Sindh yet to formulate agriculture policy

Despite the passage of 18th Constitutional Amendment, the Sindh province has yet to formulate an agriculture policy, which may worsen food insecurity in the province. "There is a dire need to introduce agriculture policy to ensure sustainable food to the people of Sindh," said Waheed Jamali, an official of Sindh Agricultural and Forestry Workers Co-ordinating Organisation while talking to PPI.

He said that 21.1 percent of the Sindh population live with hunger, 33.8 percent moderate hunger and 16.8 percent severe hunger. About 90 percent of the population in rural Sindh has a marginal status in terms of food intake or access to healthy food, with 35 percent of the population being highly food insecure, Jamali elaborated. A grower regretted that the Sindh government was yet to formulate a new agriculture policy despite growing food insecurity in the province. He said that Sindh population was facing severe nutrition problems which required the government's immediate attention.

Economic Survey of Pakistan says: Agriculture is central to economic growth and development in Pakistan. Being the dominant sector, it contributes 21.4 percent to GDP, employs 45 percent of the country's labour force and contributes in the growth of other sectors of the economy. It said the healthy expansion in agriculture stimulates domestic demand for industrial goods and other services and supplying raw material to agro-based industry notably cotton textile industry which is the largest sub sector of manufacturing sector.

The government under paradigm of the new growth strategy envisioned to enhance growth in agriculture sector by facilitating agriculture productivity sustainable environment, increasing competitiveness in agriculture marketing and trade by providing friendly climate for more investment in the sector. Agriculture is the mainstay of Pakistan, so it is the need of the hour to boot it on war-footing basis. The rulers will have to adopt a positive approach to enhance agriculture production by providing subsidies and lucrative incentives to the small growers.

During 2012-13, agriculture sector exhibited a growth of 3.3 percent on the back of positive growth in agriculture related sub sectors. Crops grew at 3.2 percent, livestock 3.7 percent, forestry 0.1 percent and fishing 0.7 percent. Sindh needs effective agriculture policy so as to provide relief to farmers, growers and labour involved in this sector for their livelihood. There is also a need to stabilise prices of food items, provide lucrative rates to farmers for crops, ensure women empowerment in this sector, develop grain storage facilities and ensure easy access to farmers and growers for selling their crops production in the markets.

The government also needs to develop and repair roads for transportation of sugarcane from crop sites to sugar mills as many roads in interior Sindh are in shambles. The lull of the rulers in this regard is also highly deplorable. According to FAO global report, 842 million people are chronically hungry, many more die or suffer the ill effects of inadequate nutrition. Around 2 billion people are affected by micronutrient deficiencies. Close to 7 million children die before their fifth birthday every year, 162 million children under five are stunted while at the same time, 500 million people are obese. Food security is a complex condition. Its dimensions, availability, access, utilisation and stability are better understood when presented through a suite of indicators.

Under nourishment and under-nutrition can coexist. However, in some countries, under-nutrition rates, as indicated by the proportion of stunted children, are considerably higher than the prevalence of under-nourishment, as indicated by inadequacy of dietary energy supply. In these countries, nutrition-enhancing interventions are crucial to improve the nutritional aspects of food security. Improvements require a range of food security and nutrition-enhancing interventions in agriculture, health, hygiene, water supply and education, particularly targeting women.

Sindh has a geographical area of 140,900 square kilometres. The Province lies between 23 and 29 degree north latitude (near tropic of cancer) and 67 and 71 degrees east longitude. The Province is surrounded by land in all directions expect there is Arabian sea in the south west. It is bordered with Rann of Kachh in south, Rajastan in east, Punjab province in north-east and Balochistan in north and west. In the extreme west are the barren Kirthar mountains; to the east is the great Indian desert, partly known as Thar desert.

