The agriculture ministry has placed its cotton crop estimate for the current season at 132.8 lakh bales, whereas the Cotton Advisory Board (CAB) which met in February 1999, has placed it at 161.50 lakh bales. The difference between these two estimates is as high as 28.70 lakh bales. It is too big for anyone to swallow it without further scrutiny, particularly when some trade sources feel that the actual crop may exceed even CAB's estimate.So far as the standing crop is concerned, one can, of course, always argue that it is very difficult to be precise about it since it is subject to climatic changes and other factors, until it is actually gathered. However,there should be no such uncertainty about statistics of actual production in the earlier years, since they can be easily cross-checked by getting the figures of imports, exports, actual consumption among others. The agriculture ministry's figures cannot stand such tests. If one adds to its figures of actual production in each of the past three years the quantity imported and deducts the quantity exported, one can get at the net supply position. Such an exercise is not difficult since the Compendium of Textile Statistics - 1997 published by the Textile Commissioner makes easily available the figures of imports and exports of cotton in these years, as also those of consumption of cotton by textile mills and others.

According to the statistics released by the agriculture ministry, cotton production in the earlier three years amounted to 128.6 lakh bales in 1995-96; 142.3 lakh bales in 1996-97 and 111.4 lakh bales in 1997-98. If one goes by these statistics and adds the figures of imports and excludes those ofexports, one may arrive at a sharply lower supply position than even mill-consumption, let alone the requirements of small spinners and non-mill consumers. The net supply may thus come to 121.10 lakh bales compared with the consumption of 138.29 lakh bales by mills alone in 1995-96. Like-wise, the net supply would come to only 125.78 lakh bales against the mill consumption of 150.41 lakh bales in 1996-97. For 1997-98, the net availability would work out to just 111.90 lakh bales, compared with the mill offtake of 143.24 lakh bales.

In other words, if one were to go by the agriculture ministry's statistics, one may find that the net supply of cotton in the country in each of the past three years was far lower than actual consumption of cotton even by textile mills. This is an absurd situation.

Unless the agriculture ministry can prove that figures of mill consumption of cotton are wrong, it may have no option but to admit that cotton production statistics given out by it for the past three years areerroneous and misleading. This may not do any credit either to the agency bringing out such statistics, or to the government which gives them place in all official publications.

Figures of actual production in the past years, can be easily arrived at even by obtaining ginning and pressing figures from various units engaged in this activity and the earlier crop estimates can be corrected by tallying them with ginning and pressing figures thus becoming available. The Agriculture Ministry seems to avoid doing so. It is no surprise its cotton crop statistics of the past years remain dubious.