What is CPI(M)’s position on the recent decision of the government to regulate prices and royalty of Bt cotton seeds and the response of MNC agribusinesses like Monsanto?

G Srinivasan, Khammam

CPI(M) holds  that new technologies should not lead to a monopoly of global MNCs over any agricultural inputs including seeds. CPI(M) demands a Seed Bill that will guarantee right of access to affordable, quality seeds and planting material to farmers through public sector addressing bio-safety concerns. Price control and regulation of seed prices through a statutory body must ensure affordable prices. A decade ago on a petition filed by Andhra Pradesh Rythu Sangham (affiliated to AIKS) the MRTPC indicted Monsanto for engaging in "restrictive and monopolistic trade practices" and on AP government petition directed Monsanto to reduce the trait value it was unfairly charging from the farmers – nine times more than the farmers in the United States.

Now there is lot of hype that agriculture ministry issued Cotton Seeds Price (Control) Order, 2015 to regulate prices and royalty under Essential Commodities Act. Royalty payable to Monsanto has been reduced by 74 percent from Rs 163 per packet to Rs 43 and maximum sale price of Bollgard II cottonseeds have been reduced to Rs 800 (per 450gm packet) from Rs 830-1,000 earlier, claims the government. At a time when Bollgard technology is facing redundancy with periodic release of costlier variants, government should have done away with all royalties and fixed a liability clause for compensating crop losses due to failure to deliver on its promises of pest resistance and yield enhancement. According to National Seed Association of India, Monsanto Mahyco Biotech (India) Ltd (MMBL) collected Rs 4,479 crore in royalty between 2005-06 and 2014-15 accumulating profits without any patent on its technology for most part of its presence in India. It could be much more given that in 2015, Monsanto sold more than 41 million Bt cottonseed packets earning royalties of Rs 650 crores ($97 million).

Monsanto’s right to royalty for infinite time ensuring inexhaustible profits remains. The claim that it will ensure uniformity in seed prices across states is far-fetched as black-marketing and jacking up of prices by traders continue unchecked. It is merely eyewash rather than real concern for farmers. In Maharashtra, reduction in prices for farmers is merely Rs 30 per packet. Whether even this benefit will be actually transferred depends on stringent regulation of seed companies and traders. This step is at the bidding of Indian seed majors. It comes at a time when there is an intense battle between Monsanto and Indian seed monopolies over payment of royalty for using Bollgard technology. MMBL has dragged eight seed firms for non-payment of about Rs 400 crore royalties for using its technology and for breach of contract. NSAI has sought refund of over Rs 1,300 crore paid as royalty to MMBL in last five years arguing that the seed firms paid this amount over and above state government stipulated trait value. MNCs led by Monsanto and some Indian outfits quit the NSAI and formed the Federation of Seed Industry of India (FSII). It is a struggle to garner the largest revenues from India’s Rs 15,000 crore seed industry and also aimed at putting pressure to go slow on the cotton seed price regulation issue.

Monsanto is threatening to “re-evaluate every aspect” of its position in India and re-think about bringing new technologies in a regulatory environment that is “arbitrary and innovation stifling”. It has used similar tactics in Argentina earlier where it screened soyabean sold by farmers to check if its technology was used and enforced a royalty of $15 per tonne if its traits were found.  When Argentina made government authorisation mandatory for any such grain inspection, Monsanto threatened to stop launching new seed technologies. In Argentina as well as in India, the governments climbed down from their position. Indian government under pressure from MNCs and also Indian seed companies withdrew within five days the Licensing and Formats for GM Technology Agreement Guidelines issued on May 18, 2016. This was calling for standard format with stipulations when finalising GM trait licensing agreement between licensors and licensees. MMBL has gone to court to quash certain provisions in the Price Control Order, specifically those allowing the centre to determine royalty fees.

Monsanto uses Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) such as patents and Plant Variety Protection to exercise total stranglehold over its proprietary seeds and traits. Bayer has now taken-over Monsanto and there is speculation that in addition to this takeover for $66 billion, this will lead to an unprecedented global consolidation of the monopoly over agricultural inputs and narrow choices for farmers. Indian government if it is serious about fighting monopolies has to ensure review and withdrawal from the unequal TRIPS Agreement. It should remove patents on all life forms, especially seeds which are primarily products of nature selected and nurtured over generations by farmers. Claiming ownership for eternity by making changes goes against the idea of community ownership of seeds and is ethically untenable. It should bring a pro-farmer seed legislation which will regulate monopolies, ensure price control and protect the right of the farmers to grow, sow, re-sow, save, use, exchange, share or sell their farm seeds and planting material and fix liability for crop losses as well as blacklist erring companies.