Subramanian Swamy suggests to Prime Minister three solutions to be included in rules of farm laws to end protests

Three sensible suggestions to make the Farm Bill acceptable to one and all from Swamy

Three sensible suggestions to make the Farm Bill acceptable to one and all from Swamy

Allow states to adopt laws, MSP to all states, limit purchase

BJP leader Subramanian Swamy on Friday suggested to Prime Minister Narendra Modi a way to bring an end to the farmers’ protest by creating three provisions in the rules of the controversial farm laws. He suggested that the rules must have provision for states to adopt the laws in writing and maintaining Minimum Support Price (MSP) in all states. He also suggested there should be a provision to limit the buying of food grains by only those who have no other major commercial or business interests other than agriculture trade.

In a detailed letter, Subramanian Swamy suggested that: “Therefore, I suggest that the rules to be framed for these Acts, may include three rules for these Acts which meet the demand of the Opposing states. First, a rule that provides for states which do not want to implement this Act. Hence the rule should restrict the implementation of the Act to those states which in writing inform its willingness to implement the Act, and thus those who do not inform its willingness to implement may be given the freedom not to benefit from the salutary aspects of the Agricultural Reforms Acts.

A few days back, Swamy had said that he had had an “informal chat” with around a dozen BJP MPs about the ongoing protest, all of who “agreed” to his proposals.

“I believe that the agitation should terminate once these provisions in the rules are incorporated in the Acts passed by Parliament. The Second rule should state that every State would be eligible for a Minimum Support Price (MSP) in perpetuity. The Third rule should limit the buying of the food grains by only those who have no other major commercial or business interests other than in agricultural trade[1].”

A few days back, Swamy had said that he had had an “informal chat” with around a dozen BJP MPs about the ongoing protest, all of who “agreed” to his proposals. In his letter to Prime Minister Modi, Swamy also said that “trouble makers and anti-national elements” had infiltrated the agitation, which has “been largely and mostly peaceful with clear cut single demand of scrapping the Act.” These “have to be dealt with strictly,” Swamy said.

Subramanian Swamy’s three-page letter to Prime Minister is published below:

Subramanian Swamy’s Suggestion to PM Narendra Modi on Agri Laws by PGurus on Scribd

References:

[1] Reset: Regaining India’s Economic Legacy – Amazon.in

Team PGurus

12 COMMENTS

  1. What a stupid suggestion, these reforms are pending for more that 2 decades silly, do you even understand that every sector in India like infrastructure , service, manufacturing has incomes increasing while agriculture is a sector which has incomes falling. These elements who are protesting are hell bent on stopping the reform process of the govt

  2. The Dr.Swamy we all knew is no more.

    I have lost respect for him as he continues to speak / write to an empty space / postbox requesting the PM to act.
    Any self respecting man would resign his post so as not to have any connection with the future happenings under his watch. Else he will be held as an accomplice

    How can Dr.Swamy expect a man with a fake degree to understand and act in the manner he suggests. And that too when that man is the puppet of the offspring of the Polyester Prince !

    • Abusing others is easy, but tell us why SS’s suggestions, and others added here are not acceptable to the farmers. Please give specific details not vague generalizations.

      • My comments refer to the letter written by SS to Modi. Nothing to do with farmers
        Do not obfuscate the subject.
        Kindly read and comprehend before you remark.

        • ” expect a man with a fake degree to understand and act in the manner he suggests”. That refers to the farm laws and the protests. So my previous comment is valid. Actually I should have also asked you for proof that NM has a fake degree and proof for the rest of the allegations. Personal attacks are made to cover ignorance.

  3. Dr Swamy’s suggestions are surely a very good way forward.

    I don’t expect the agitators (let me not try to be as politically correct as Dr Swamy by calling them farmers) to agree to this suggestion. But this provides the right handle for the Govt before saying “take it or leave it”.

    The agitators have no business to deny the benefits of the laws to those who support these laws. Even to the SC, the Govt can say, we’ve offered the laws as optional to the states. How can SC say it will refuse the benefits of the laws to willing states, unless SC says the laws are unconstitutional? Neither the agitators nor opposition have challenged the laws on constitutionality as they know they have no grounds.