The lower Indus plain has been formed by the meandering and shifting courses of Indus River. In the basin of Indus the earliest civilisation came into existence (Pithawala, 1938). The mighty river Indus is flowing from the world's highest mountains into the Arabian Sea. The colossal flow of Indus water has brought for Sindh rich silt and sandy loam, from northern areas which enhance the fertility of the soil.

Copyright Pakistan Press International, 2013

Caribbean receives EU funding to boost agriculture

GEORGETOWN, Guyana, Saturday March 16,2013 - The European Union is providing Euro 8.6 million (One Euro =US$1.30 cents) to boost agriculture in the Caribbean.

The funds are being provided under the 10th European Development Fund (EDF) Intra-African Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Agriculture Policy Programme for the Caribbean between the European Commission and the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA).

The agreement was signed by Guyana President Donald Ramotar, who has lead responsibility for agriculture within the quasi-Caribbean Community (CARICOM) cabinet, the Delegate of the European Union (EU) to Guyana, Ambassador Robert Kopecky, Co-ordinator of IICA’s Regional Integration for the Caribbean Region, Gregg Rawlins and CARICOM Secretary General Irwin LaRocque.

IICA is the principal implementing agency of the Programme on behalf of the Caribbean Forum (CARIFORUM), with the Caribbean Agricultural Research and Development Institute (CARDI) and the CARICOM Secretariat as implementing partners.

LaRocque said the implementation of the programme “comes at a time of significant challenges for the Caribbean in general, and the 16 states of CARIFORUM in particular.

“It is a time when our states have no choice but to improve their competitiveness, with a view to achieving greater economic viability and sustainability. That competitiveness would put us in good stead as we seek to take advantage of the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) with the European Union.”

He said the essence of the programme’s interventions is informed by the results of a series of consultations with the key players in the agricultural sector in CARIFORUM including the Caribbean Farmers Network (CAFAN); the Caribbean Network of Rural Women Producers (CANROP); Caribbean Agriculture Business Association (CABA) and the Caribbean Forum for Youth in Agriculture (CAFY).

The four year programme is specifically planned to further strengthen policy regimes and incentive schemes for agricultural smallholders across the region that form the bulk of producers.

It would also improve food security by increasing production and productivity of selected commercially and nutritionally valuable agricultural produce.

A CARICOM Secretariat statement said that in the execution of the programme, there is a specific bias to women and youth as these groups have been identified as important to the sustainability of the sector.

“The design of the programme followed intensive consultations among stakeholders in the sector across the Region and also benefitted from a number of policy instruments including CARICOM’s Liliendaal Declaration and the Jagdeo Initiative on the nine key binding constraints to agricultural development in the region,” the statement added. (CMC)

Original Article Here

Agriculture ministry sacks communications director

THE Ministry of Agriculture has sacked its director of communications, Cecil Thoms, who was accused by junior minister Ian Hayles of taping his conversations without permission.

The sacking comes less than a day after Director of Public Prosecutions Paula Llewellyn ruled that no criminal offence was committed, after reviewing the file submitted by the police on the alleged taping.

"My lawyer and I are examining all possible legal options for breach of redress and, therefore, we will be contesting this because clearly there has been a breach of natural justice and we think that it is something that is worth contesting," Thoms told the Jamaica Observer yesterday.

Thoms, a former radio reporter, said the Public Service Commission (PSC) in terminating his services cited Section 23, Sub-section 3 of the Public Service Regulation of 1961, which states that "you do not need a reason to fire someone who is on probation".

"But Thoms has taken issue with the way in which the matter was handled, noting that he was not on probation and had been with the ministry since May 2010.

"My dismissal was unfair and given the circumstances, especially in light of the director of public prosecution's ruling, it could have been handled differently," he added. DPP Paula Llewellyn had recommended that both parties seek to have the matter mediated in the best interest of all.

In the meantime, Thoms' attorney Patrick Bailey said his client was dismissed unfairly, adding that they were exploring all their options.

