Raju Shetti interview: ‘Farmers not MVA’s priority, SSS also against its land acquisition policy’

To determine a roadmap for the organisation. High on the agenda is the discussion and adoption of a proposal on whether the SSS should continue or break the alliance with the MVA government in Maharashtra. A formal decision will be taken at the meeting.

How are party leaders and workers viewing the situation?

A majority of the party office-bearers and workers are of the view that continuing with the MVA is detrimental to their political image. The SSS is committed to championing the cause of farmers across the state. The general perception in the party is we should end the alliance and reassert our independent identity as a party of, and for, farmers.

What triggered the SSS to reconsider its ties with the MVA?

In 2019, when the SSS pledged its support to the MVA, it was based on a Common Minimum Programme. The MVA projected itself as a pro-farmer government. After two years, almost all the policies and programmes that were promised remained unaccomplished. The farmers and the agriculture sector are not priorities for the MVA government. This is very unfortunate, we feel let down.

Are differences over land acquisition the primary reason for the conflict?

Yes, we have serious differences over the MVA’s land acquisition policy because it goes against farmers’ interests. Maharashtra was among the states that used to pay farmers five times the market rate for land acquired for national or state projects. Last year, the MVA reduced the rate of land acquired for state and national highways, and other projects by 20 per cent. Secondly, the MVA’s decision exposed its double standards. In 2015, the Congress and the NCP had vehemently opposed the Modi government’s attempt to dilute the 2013 Land Acquisition Bill, terming it anti-farmer. The Shiv Sena, which was an ally of the BJP at the time, also opposed the Bill. Today, the Shiv Sena, the Congress, and the NCP are coalition partners, and they are pushing through land-acquisition reforms that go against farmers’ interests. It is not acceptable to the SSS. Our protest against the MVA’s land acquisition policy will continue.

But the MVA has always taken a stand for sugarcane farmers.

It is misleading. If they were so concerned about sugarcane cultivators, they would not have withheld their payments for one year. The SSS wants full payment to farmers in one instalment within 14 days, which is the current norm, and not two or three instalments that the Centre and the state are pushing. When the Niti Aayog mooted the proposal of a Fair Remuneration Price (FRP) payment to cane farmers in two instalments for discussion, the MVA was the first state government to give its consent and implement it immediately. As per its norms, it is mandatory to make full FRP payments to farmers within 14 days of procuring sugarcane.

How do you explain the MVA’s wine policy to help farmers?

Using farmers as a pretext, MVA leaders have promoted their own businesses. The policy was to promote wine production, which was in surplus, through supermarkets and walk-in shops. The policy was economics-driven and not for the upliftment of farmers. The decision has, in fact, sullied the image of farmers. In the rural belt, farmers are against wine policy and they are hurt.

Have you turned against the MVA as you did not get to become a Member of Legislative Council (MLC)?

Look, I am a president of a political party. We work with and for farmers. Membership of the state legislative council means nothing to me. I have represented both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha in the past. I have always retained my independence and political identity.

Are you looking to realign with the BJP for the 2024 Lok Sabha polls?

The SSS is not going to ally with the BJP. The current mood in the party is that we should remain neutral. We should have our own roadmap. We should voice the challenges confronting farmers aggressively throughout Maharashtra. We are not worried about electoral outcomes in the state or the Centre in the 2024 elections.

How do you respond to accusations of political opportunism?

It is ridiculous. I have never done a political bargain for myself. When it comes to the cause of farmers, we have never compromised. Or else what explains the series of agitations in the last two years even after remaining in the MVA. In 2014, when I was with the NDA, I frequently raised farmers’ issues inside Parliament as well in public forums. Unfortunately, the MVA never consulted us on major policies related to farmers.

To cite an example, when the Sugar Price Control Committee was reconstituted the MVA neither bothered to take me into confidence nor discussed who should represent farmers. All decisions were taken suo moto. We were kept away as they did not want anybody questioning their actions.

In the past, former Chief Minister Prithviraj Chavan of the Congress and the BJP’s Devendra Fadnavis held wider consultations with several farmers’ organisations, including the SSS. They also gave SSS representation in the committee. Another example is when we organised the ‘Panchganga Parikrama Yatra’ to demand compensation for flood-hit farmers, CM Uddhav Thackeray promised a package for farmers higher than the 2019 one. The promise has remained only on paper. The Rs 50,000 incentive under loan waiver to farmers who regularly repaid crop loans is another unfulfilled promise.