Agriculture Minister Mishra threatens to quit Cabinet
The six-month-old Inder Kumar Gujral ministry suffered a jolt on Friday with Agriculture Minister Chaturanan Mishra threatening to quit the Cabinet.
Mishra objected to the prime minister's ''public criticism of non-performance'' against his agriculture ministry.
The Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs recently stirred a hornet's nest, when its quarterly performance evaluation of various ministries and departments listed Mishra's portfolio for non-performance.
The panel and the prime minister had taken a ''serious view'' of
the agricultural co-operation and animal husbandry departments utilising less than five per cent of the funds allocated to them during the first quarter of 1997-98.
An irate Mishra dashed off a letter to Gujral on Friday seeking his permission to quit the Cabinet and to ask the Communist Party of India to nominate another more capable person in his place. He said he was releasing the letter to the media since everything had been made public.
Earlier, he had written to the finance ministry holding it responsible for adopting ''anti-farmer policies'' and preventing his
ministry from utilising funds.
The senior CPI leader, who has served as the agriculture
minister ever since the United Front government took over in June 1996, took serious exception to the prime minister expressing public dissatisfaction over his performance. According to Mishra, facts spoke otherwise.
In his letter to the prime minister on Friday with a copy marked
to CPI general secretary A B Bardhan, Mishra said, ''If you were
not satisfied, you (Gujral) should have told me about this instead of
speaking through the media.''
Mishra, in his letter to the finance ministry, had squarely
blamed it for posing hurdles in the utilisation of funds and
virtually vetoing the agricultural ministry's proposals.
The minister, a Rajya Sabha member from Bihar, said under his
leadership the country had achieved a record foodgrain production of
198.7 million tonnes besides a big breakthrough in cross-breed fish
production.
The chief ministers of major states including West Bengal, Madhya Pradesh and Punjab, he said, were happy with his ministry's performance.
The controversy began with Mishra's letter to Finance
Minister Palaniappan Chidambaram. Criticising the latter ministry's ''anti-farmer
policy'', Mishra said the agriculture ministry was not being allowed to utilise its funds.
He listed six schemes of his ministry, including a pilot
project for crop insurance which had been scuttled by the finance
ministry despite the Cabinet's approval. He claimed
he had brought this aspect to the prime minister's notice
several times.
Mishra also said that his ministry spent 98 per cent
of the allotted funds last year. The agriculture ministry, he said, can spend
money only through the states and only when the utilisation
report of the previous year was submitted. The financial position ofa large number of states was so bad that they could not give
matching funds needed for the scheme, he added.
''I have earlier stated that this condition of matching grants be waived and the Centre spend its share without matching grants as otherwise the poor states are getting poorer every day. But the finance ministry did
not agree,'' Mishra said.
He gave some ''concrete'' examples of the finance ministry's ''anti-farmer policy'':
1. A pilot project of crop insurance was sanctioned by the
Cabinet and announced in Parliament. But the finance minister vetoed it and hence nearly Rs 1 billion could not be spent.
2. During H D Deve Gowda's tenure as prime minister, ''you also agreed'' to allot funds for having one Krishi Vigyan Kendra in each district. But again the finance ministry vetoed the proposal.
3. Over a million tonnes of potato rotted as many states could not agree to the market intervention scheme. ''I wanted the Centre to intervene. But the finance ministry said that there was no scheme to
help the farmers when there is overproduction. I wanted a new
scheme, but your ministry again vetoed it, saying that no new scheme
can be sanctioned,'' he said.
4. The agriculture ministry decided to take the green revolution to
poor states like Assam, Bihar, Himachal Pradesh and Orissa and submitted a proposal for a minimum fund of Rs 2.5 billion for tubewells and irrigation in these areas. But again the finance ministry vetoed it.
5. Due to the Centre's ''wrong policy'', loanee farmers could not pay the interest on waived loans. As a result, ''in the vast region of the country the co-operatives have collapsed. I have several times asked for waiving the interest. But you did not give a paisa for revamping these cooperatives though you did give several thousand millions of rupees to revamp the commercial banks. All these have been brought to the notice of the prime minister several times.''
6. "As for the present Budget, this government came in April.
Budget was passed in May and allotments given in June and then in
June alone the quarter ended. How do you expect the money to be
spent? Why did your ministry rush to the media?'' Mishra asked.
''Despite this, since I am interested in spending the funds on
time, I asked my ministry to give their comments both on agriculture as well as animal husbandry and dairying,'' Mishra
said.
Gujral, who is in Punjab, spoke to Mishra.
An official spokesman said Gujral clarified to Mishra
that his observations at the last Cabinet meeting about the low
investment of budget plan expenditure in all sectors was in
general and did not refer to any particular ministry.
He, however, did not elaborate on the nature of talks the
prime minister had with Mishra. He also refused to comment
whether Gujral had persuaded Mishra to withdraw his offer to
resign.
Expressing satisfaction with his telephonic chat with Gujral, Mishra said he would retract his offer only if the prime minister personally clarified on his performance as a minister. ''The retraction would not obliterate my basic differences with the finance ministry,'' he said. ''Certain policies should be changed.''
Reacting to the development, the CPI said it would not withdraw from the Gujral ministry. Sources said the threat is intended to speed up the implentation of the UF's Common Minimum Programme.
UNI
|