Original Article Here

Govt urged to reevaluate agriculture policy

KARACHI: Stakeholders have called upon the government to reevaluate its agriculture policy and declare agriculture as an industry, according to a statement on Saturday.

“Economic renaissance in Pakistan is totally dependent on agriculture growth,” said Ahmad Jawad, CEO of Harvest Tradings and Member Export of the Islamabad Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ICCI). “Pakistan urgently needs a sustainable agricultural policy to improve the balance of trade and put the economy back on the track,” he said.

Several farmers are being forced to sell their yield at lower rates and are being exploited by the middlemen every year, he said.

The agricultural loans limit should be increased up to Rs400,000 per acre against the existing limit of a few thousand rupees and Zarai Taraqiati Bank Limited (ZTBL), whose mandate is to serve the agriculture sector, must wake up and implement their vision practically, he said.

Jawad said that their crop production remained stagnant for several years, while the population kept on increasing. He said that small farmers are not benefiting from increased food prices, since the input costs increased tremendously.

National price monitoring committees should be strengthened at the district, provincial and national levels, while food banks should be set up at the provincial level and in food-insecure areas, he suggested.

Jawad said that 43 percent of Pakistan’s labour depends on agriculture and the yield gap in the four major crops of Pakistan was three times more than the best producers in the world such as China and Egypt.

Low yield is affecting the financial position of the 43 percent labour, leading to poverty in rural areas.

Approximately 25 percent of fruits and vegetables production is also lost due to the absence of required storages, he said.

The national policy on agriculture should aim at setting in place the enabling and supportive measures and viable environment to promote growth in the sector. The policies and strategies should be formulated keeping in mind the productivity and market-driven growth.

Structural changes in the economy have brought new issues and challenges in the agricultural sector.

Acute labour shortage, limited availability of suitable land and increasing cost of production arising from the energy crisis and competition for resources, as well as intense competition in the global market, resulting from trade liberalisation, he said.

Jawad also said that per acre yield could be improved through large-scale introduction of hybrid seeds and mechanised farming, high efficiently irrigation systems such as drip irrigation and reduction in wastage of crop through introduction of privately-owned storage facilities.

“The provincial governments should ensure more storage capacity through public-private partnership,” he suggested.

Courtesy The News

Weak policy commitment hits agriculture strategy

KATHMANDU: Weak commitment to policy and weak implementation capacity will be an obstacle to get the desired results from the Agriculture Development Strategy, according to participants at the ‘Policy Dialogue: Workshop on Agriculture Development Strategy’, here today.

The strategy has a target to increase agriculture exports by almost seven times, land productivity by more than three times, labour productivity by three times, and contribution of agriculture to the GDP by three times. However, society has to completely change its perception of farming from being unattractive and full of drudgery, to an honourable professional activity, according to senior agriculturist at the Ministry of Agriculture Development (MoAD) Sabnam Shivakoti.

Similarly, the exodus of youth from rural areas, growing rural-urban gap, loss of agricultural land, weak smallholder farmer organisations, and adoption of improved technology 

are some of the key challenges to transform the agriculture sector that includes broader areas from crops to livestock, forestry and fisheries, production, trade, processing to marketing, and spans across different ministries and agencies, and includes not only government agencies but farmers, private sector enterprises, cooperatives, NGOs, and service providers.

The strategy is trying to address the current agriculture system that has become less important as a share of labour and GDP, she said, adding that after the implementation of the strategy, agriculture could become more productive in terms of higher agricultural labour income and GDP.

For better results, technology development and dissemination that is demand-driven and responsive to farmers and enterprises, needs to be developed, besides ensuring that input supply and distribution system provides timely, quality, and reasonably priced inputs to farmers, providing a favourable environment and specific measures to increase the level and effectiveness of public and private investment including investment in infrastructure and irrigation.

However, market development and commercialisation of agriculture is key to achieve growth potential of agriculture, driven by expanding domestic and regional demand, emergence of innovative and competitive enterprises, and increased value addition, added Shivakoti. “Along with proper land management that ensures effective implementation of land planning and management to promote productive use of land, rights of tillers, and environmental protection must also be ensured.”

