Sir, the food minister has tried to point out that sufficient attention must be paid to the recommendations of such an important body as the tariff commission. Is the government prepared to implement all the recommendations of the tariff commission even in the case of the sugar industry? Is it not a fact, Sir, that the tariff commission recommended that the incentive money that accrued on account of the reduction in excise duty should be distributed between the cane-growers and the mill owners-30 percent to the factory owners and 70 percent to the growers and our government, instead of accepting that recommendation, is contemplating to reserve 25 percent for rehabilitation of the factory owners and then to distribute the rest between the two. The tariff commission, in one of its reports, doubted the feasibility and the advisability of linking price with recovery. The central government not only ignored the advice of the tariff commission but they have also ignored the recommendations of the governments of Bihar and Uttar Pradesh in this matter. Our food minister claims to be a friend of the peasant and it is not possible really, Sir, for anyone to be in the government of India being mostly composed of peasants-to remain there, unless he claims to be a friend of the peasant, it is not possible for me, Sir, to say what his real intentions are, but I must submit, Sir, that his policies, at least, in recent times, have been anti-peasant. I would only invite attention to a law recently passed by parliament under his guidance wherein an attempt is made to regulate the curshing of sugarcane. I will not go into the details of the agricultural production during the first two years of the Tenth Plan, but I will refer to some other salient features.
