“We have walked 10 steps. They should also walk at least two, so that we can meet at some point. We want resolution in the interest of farmers. They should also understand this,” minister of state for agriculture Kailash Choudhary told ET.
He said the farmer unions must shed their adamant stance to help find a resolution to this issue.
“Laws are made after considering a large number of factors. These are passed by both the houses (of Parliament). A large number of farmer unions have backed the laws. If these Acts are holding good for them, how can these harm protesting farmer groups? How can we ignore a large section of farmers,” asked Choudhary.
The government has always indicated that repealing of the laws was not possible and consensus should come on a few amendments which farmer groups consider important. The two sides could not reach an agreement after seventh rounds of talks, and if the unions remain firm on their demand on repealing the laws, talks are likely to fail again.
“It’s totally a political decision. We have created each and every clause in law after a lot of deliberation and keeping the practical difficulties in mind. The provision of dispute settlement with the SDM (sub-divisional magistrate) court or with collector within a stipulated time was made considering cost and time involved in court cases. All the clauses favour agriculture and farmers’ interest,” said an agriculture ministry official, who was involved in drafting of the laws.
He said the laws didn’t interfere in any of the existing systems, and gave wider trading choices to farmers.
“Reforms have to pass through agitation. The results have started showing in some parts of the country. The government should have an open discussion with every stakeholder state-wise before taking any decision, even if it’s about any amendment,” the official said.