The policy dialogue shared the process and content of the strategy with the wider public so that its assumptions, analyses, priorities and thematic thrusts could be scrutinised. Its aim was to also identify weaknesses and strengths in the process and its content, and review viable changes and suggestions if needed. The dialogue had an objective to also review the initiatives taken in mainstreaming organic agriculture integration, and to provide inputs.

The strategy that envisions ‘a competitive, sustainable and inclusive agricultural sector that contributes to economic growth, improved livelihoods, and food and nutrition security,’ also has to include the voice of farmers and practitioners in the planning process and engage key policy shapers and makers, according to the civic society that blamed the policy for being donor driven and of techno-bureaucratic interest and orientation.

Nepal is on the threshold of a new socio-cultural, political and economic change, and reshaping agricultural policies and strategies could play a vital role in economic development.

There have been a number of policies and programmes for the development of the agriculture sector since 1995.

Original Article Here

Europe’s agriculture policy is damaging developing nations

From Dr Nicola Cantore and Ms Sheila Page.

Sir, The common agricultural policy damages developing countries as a group, and the proposed reforms will damage even those previously favoured. As Gail Soutar admits (Letters, August 22), the purpose of the CAP is to “allow European Union farmers to compete globally”. The budget for this remains about €50bn, and the CAP instruments, such as export subsidies and direct payments, are supplemented by still high tariffs.

While the exact impact of each of these measures can be debated, it is frankly inconceivable to suggest that the current €50bn spent on existing European farmers, without asking them to change their behaviour, and with some farmers deriving more than 50 per cent of their incomes from CAP, is, first, money well spent to achieve the valid objectives of the CAP and, second, not affecting trade and production patterns globally. EU agriculture policy directly affects growth and income distribution in and among developing countries.

Moreover, in the current context of increasingly volatile food prices, CAP instruments may exacerbate the negative effects for developing countries. If the CAP is successful in stabilising European markets, this can only mean price fluctuations are transferred to international markets.

Ms Soutar’s argument that “export subsidies amounted to less than 0.5 per cent of the EU agricultural budget in 2010” does not incorporate the recent request by Poland to reconsider the reintroduction of export refunds to dairy products as fast as possible. The argument that “more than 90 per cent of domestic support is decoupled from production and therefore regarded as non-trade-distorting” is questioned by many research studies, which identify distortions from decoupled payments – for example, they lead to an excess of liquidity of farmers in the credit market.

Original Article Here

Subsidies restricts agriculture growth

The governmental control over agricultural affairs, subsidies and rent seeking approaches have restricted agriculture business to become competitive in line with the concept of free market, said an official.

According to the official the government is not perusing the guidelines provided by the Framework for Economic Growth under which the governmenthas to review and improve policies such as seed, fertilizer, irrigation water pricing, electricity subsidies, food subsidies, release stocks, foodprocurement, support price, import tariffs and export controls.

“To make the agriculture business more competitive, agriculture markets needs to be deregulated to promote private sector participation and to attractinvestment in developing supply chain, modern storage and warehousing facilities,” said the official, adding that compliance of international standards and certification of agricultural commodities and products for export should be focused to access the high end markets.

According to the Framework for Economic Growth governmental role would shift from active player to a facilitator and regulator and this policy shift will help reduce the public burden and enhance economic activity by providing better opportunities to the private sector.

“After necessary restructuring, the national agricultural research system would be having better service structure, focused research, avoidingduplication and enhanced coordination,” the official said, adding this will bring innovations in agriculture and ultimately the commercialization of technologies.

The official said agricultural policy analysis capacity will be enhanced to have knowledge based decision making in economic planning and efficient resource allocation. There will be efficient public sector institutions resulting in better service delivery. All stakeholders will be involved in planning process by adopting demand driven and bottom up development approach.

