M.S. Swaminathan Will Forever Be Remembered in the Hearts of Millions of Farmers

The Swaminathan Report or the Swaminathan Commission Report are two words that practically every Indian farmer would be familiar with. They are also aware of what its key suggestion is for them: Minimum Support Price equals the total cost of production multiplied by 50% (often abbreviated as C2+50%).

Millions of peasants who are calling for the execution of the National Commission for Farmers’ (NCF) Report will hold Professor M.S. Swaminathan in their hearts above all else. This is because Professor Swaminathan will not only be remembered in the halls of government and bureaucracy but also in the institutions of science.

However, because of the significant contribution, effect, and irreplaceable mark he placed on the findings of the NCF, of which he served as chairman, Indian farmers simply refer to it as the Swaminathan Report.

The investigations tell a tale of treachery and repression on the parts of both the UPA and NDA governments. The first report was submitted in December 2004. The fifth and last report was submitted in or around October 2006. Not even an hour of focused discussion on the agrarian problem was ever held, let alone a special session of parliament, which is exactly what we urgently need. Additionally, 19 years have passed since the initial report was submitted.

The pledge made by the Modi government to swiftly implement the Swaminathan Report, particularly its MSP formula proposal, helped the government gain power in 2014 to some extent. Instead, the new administration quickly filed an affidavit with the Supreme Court stating that it would not be possible because it would cause market price distortion.

Perhaps the UPA and NDA used the argument that the studies were too “pro-farmer” because both governments were working to privatise Indian agriculture. The study was the closest thing to a pro-agriculture strategy since Independence. led by a man who advocated for a completely different framework: measuring agricultural success in terms of the rise of farmers’ income, not just in terms of greater output.

Leave Your Reply

Your email address will not be published.

*