Farm loans and their 'waivers': India
(→RBI to study UPA-1’s farm loan sop success of 2008) |
(→2008 waiver by UPA-1: RBI to study its effectiveness) |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
=Farm loan waivers= | =Farm loan waivers= | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
=Impact of waivers= | =Impact of waivers= | ||
==Waivers will not help marginal farmers== | ==Waivers will not help marginal farmers== | ||
Revision as of 14:52, 5 May 2018
This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content. Readers will be able to edit existing articles and post new articles directly |
Contents |
Farm loan waivers
Impact of waivers
Waivers will not help marginal farmers
Subodh Varma, Few Avail Of Bank Loans Due To Hassles Involved, April 11, 2017: The Times of India
“In this whole terai belt you will find very few small farmers who have got bank loans. There is too much headache, too many procedures and then, people take cuts.If we need money we have to go to the money lender,“ laments the elderly farmer. About 86 lakh small and marginal farmers will have their bank debts up to Rs.1 lakh waived, as per the UP government's claims. This is not a small number and has cheered up a large number of small farmers suffering from financial crunch brought on by droughts and dwindling incomes.
But NSSO data shows that less than half of the small and margi nal farmers in the vast state owe money to banks. Majority of such indebted farmers have taken loans from informal or non-institutional sources like local money lenders, traders, friends and relatives or bigger farmers.
The smaller the farmer in terms of land holding, the less likely that he or she will get a bank loan, the data shows. Among farmers with less than one acre of land, just 28% have outstanding bank loans with the remaining 72% owing money to non-formal creditors, mainly money lenders.Among farmers holding one to five acres, the share of those with bank loans rises to 67%.
So, while Yogi Aditya Nath will probably derive political mileage for fulfilling an election promise, on the ground this policy may not provide the much needed relief to the poorest sections of farmers.
Experience with previous debt waivers has been similar. The biggest such scheme was announced by the UPA in 2008, with Rs 52,520 cr waived off across the country . According to a study done by R Ramkumar of the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS), in most of the states the benefits were cornered by farmers with bigger land holdings. In UP , there is a clear possibility that this is what will happen given the nature of loan disbursals.Another issue troubling farmers is that this is a one-off scheme. What happens afterwards?
“With rising costs, we don't get enough returns on the harvested produce. While this scheme will give some relief, the future is still murky ,“ says Sohan Lal, a farmer in Gonda, smirking at the prospect of Rs.45,000 loan getting waived.
17% Maha farmers account for 46% of all loans due for waiver
7 Lakh Have Dues Of Over Rs 1.5L Each
The fear that rich farmers may corner a substantial portion of the largesse under the farm loan waiver scheme is not without basis.Statistics accessed by TOI from Maharashtra government's co-operation department shows that just 17% of all defaulting farmers account for 46% of total amount owed to banks in the rural sector. There are nearly 41 lakh farmers in the state who have bank debts that add up to an outstanding of Rs 36,474 crore as on June 30, 2016, the cut-off date set for the loan waiver. Of these, 7.15 lakh cultivators (17%) have loans that add up to Rs 16,669 crore. Each of them have an outstanding of more than Rs 1.5 lakh.
The rest have loans of less than Rs 1.5 lakh to repay . They are overwhelmingly in the ma jority (33.8 lakh) and are eligible for a full write-off. However, their cumulative debt at Rs 19,804 crore is just a shade over those who make up the 17% group.
Officials said a significant chunk of loans are from district central co-operative (DCC) banks and these are run by politicians. It is likely that bulk of loans which are being waived would have gone to those linked to their party or families. “We have come across cases where loans of more than Rs 5 lakh were given without even a piece of paper,“ said an official, underscoring the potential for misuse of the waiver scheme.
He also said that there are 13 DCC banks in the state that are financially weak and a large number of their defaulters are influential people. A crop loan of Rs 3 lakh can be availed of at 11% interest, of which a farmer has to pay only 4%, the rest being borne by the state and Centre. Hence, funds are often wrongly sourced as crop loans, said an official.
State protection of moneylenders
SarangdharsinghShivdassinghChavan case/ 2010
The Supreme Court held a Congress chief minister of Maharashtra, parts of which had then be come infamous as farmers' graveyard, responsible for protecting money lenders who squeezed farmers into inescapable debt traps.
On December 14, 2010, the SC in “SarangdharsinghShivdassinghChavan“ case held VilasraoDeshmukh responsible for preventing the police from taking action against moneylenders accused of harassing farmers.
“This court is extremely anguished to see that such an instruction could come from the chief minister of a state which is governed under a Constitution which resolves to constitute India into a socialist, secular, democratic republic. Chief minister's instructions are so incongruous and anachronistic, being in defiance of all logic and reason, that our conscience is deeply disturbed. We condemn the same in no uncertain terms,“ it had said.
