CACP trashes food Bill, says farm sector to be hit

A A

fe Bureau: New Delhi, Dec 22 2012, 00:49 IST

paper draws attention to an amusing part of the FSB, a force majeure clause to ensure neither the central nor state governments have any liability in the event of “war, flood, drought, fire, cyclone, earthquake or any act of God”. While this comprehensive force majeure clause that would make any insurance company proud will help protect the government, the authors say, it is “precisely in these conditions … that the poor and vulnerable would depend on government to ensure their food security.”

Ads by Google

Single Page Format

Previous | 1 | 2 | 3

Column : The elusive 4% agricultural growth FE Editorial : Techno fixesCash transfer scheme 'revolutionary' measure of UPA: Sonia House panel on Food Security Bill to submit report by January 15

Previous Story Quick view Next Story Dec 2012, the kindest month for equity issues

Reader's Comments (1)| Post a Comment

Fe Comment

B. Yerram Raju | 24-Dec-2012Reply | Forward

The authors served a good cause in exposing the perverse act of the Government in the name of Food Security. The recent calamity of NEELAM in intense paddy-growing districts of Andhra Pradesh illustrates how insurance mechanism fails the farmer in situations of natural calamity and the affected farmers had to beeline to the Government to shell out compensations for the loss and discoloured paddy to be procured by the Government agencies. Further, the Governments and the CACP should declare the minimum price only for paddy and not rice,when alone the stranglehold of rice-millers on the government can be eliminated and the farmers and not the millers who would get the benefit of the minimum price.