As rightly pointed out by Mr. Tyagi, when we look at the 1986-88 prices, – we are in 2014 – in 1986-88, the price of foodgrains had gone up manifold. Now if the Government of India raises it to Rs.1,400 per quintal to farmers for procurement of wheat, and the price of wheat was Rs.385 in 1985-86, then, what will be the consequence? It will be assumed that the Government is giving a subsidy of Rs.1,015 per quintal of wheat. Thus there is a need to change the WTO rules. But this price mechanism cannot work. This is my first point.

The second point is that the member countries, through a process of consultation, will also have the right to scrutinize the Food Programmes of India or, for that matter, of any country. So, the member countries will invade into India to assess the fall-out of the price mechanism and, in case of any breach, the same could be disputed. All these provisions of the Agreement clearly suggest that internal policy matters within India will be subject to foreign scrutiny and, hence, add up to erosion of our sovereignty. This is highly objectionable, Sir. This is a matter of great concern for us that India’s sovereignty will be compromised in that way.

Thirdly, Sir, the final Draft agreed in Bali mandated developing countries to ensure various measures of trade facilitation. Now it is unfortunate that no cost assessment has been made by the Government about implementing the provisions of trade facilitation. What is happening is that by providing trade facilitation, imports from the rest of the world may flood India, further worsening the already difficult external payment position. This is another area of concern for India.

And, finally, in reality, this agreement reached by the BJP Government has, actually, eroded the sovereignty of the nation on the one hand and put a ceiling on the freedom of future regimes to announce any such food security programmes.

(Continued by SSS/2O)

SSS-MP/2O/3.00

SHRI SUKHENDU SEKHAR ROY (CONTD.): Because, in the Trade Facilitation Agreement that I have mentioned, the entire money will be cut from the prime allocation on health, on food and other areas and that will be adjusted with the trade facilitation arrangements. Therefore, Sir, I would submit and I would appeal to the hon. Commerce Minister to clarify these points in this august House so that the nation can have a clear picture on this issue. Thank you.

(Ends)

..................................................................................

* Hon. Member may please fill in.

provide subsidies to the farmers and they are not able to give relief to the needy people. In this context, I would like to mention one point that in Tamil Nadu, the Public Distribution System is functioning very well. Another important fact I would like to refer to is -- Amma Unavagam -- Amma Canteen that is providing quality food to the needy people. That is the brainchild of our Amma. I hope, like our Amma, the Central Government would protect the poor farmers and the poor people. Thank you, Sir.

(Ends)

SHRI SATISH CHANDRA MISRA (UTTAR PRADESH): Sir, I would not repeat what has already been said by all the Members. Instead of that, I will straightaway come to one clarification which I want to seek from the hon. Minister with respect to para 10. Para 10 says that “The General Council has also unequivocally agreed to delink the negotiations for a permanent solution on public stockholding for food security purposes from the agriculture negotiations on other issues under the Doha Development Agenda. This would ensure that the negotiations for a permanent solution would continue if the negotiations on such other issues are delayed.” Now, I would only like to ask the hon. Minister whether there is a special and any differential mechanism for the other issues and what these issues are. Are they industrial goods or the market excesses? I would request the hon. Minister to clarify this.

(Ends)

Secondly, Sir, in the name of public stockings and not taking the issues to the WTO's Dispute Resolution Forum, you are going to allow 75 per cent of Indian market to be flooded with agriculture produces from all other countries and you are going to make agriculturists in India to suffer. They are not going to have the competitive price. The flooding is going to happen, because the TFA allows you to have 'allowed tariff' and you are allowing in and out flow without any hesitation. Therefore, within a year, you are going to have a catastrophe on agriculturists in India. So, I would like to know from the hon. Minister in which way are you going to protect the interests of the agriculturists, their produce and also the labourers who are depending on agriculture. Thank you.

(Ends)

SHRI ANANDA BHASKAR RAPOLU (TELANGANA): Mr. Deputy Chairman, Sir, this is the time know from the hon. Minister on her 19 point statement what are the escape channels and routes we have to come out of the complications of the cobweb -- चक्रव्यूह -- which is called the World Trade Organisation.