When the judgment came, Deshmukh was a minister in Manmohan Singh's cabinet.
Farmers, Dalits and Mus lims died or were killed in equal numbers in the past as today . The BJP-led NDA government and the parties ruling states are rightly being criticised for lethargy in tackling the motley criminal gangs spreading hatred in the name of religion and cow.
Even after accounting for crimes committed today by the despicable breed of cow vigilante groups, is the ground situation any different from the past? Statistics say no. Then, why did we keep silent when farmers, Dalits and Muslims were dying or getting murdered in the past? Was it because `secular' parties held the reins at the Centre and states? Maybe, we should not be asking this as it could discredit `secular' parties which are today rightly protesting loudly against similar murders.
Before we go to statistics, a disclaimer: Even after 70 years of independence, the plight of farmers, Dalits and Muslims have not seen the transformation envisioned by leaders of the freedom struggle.
Last week, it was heartening to see people from all walks of life -actors, writers, authors, journalists, social activists and many more -who kept silent for years over trampling of rights and lives of farmers, Dalits and Muslims, venting their dissent against vigilantism-driven murders, making optimum use of their constitutional right to free speech and saying `Not In My Name'.
In the last decade, when farmers were committing suicide in droves, Dalits were getting murdered across the country and Muslims were targeted, one wonders what prevented the present protesters from exercising free speech in “their name“ to criticise the governments concerned. But a good beginning, though belated, is always a welcome step.
Right to free speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution is a conscience driven exercise. One reacts to an incident when deep within shehe feels it does not conform to the ethos, culture and human values of society that keeps alive our hard earned democratic values.
Today , it would be futile to ask why their conscience was not pricked and why secular political parties did not rally farmers to protest against a Congress chief minister of Maharashtra, parts of which had then be come infamous as farmers' graveyard, when the Supreme Court held him responsible for protecting money lenders who squeezed farmers into inescapable debt traps.
On December 14, 2010, the SC in “Sarangdharsingh Shivdassingh Chavan“ case held Vilasrao Deshmukh responsible for preventing the police from taking action against moneylenders accused of harassing farmers.
“This court is extremely anguished to see that such an instruction could come from the chief minister of a state which is governed under a Constitution which resolves to constitute India into a socialist, secular, democratic republic. Chief minister's instructions are so incongruous and anachronistic, being in defiance of all logic and reason, that our conscience is deeply disturbed. We condemn the same in no uncertain terms,“ it had said.
When the judgment came, Deshmukh was a minister in Manmohan Singh's cabinet.None among the intelligentsia, social activists or farmers' leaders echoed the SC's anguish and protested to seek Deshmukh's resignation.Probably , it is not a fad to protest when `secular' parties hold the reins of power.
Last week, Congress leader, economist, author and former MP Bhalchandra Mungekar wrote a column in a daily newspaper quoting statistics from the National Crime Records Bureau to highlight atrocities faced by Dalits between 2009 and 2013, when his party was in power at the Centre.
Mungekar wrote, “During 2009-13, there were 3,194 incidents of Dalit murders; 7,849 Dalit women were raped. During this period, the seven states of Andhra Pradesh, Odisha, Bihar, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh accounted for 80% of total crimes and atrocities, with UP alone accounting for about 25%.“ This means, every day more than two Dalits were murdered and more than five Dalit women were sexually assaulted during this period.
During 2009-2013, UP was ruled by a `secular' party , so were Andhra Pradesh, Rajasthan, Odisha and Bihar. But Dalit atrocities seldom figured as a debating or a rallying point for expression of anguish against `secular' governments during that period.
Discrimination and atrocities against Dalits have been continuing, and we must protest continuously irrespective of the party in power. It is every citizen's fundamental duty to protect dignity of the voiceless and protest against injustice.
In 2008, the UPA government had sent to the states `Guidelines on Communal Harmony' to prevent and avoid communal disturbancesriots and the follow up action required. Despite this, 2013 Muzaffarnagar riots (UP , 62 killed), 2012 Assam riots (Kokrajhar, 77 killed), 2011 Bharatpur riots (Rajasthan, 8 killed) and 2010 Deganga riots in West Bengal happened.
The grim reality is that `secular' parties at the Centre and states fared no better in protecting the minority community . When Kashmiri Pandits faced ethnic cleansing, not many protested against the dance of raw communal hatred.
A commoner wants harmony and peace. He will always lend his name to protests against vigilante groups, communal forces, corruption and injustice.But the `secular' intelligentsia must remain neutral to the colour of the ruling party while leading protests.
See also
Farmers, cultivators and their issues including Farm loans
