The "free power scheme" is in vogue for longtime now in TamilNadu. In AP, it was brought back by YSR when he became the chief minister. In Punjab , Akali Dal promises free power back to farmers when it comes back to "power". In MP, restoration of free power scheme during the last Assembly Elections invoked the ire of High Court. PrimeMinister Manmohan Singh is always opposed to the free power. Why this scheme is such an explosive and politically sensitive issue?
In general, the tendency is to put the farmers in the poor light, because they are seeking something "free" and when it is withdrawn they are protesting against it. To be fair to the farmers, they are one of the simple, hardworking and honorable class of people you can find anywhere. And like any honorable people they do feel hurt if they are branded as someone who wants everything free.
Majority of the farmers depend either on the canal water (water from dams, tanks and rivers - called as command area) or the ground water (open wells, deep bore wells - called as dry land) for the irrigation. The general opinion was that the cost of cultivation of a dry land farmer was much higher than that of a command area farmer.
Thanks to the successive monsoon failures, the ground water table has gone down. As a result, farmers have to dig up to 1,000 ft (atleast in TN) to get water. In effect, most farmers will have pumpsets of five to ten horsepower. So the overall cost of the cultivation increases. In fact, even if there is a bumper crop for the farmer, especially the small and marginal ones will not benefit due to the fall in prices of his produce and also of the increased input costs.
While the canal water is subsidised by the Govt.(meaning there is a cost involved in the management and distribution of the canal water - which is not passed on to the farmers) the well water used for irrigation was not subsidised. So the argument is - power supply to agricultural pump sets should be free.
The strong feeling among the farmers community is to have the subsidy continued. The other points they put forward in favor of their opinion:
1. The power supply to the farmers is only free for the irrigation purposes and not for the household uses.
2. Power supply is used for ground water tapping and it has helped to cultivate waste lands and drought-hit areas to the benefit of the country.
3. If farmers do not get subsidy in any form, while their counterparts in foreign countries are getting it, how will they be able to compete?
4. The loss to SEB's (State Electricity Boards) is not due the free power scheme (as projected in certain circles) but mainly due to the transmission loss and power theft.
5. The non-farming electricity users (household, industries) continue to get all sorts of subsidies why should we alone have to bear the brunt.
2. Power supply is used for ground water tapping and it has helped to cultivate waste lands and drought-hit areas to the benefit of the country.
3. If farmers do not get subsidy in any form, while their counterparts in foreign countries are getting it, how will they be able to compete?
4. The loss to SEB's (State Electricity Boards) is not due the free power scheme (as projected in certain circles) but mainly due to the transmission loss and power theft.
5. The non-farming electricity users (household, industries) continue to get all sorts of subsidies why should we alone have to bear the brunt.
I am not articulating the other side of the argument as it is well known ........(nothing should be free, atleast cost should be borne, .....et all)
My personal opinion and comments are:
1. India
2. Serious thoughts should be given on Rural Economics - the unbridled dog-eat-dog Market Economics is not going to help the farmers.
3. Even in advanced countries (US included) farmers are heavily subsidised and protected. So there is nothing wrong if we have to protect our farmers.
4. Instead of absolute free power - nominal charge for farmers can be brought in.
5. Income tax for rich farmers can be introduced. The income generated can be used to offset against the loss incurred in the free power. (Income tax for farmers is another explosive issue with its own problems ...)
Overall, we require a far more understanding and empathy to handle this issue instead of blind rhetorics.
2. Serious thoughts should be given on Rural Economics - the unbridled dog-eat-dog Market Economics is not going to help the farmers.
3. Even in advanced countries (US included) farmers are heavily subsidised and protected. So there is nothing wrong if we have to protect our farmers.
4. Instead of absolute free power - nominal charge for farmers can be brought in.
5. Income tax for rich farmers can be introduced. The income generated can be used to offset against the loss incurred in the free power. (Income tax for farmers is another explosive issue with its own problems ...)
Overall, we require a far more understanding and empathy to handle this issue instead of blind rhetorics.