Our nation's GDP covered by trade is to the tune of 35 per cent. A great shift has taken place between 1950s and now. Sir, services are now having a greater role by almost 55 per cent. Those were the days in 1950s when agriculture was ruling the roost with 58 per cent. We are on the stronger side as far as services are concerned. We are authority in export of services. In the recent one decade, our export capacity in services has grown to 40 per cent. But, at this juncture, we are an infrastructure-deficit nation. We are having population which depends on agriculture to the tune of 50 per cent. Given the ground reality, it is quite impossible to have any sort of compromise on food security and agrarian platform. Still, we are yet to attain, as mentioned by our hon. Deputy Leader and our senior colleagues, Natchiappanji, them and are friendless. We are almost something like Abhimanyu in the पद्मव्यूह. In this चक्रव्यूह, how are you going to enlarge your capacity to come out of the escape channels without compromising interests, particularly agrarian interest, of our nation? This is the first clarification I wish to seek from the hon. Minister.

Besides that, Sir, we are having economic growth and we are getting complication not only from the WTO but also from the Multilateral Agreements and the FTAs. These complications are eating into the question of sovereignty of our nation. For that, even at global platforms, discussions are going on about the utility and the effectiveness of the WTO as far as agrarian sector is concerned. On this front, we are yet to attain the proper position since those were the great days of Argentina, Brazil and India -- ABI trio -- but, now, we are a loner. So, how this Abhimanyu -- India -- will come out of the complicated cobweb of the WTO? Thank you.

(Ends)

(Ends)

सर, आज आपने हाउस में देखा होगा जब पेट्रोल और डीजल के ऊपर चर्चा चल रही थी। हमारा किसान जो भी फसल पैदा करता है, जो भी पैदावार करता है, उसकी वजह से हम देश की जरूरतों को पूरा कर पाते हैं। जब हम मिनिमम फूड सिक्योरिटी की बात करते हैं, तो वह भी किसानों की मेहनत के जरिए से हो पा रही है, उसमें हमारी कोई मेहनत नहीं है, इसमें हमारे लिए उनका सपोर्ट है। इसके लिए हम सब की एक ही दृष्टि होनी चाहिए। जब किसान रोता है, तो सारा देश रोता है और जब किसान हंसता है, तो पूरा हिन्दुस्तान हंसता है, जब किसान की रीढ़ टूटती है, तो पूरे देश की रीढ़ टूटती है, अगर देश की रीढ़ टूटती है, तो कोई सरकार भी नहीं रह पाती है और सरकार की भी रीढ़ टूट जाती है। इसीलिए मैं एक बार फिर से निवेदन करूंगा कि मिनिमम सपोर्ट प्राइस में जो इनपुट्स वे लोग आज देते हैं, उनकी इतनी ज्यादा कीमत बढ़ गई है, वह चाहे फर्टिलाइजर हो, चाहे डीजल हो, चाहे केरोसीन हो, चाहे ऑयल हो, चाहे सीड्स हो। डिप्टी चेयरमैन साहब, हम एग्रीकल्चरल लेबर की बात तो कल करेंगे, परन्तु इसके बारे में, मैं यही निवेदन करना चाहता हूं कि सरकार को आज जो मेंडेट मिला है, जब आप WTO में अपने देश का तिरंगा लेकर बैठते हैं, तो उस वक्त वहां कोई पार्टी जाकर नहीं बैठती है, किसी पोलिटकल पार्टी का रिप्रेजेंटेटिव वहां जाकर नहीं बैठता है, वहां इस देश का रिप्रेजेंटेटिव जाकर बैठता है। इसके लिए यह हाउस और सारा देश उसके पीछे रहता है। इसीलिए हमें किसी के सामने झुकने की जरूरत नहीं है। एक ज़माना था जब हम जाकर अमेरिका के सामने गेहूं के लिए हाथ फैलाते थे। आज हमारा देश, हमारा किसान, हमारे लोग उस स्तर पर नहीं हैं, उससे काफी आगे पहुंच चुके हैं। मैं आप के माध्यम से प्रधान मंत्री जी से निवेदन करना चाहता हूं कि जब वे पहले रोज इस हाउस में आए थे तब मैंने उनसे कहा था कि आप किसान की तरफ नज़र रखिए। अगर किसान दुखी रहेगा, तो इस देश में कोई व्यापार नहीं चल सकता है।