The government has planned to form a high social capital to promote participatory asset management, the utilization of advanced technologies, improved input availability and use efficiency would result in high crop.

Original Article Here

Resolve uncertainty over agriculture: Mulder

Politicians need to resolve uncertainty around agricultural policy, said Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Deputy Minister Pieter Mulder.

"The biggest problem at present in agriculture is the uncertainty about land and uncertainty about further government interference in agriculture," he told the Afrikaner Cattle Breeders' Association centenary in Thabazimbi, according to his office.

Agricultural uncertainty was caused by irresponsible propaganda statements which sought short-term political gain, said Mulder.

Political will was needed to take the right decisions about land reform and less state interference in agriculture. Land reform was linked to food security.

"Forty percent of all cattle in South Africa belong to communal and small-scale farmers," he said.

"The problem is that these farmers only contribute five percent to the meat production in the country."

If this percentage could be increased, it could make a huge contribution to addressing poverty in rural areas.

Afrikaner cattle had helped to provide food, milk and transport to South Africans, through the association.

"The fact that this breed of cattle is depicted on monuments, honoured by poets and praised in traditional songs, confirms the important role which it has played in the last hundred years," said Mulder.

Original Article Here

Snyder ducks debate over where agriculture ranks among Michigan's industries

A January 2012 photo of Gov. Rick Snyder, who opened
the Michigan Ag Expo at Michigan State University
 this morning. / PATRICIA BECK/Detroit Free Press

Gov. Rick Snyder gave praise and a pep talk to farmers as he opened the Michigan Ag Expo at Michigan State University this morning, but later sidestepped a debate over whether agriculture is Michigan's second-largest industry. 

"Agriculture is one of our Big 3," Snyder told reporters after speaking under a large tent at the expo grounds. "We've got autos, ag and tourism." 

The Mackinac Center for Public Policy has disputed claims by MSU and others that the farm sector is the second-biggest in Michigan, claiming the analysis is flawed because it includes entities such as cereal factories, wholesalers, retailers such as grocery stores, and restaurants in measuring the economic impact. 

Based on that analysis, some argue that farming accounts for about one out of every four jobs in Michigan. 

Jamie Clover Adams, Snyder's newly named director of the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, defended the ranking when she addressed the Ag Expo shortly before Snyder did. 

"It's interconnected," she said of the economy. "That's how it works, and that's how we should measure it." 

Adams pegged the value of the farm sector to Michigan's economy at $91 billion. 

Snyder told reporters he agrees with Adams that the analysis of agriculture's impact used in an MSU study is sound and he also likes to say farming is the state's second-biggest industry. But he stopped short of taking a firm position on the debate. 

"We shouldn't be spending all our time talking about that," Snyder said. "Let's just make sure we're growing it." 

Snyder told more than 100 farmers at the event that farming was "one shining light" in Michigan during the prolonged economic recession. 

He said the sector doesn't get the credit it deserves. But he said it also needs to double its exports, and a new bridge across the Detroit River is critical to making that happen. 

Original Article Here

The "Monsanto Rider": Are Biotech Companies About to Gain Immunity from Federal Law?

Congressman Jack Kingston, Georgia, Chairman of the
House Agriculture Appropriations Committee
poses questions before the House Agriculture Appropriations
Subcommittee in Washington, D.C., Tuesday, March 6, 2012.
Kingston was voted "legislator of the year for 2011-2012"
by the Biotechnology Industry Organization, whose
members include Monsanto and DuPont.
(Photo: Bob Nichols / USDAgov)

By Alexis Baden-Mayer, AlterNet | News Analysis

While many Americans were firing up barbecues and breaking out the sparklers to celebrate Independence Day, biotech industry executives were more likely chilling champagne to celebrate another kind of independence: immunity from federal law.