    In fact, the Govt may not be quite interested to accept Clauses 2 and 3 suggested by Dr Swamy, but since the agitators will refuse the offer anyway because their objections won’t be met by this move, this debate is only academic. But it will at least provide the Govt an opportunity to say it tried its very best, walking an extra few miles.

    If agitators say refusal should not be at state level, as many BJP/ NDA rules states will deny the opportunity to farmers to refuse these laws, then the Govt can follow a similar (but not exactly the same) suggestion I had made in my PGurus article ( https://www.pgurus.com/selective-initial-implementation-of-the-farm-laws-as-a-way-out/ ) in December, wherein I had suggested that individual farmers who don’t want to avail these laws can opt out of these laws.

    In reality, both these suggestions offer no new option to the farmers, since availing the benefits of these laws was optional anyway. If Punjab (or any other statewide/ individual) farmers had jointly decided not to avail these laws, they could have anyway done so.

    The agitators’ lobby tried to sabotage the laws to serve their vested interests, against the national interest, and the Govt has rightly refused to be cowed down, though it is making the politically correct statements about the ‘farmers’ in the agitation.

  4. Dr.Swamy’s suggestions are very good and a way out to defuse the agitation. I will add one additional stipulation- States which elect not to implement the laws will have to wait 3-5 years before they can switch to the new laws. This will allow agricultural experts , govt., farmers, and genuine supporters of farmers to evaluate the merits of the new laws as compared to xisting ones. Then the govt. scan either let non -compliant states adopt the new laws or repeal the laws because evidence proves that they are not beneficial to farmers. The genuine farmers will then have proof that the govt. was right and passed the laws to benefit them. This will also restore the confidence of people in the govt.
    Regarding the second rule, the GOI in discussions with farmers assured them MSP will be retained in its present form. The third rule may be tweaked so that it will not negate the the main goals of the farm law.
    This should be the final offer of GOI and let us see how the farm protesters , their political backers and the ‘ breaking India gangs’ respond. Rejection of this proposal will give the GOI the moral support to implement the laws .

  5. Govt. has said they are ready to amend the law, but protestors say they want laws to be repealed and nothing less. Dr. Swamy should send this letter to protestors rather than to the govt. He says protests have been ‘largely’ peaceful, has he started smoking pot lately? I AGREE with all these amendments, but I am sure protestors will refuse them instantly.

    It was NEVER about farm laws and EVERYBODY knows it by now, except of course Dr. Swamy, or maybe, he is doing all this to rebuild the narrative that its about farm laws, like what protestors are trying to do since 26 Jan fiasco. These farm law protests have fully exposed the left ecosystem and now we know how deeply and discreetly it runs in this country.

    I am highly impressed by the way Modi-Shah have played it till now, otherwise, this ecosystem would have never exposed itself. Left has forgotten the stock market idiom ‘Never add to a losing position’. I think they are going to sacrifice a lot more in this pyre.

    • Unfortunately, Dr. Swamy is going the way of Justice Katju, egged on by his Bhakts ( I have to use this since his followers taunt those who do not agree with him using this word) in the Twitter that he keeps retweeting to get affirmation. He knows clearly that the farmers are obdurate , yet he throws in this (I have come across many who have suggested the first rule) to keep himself in the limelight discussing the pros and cons of the Farm laws that he wants to change. That “The Hindu” has published a news item on this average suggestion, is proof enough.

  6. Dear Dr. Swamy:
    Not only have I followed several of your talks, views etc but also had the pleasure to be introduced to you by Jitender Bhargava [The Descent of Air India fame] at a MoneyLife event in Mumbai a few years ago.
    And, I’ve read with inteest your suggestions on the Farm Laws that has sadly been centrestage for several weeks now. Your suggestion ‘buying of the food grains by only those who have no other major commercial or business interests…’ can quite easily be cicumvented by an old practice mastered by so many – SHELL COMPANIES. I am sure you are already aware of this…

  7. The first rule is not new and it has been floating around. would be surprised if the GOI has not thought about this. The suggested second and third rules are as good as repealing the Farm laws. This doe snot appear to be a sound suggestion.

    • Best is to repeal these controversial acts. Govt already agreed for 18 months suspension. Then best is to come with new Acts discussing with all. Modi must stop his oneupmanship.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here