E A S Sharma, former Union Secretary on Wednesday lashed out the government of keeping the Parliament in dark by agreeing WTOs Peace clause conditionality , which proves National Food Security Act was enacted only to gain political mileage. “My concern is that Parliament is supreme and if there is a conflict between a Parliament- enacted law and WTO conditions, then India should tell the WTO that it will have to opt out of it. It is unfortunate that the UPA government should negotiate a “peace clause” with the WTO limiting food subsidies to be applicable for four years even before the ink on the food security act has dried,” he said. In his letter to Ms. Gandhi, Mr. Sarma said, “This decision inevitably leads one to the conclusion that the UPA has enacted the legislation only to gain political mileage and not with any commitment to the need to provide nutritious food to the low-income groups.” “The government has tacitly accepted the contention that the food subsidy is a “market distorting subsidy.” In other words, when Parliament has provided a permanent statutory foundation for food security as a fundamental right, the UPA executive has bowed down before WTO and introduced a time limitation, a concept not envisaged by Parliament,” Mr. Sarma said. He added: “It is ironical that India should initially lead 46 developing countries in the WTO to press the argument that the concept of food security be outside WTO protocols on free trade but quietly cave in to pressures exerted to discard the argument overnight.” India heads the G-33 group of 46 developing nations which is seeking amendments to the WTO Agreement on Agriculture to allow procurement of food grains from marginal and subsistence farmers. Grains procured to fight hunger should not be included under WTO-restricted subsidies, the group says. The agreement allows “market distorting subsidies” to be restricted to 10 per cent of the total production. India apprehends that its recently-enacted food subsidy law which provides for cheap food grains to nearly two-thirds of the population could push food subsidy beyond the 10 per cent. Therefore, barely weeks ahead of the WTO’s ninth ministerial in Bali in December, it has accepted a four-year “peace clause” against the 8 to 9 years sought by G-33. Source : The Hindu
Posted on: Thu, 21 Nov 2013 05:18:19 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015