A so-called "Monsanto rider," quietly slipped into the multi-billion dollar FY 2013 Agricultural Appropriations bill, would require – not just allow, but require - the Secretary of Agriculture to grant a temporary permit for the planting or cultivation of a genetically engineered crop, even if a federal court has ordered the planting be halted until an Environmental Impact Statement is completed. All the farmer or the biotech producer has to do is ask, and the questionable crops could be released into the environment where they could potentially contaminate conventional or organic crops and, ultimately, the nation's food supply.

Unless the Senate or a citizen's army of farmers and consumers can stop them, the House of Representatives is likely to ram this dangerous rider through any day now.

In a statement issued last month, the Center For Food Safety had this to say about the biotech industry's latest attempt to circumvent legal and regulatory safeguards:

Ceding broad and unprecedented powers to industry, the rider poses a direct threat to the authority of U.S. courts, jettisons the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) established oversight powers on key agriculture issues and puts the nation's farmers and food supply at risk.

In other words, if this single line in the 90-page Agricultural Appropriations bill slips through, it's Independence Day for the biotech industry.

Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) has sponsored an amendment to kill the rider, whose official name is "the farmers assurance" provision. But even if DeFazio's amendment makes it through the House vote, it still has to survive the Senate. Meanwhile, organizations like the Organic Consumers Association, Center for Food Safety, FoodDemocracyNow!, the Alliance for Natural Health USA and many others are gathering hundreds of thousands of signatures in protest of the rider, and in support of DeFazio's amendment.

Will Congress do the right thing and keep what are arguably already-weak safeguards in place, to protect farmers and the environment? Or will industry win yet another fight in the battle to exert total control over our farms and food supply?

Biotech's 'Legislator of the Year' behind the latest sneak attack

Whom do we have to thank for this sneak attack on USDA safeguards? The agricultural sub-committee chair Jack Kingston (R-Ga.) – who not coincidentally was voted "legislator of the year for 2011-2012" by none other than the Biotechnology Industry Organization, whose members include Monsanto and DuPont. As reported by Mother Jones, the Biotechnology Industry Organization declared Kingston a "champion of America's biotechnology industry" who has "helped to protect funding for programs essential to the survival of biotechnology companies across the United States."

Kingston clearly isn't interested in the survival of America's farmers.

Aiding and abetting Kingston is John C. Greenwood, former US Congressman from Pennsylvania and now president of the Biotechnology Industry Organization. No stranger to the inner workings of Congress, Greenwood lobbied for the "farmers assurance provision" in a June 13 letter to Congress, according to Mother Jones and Bloomberg, claiming that "a stream of lawsuits" have slowed approvals and "created uncertainties" for companies developing GE crops.

Greenwood was no doubt referring to several past lawsuits, including one brought in 2007 by the Center for Food safety challenging the legality of the USDA's approval of Monsanto's Roundup Ready alfalfa. In that case, a federal court ruled that the USDA's approval of GMO alfalfa violated environmental laws by failing to analyze risks such as the contamination of conventional and organic alfalfa, the evolution of glyphosate-resistant weeds, and increased use of Roundup. The USDA was forced to undertake a four-year study of GMO alfalfa's impacts under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). During the four-year study, farmers were banned from planting or selling the crop – creating that 'uncertainty" that Greenwood is so worried about.

The USDA study slowed down the release of GMO alfalfa, but ultimately couldn't stop it. As Mother Jones reports, in 2011, the USDA deregulated the crop, even though according to its own study, the USDA said that "gene flow" between GM and non-GM alfalfa is "probable," and threatens organic dairy producers and other users of non-GMO alfalfa, and that there is strong potential for the creation of Roundup-resistant "superweeds" that require ever-higher doses of Roundup and application of ever-more toxic herbicides. The report noted that two million acres of US farmland already harbor Roundup-resistant weeds caused by other Roundup Ready crops.

