Saturday, 7 February 2015 00:00
-
- {{hitsCtrl.values.hits}}
SRI LANKA’S politics have started to undergo a massive change. It aims to be more inclusive and sustainable in terms of policies and perhaps nowhere is that needed more than in the Seed Act.
A deeply-contentious issue that could affect as much as 70% of Sri Lanka’s population linked to agriculture it was kicked off under much criticism by the previous Government but never passed. Its fate remains to be seen.
The main grouse with the proposed Seed Act is that it centralises the production and distribution of seeds under the Department of Agriculture. Grassroots farmers’ organisations in Sri Lanka fear this will undermine farmers’ rights and threaten biodiversity. Reluctance by the Government to have open and inclusive discussions on the matter has also eroded confidence.
The draft ‘Seed and Planting Material Act’ under consideration by the Government will, campaigners say, benefit the seed industry, controlled by big transnational corporations at the expense of the country’s small-scale farmers who are the mainstay of the rural economy.
The new law will require, among other things, the compulsory registration of farmers and certification of all seed and planting material in Sri Lanka by a Seed Certification Service to be run by the Department of Agriculture.
A ‘Director in Charge’ will exercise the exclusive right to certify seed and planting material, with the department maintaining and publishing a list of producers and suppliers of certified seed and planting materials. The new law, accused by critics as being “draconian”, provides for officials to raid farmers’ premises to enforce compliance.
It says that no person shall “import, export, sell, offer to sell, dispose in any manner or supply or exchange with commercial intention seed and planting materials except in accordance with the provisions of this Act”, a line which has incensed smallholder famers who often exchange seeds with neighbours on a non-commercial level. The resentment is made worse by limited accurate knowledge of the proposed Act and transparent policy engagement.
The ‘behind closed doors’ approach of the Government has also contributed to fears over biodiversity, already limited by State agriculture programs. Some farmers are returning to indigenous types of rice cultivation due to climate conditions and higher profit margins but they worry a Seed Act will allow for huge corporations to take over, ultimately weeding out local rice varieties.
The typical socialist ideology expounded for decades is also playing a strong role with discourse around the Seed Act not being clearly articulated on market terms. Around the world organisations are battling with Seed Acts that activists say are trying to shut out smallholder farmers. Canada for example is going through a somewhat similar situation while India’s Seed Bill, introduced in 2005, faced severe condemnation along the same lines.
When dabbling with legislation such as the Seed Act, which will impact the livelihoods of thousands of people, any Government has a gargantuan responsibility to be as inclusive and transparent as possible. Over to you Mr. President.
