Govt proposes ban on 27 pesticides; industry terms it as anti-generics move
20 May 2020
1
The government proposes to ban 27 pesticides/insecticides, including Carbendazim and Monocrotophos, which are widely used by the farmers across the country, as part of agri-marketing reforms enunciated in the stimulus package announced by finance minister Nirmala Sitaraman.
A draft order - Banning of Insecticides Order 2020 – issued by the ministry of agriculture and farmers’ welfare on Monday lists 27 pesticides for the proposed ban and gives 45 days for the industry and companies manufacturing such chemicals to file their objections, if any.
The ministry’s order prohibits import, manufacture, sale, transport, distribution and use of pesticides/insecticides, including Acephate, Atrazine, Benfuracarb, Butachlor, Captan, Carbofuran, Chlorpyriphos, 2,4-D, Deltamethrin, Dicofol, Dimethoate, Dinocap, Diuron, Malathion, Mancozeb, Methomyl, Oxyfluorfen, Pendimethalin, Quinalphos and Sulfosulfuron
The pesticides industry sees the government’s order as a move against the generic pesticides industry, in which India has a lead, under pressure from the international cartel.
Report citing Rajesh Aggarwal, managing director of Insecticides India Ltd, said the industry is going to challenge the order. “We are going to oppose the order and submit the details of all the data, which has been generated by the industry,” he was quoted as saying.
“There is strong pressure in the international market that the generics have to go. India has a strong presence in the generics,” he added said.
According to Aggarwal, if the ban is implemented, it would not only hurt farmers, but also exports. The domestic pesticide market is estimated at Rs19,000 crore, while exports are pegged at Rs21,000 crore. The list of chemicals account for about a fifth of the total industry, Aggarwal said.
Also, they point out that banning local production and use of affordable chemicals would go against the very basis of `Make In India’ and `Atmanirbhara Bharat’ as it would lead to brand monopoly, which would push up cost of cultivation for farmers.