In another case – which perhaps paved the way for this latest provision now before the House - the USDA in 2011 outright defied a federal judge's order to halt the planting of Monsanto's controversial Roundup-Ready GMO sugar beets until it completed an Environmental Impact Statement. The USDA allowed farmers to continue planting the crop even while it was being assessed for safety on the grounds that there were no longer enough non-GMO seeds available to plant.

Who loses if Monsanto wins this one?

Among the biggest losers if Congress ignores the DeFazio amendment and passes the "farmers assurance provision" are thousands of farmers of conventional and organic crops, including those who rely on the export market for their livelihoods. An increasing number of global markets are requiring GMO-free agricultural products or, at the very least, enforcing strict GMO labeling laws. If this provision passes, it will allow unrestricted planting of potentially dangerous crops, exposing other safe and non-GMO crops to risk of contamination.

As we've seen in the past, farmers who grow crops that have been inadequately tested and later found dangerous, or whose safe crops become contaminated by nearby unsafe crops, risk huge losses and potentially, lawsuits from their customers. Ultimately, the entire US agriculture market and US economy suffers.

We have only to look back to the StarLink corn and LibertyLink rice contamination episodes for evidence of how misguided this provision is. In October 2000, traces of an Aventis GM corn called StarLink showed up in taco shells in the U.S. even though the corn had not been approved for human consumption because leading allergists were concerned it would cause food allergies. The contamination led to a massive billion dollar recall of over 300 food brands. The 'StarLink' gene also turned up unexpectedly in a second company's corn and in US corn exports, causing a costly disruption to the nation's grain-handling system, and spurring lawsuits by farmers whose crops were damaged.

A similar disaster occurred for US rice farmers in 2006. In august of that year the USDA announced that mutant DNA of Liberty Link, a genetically modified variety of rice developed by Bayer CropScience, a then-German agri-business giant, were found in commercially-grown long-grain rice in Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas and Missouri. LibertyLink rice, named for Bayer's broad-spectrum herbicide glufosinate-ammonium, was never intended for human consumption. Following the announcement of contamination, Japan banned all long-grain rice imports from the U.S., and U.S. trade with the EU and other countries ground to a halt. Rice farmers and cooperatives were forced to engage in five long years of litigation against Bayer

CropScience in an attempt to recoup some of their losses.

All the other ways this provision is just plain bad

There's a reason we have laws like the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and thePlant Protection Act of 2000, which was specifically designed "to strengthen the safety net for agricultural producers by providing greater access to more affordable risk management tools and improved protection from production and income loss . . .". The 'farmers assurance provision" is a thinly disguised attempt by the biotech industry to undermine these protections. Worse yet, it's an affront to everyone who believes the US judicial system exists to protect US citizens and public health.

Why should you be outraged about this provision? For all these reasons:

· The Monsanto Rider is an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers.Judicial review is an essential element of U.S. law, providing a critical and impartial check on government decisions that may negatively impact human health, the environment or livelihoods. Maintaining the clear-cut boundary of a Constitutionally-guaranteed separation of powers is essential to our government. This provision will blur that line.

· Judicial review is a gateway, not a roadblock. Congress should be fully supportive of our nation's independent judiciary. The ability of courts to review, evaluate and judge an issue that impacts public and environmental health is a strength, not a weakness, of our system. The loss of this fundamental safeguard could leave public health, the environment and livelihoods at risk.

· It removes the "legal brakes" that prevent fraud and abuse. In recent years, federal courts have ruled that several USDA GE crop approvals violated the law and required further study of their health and environmental impact. These judgments indicated that continued planting would cause harm to the environment and/or farmers and ordered interim planting restrictions pending further USDA analysis and consideration. The Monsanto rider would prevent a federal court from putting in place court-ordered restrictions, even if the approval were fraudulent or involved bribery.

· It's unnecessary and duplicative. Every court dealing with these issues is supposed to carefully weigh the interests of all affected farmers and consumers, as is already required by law. No farmer has ever had his or her crops destroyed as a result. USDA already has working mechanisms in place to allow partial approvals, and the Department has used them, making this provision completely unnecessary.

· It shuts out the USDA. The rider would not merely allow, it would compel the Secretary of Agriculture to immediately grant any requests for permits to allow continued planting and commercialization of an unlawfully approved GE crop. With this provision in place, USDA may not be able to prevent costly contamination episodes like Starlink or Liberty Link rice, which have already cost farmers hundreds of millions of dollars in losses. The rider would also make a mockery of USDA's legally mandated review, transforming it into a 'rubber stamp' approval process.

· It's a back-door amendment of a statute. This rider, quietly tacked onto an appropriations bill, is in effect a substantial amendment to USDA's governing statute for GE crops, the Plant Protection Act. If Congress feels the law needs to be changed, it should be done in a transparent manner by holding hearings, soliciting expert testimony and including full opportunity for public debate.

If we allow this "Monsanto Rider" to be slipped into the FY 2013 Agricultural Appropriations bill, consumers and farmers will lose what little control we have now over what we plant and what we eat.

If you would like to join the hundreds of thousands of concerned citizens who have already written to Congress in support of the DeFazio amendment, please sign our petition here.

Original Article Here

Food access, agriculture policies, Congress and you

Are you someone who enjoys eating food? Do you grow and sell your own food? Are you one of thousands of low-income families having difficulty accessing food supply? If you are interested in understanding how America's food and agriculture policy is about to change and how this change may affect you. Attend the Know Your Food public forum to find out more.

The 2008 Farm Bill is set to expire on Sept. 30, and Congress is already making headway to establish a new bill, with a proposal on the Senate floor at present. This bill will shape food and agricultural policies for the next five years, affecting food stamps, crop insurance, conservation practices, school-lunch programs, nutrition education, research monies, and energy initiatives ,among many other issues.

Chief minister targets to woo farmers, promises friendly version of land acquisition bill

LUCKNOW: Anticipating what farmers support could mean to Samajwadi Party in the 2014 Lok Sabha elections, the Akhilesh government doled out sops worth Rs 5,432.37 crore for agriculture and allied activities to benefit the group. Chief minister Akhilesh Yadav also reiterated his government's commitment to scrap the old land acquisition policy and come up with a farmer friendly version soon.

Stating that loans were a stress that haunted a farmer's mind, the chief minister announced a loan waiver package for small farmers. A sum of Rs 500 crore has been earmarked for this purpose. This scheme would be helpful to farmers who mortgage their land with government banks and fail to repay the loan. In another big decision, the government decided to increase the insurance cover in Kisan Accident Insurance Scheme. An allocation of Rs 350 crore has been made to increase the sum assured from rupees one lakh to rupees five lakh.

To tap the big farmers, the government allocated Rs 400 crore for payment of dues to cane farmers. The government revived a scheme called Bhumi Sena, a project run by the UP Bhumi Sudhar Nigam wherein sodic, wasteland, barren and waterlogged land of selected allottees usually marginal farmers is treated to increase its productivity and help in improving their quality of life. The said scheme can be helpful to marginal farmers in districts of Bundelkhand.

Steps have been initiated to take care of basic problems such as availability of seeds and fertilisers that bother a farmer. The government sanctioned Rs 137.82 crore for procurement of fertilisers and seeds for 2012-12. For procurement of eight lakh metric tonne phosphate and three lakh metric tonne urea ahead of the 2012-13 Rabi season, the government earmarked Rs 100 crore. A sum of Rs 72.51 crore has been kept aside for ensuring availability of hybrid seeds and improved seeds for groundnut and sugarcane.

The interest of the farmer has been kept in mind beyond the realms of agriculture and associated activities. For instance, the government has fixed a target for ensuring availability of water till the tail end of 9,654 canals in Kharif season and 9,850 canals in Rabi season in the present financial year. Farmers will also benefit from the allocations of Rs 1,473.59 crores for old age and farmer pensions.

Original Article Here