Saturday, May 28, 2022

PMB to adversely impact agrochemical industry

By Y V Phani Raj

Published: Published Date - 11:13 PM, Tue - 1 December 20

STRUGGLING SPACE: Although pesticides are inevitable to protect crop yields, per hectare pesticide use is much lower in India compared to several other countries. Photo: Agencies The bill also acts against the goal of doubling farmers’ income, say experts

Hyderabad: The Pesticides Management Bill 2020 (PMB) was introduced in the Rajya Sabha on 23 March to replace the Insecticides Act 1968 that currently governs the registration, manufacturing, export, sale and use of pesticides in India. The agrochemical industry says while the PMB is noble in intent, there are several lacunae that could end up hurting the interests of farmers. In its present form, the bill acts against the Centre’s goal of doubling farmers’ income by 2022.

The new bill may come up for discussion in the next session of Parliament. Though the bill includes specific refinements, there are concerns such as the need for a time-bound, predictable, stable, and transparent process for registration of products, which need to be addressed immediately by the government before the bill is passed.

Although pesticides are inevitable to protect crop yields, per hectare pesticide use is much lower in India compared to several other countries. The nation uses an average of 0.5 kg per ha of pesticide compared to 7 kg per ha in the US, 2.5 kg in Europe, 12 kg in Japan and 6.6 kg in Korea. Currently, there are around 1,175 pesticide molecules of both chemical and biological origins used in the world, out of which only 292 molecules are registered for use in India.

R G Agarwal Group, chairman, Dhanuka Agritech, told Telangana Today, “The PMB-2020 has blatantly absented the provision for limitation of time for registration of a new molecule and has also failed to rule in for a strict adherence to the same. The bill has further overlooked incorporating a clause to protect data, for a minimum five years or more for new molecules.”

There is a need for increased surveillance of pest population & environmental conditions, early warning systems (such as Desert Locust Information Service), regional cooperation among countries, environmentally-sound pest control systems and crises response.

Binod Anand, Advisor to Dhanuka Group, said, “The Registration Committee (RC) has powers to subjectively review the registration of a pesticide and then suspend, cancel or even ban its usage without any scientific evaluation. This can disrupt farmers’ functioning and productivity. It calls for an independent regulator to oversee the RC’s decisions in safeguarding the interests of farmers, the crop protection industry and India’s food security goals.”

Section 23 of the Bill provides for re-registration of pesticides already registered under the erstwhile 1968 Act. PMB mandates that such registrations will only be valid for two years after the Bill comes into force. During this timeframe, the manufacturer needs to apply and obtain fresh registration from the RC, only then can they manufacture and sell the product beyond two years.

Anand added, “The bill should provide that each registration granted under the 1968 Act will be deemed to be approved under PMB without the limited two-year timeframe.”

Further, according to Dr KC Ravi, chief sustainability officer, Syngenta, “The provisions such as criminalisation of offences, regulatory provisions like reregistration’s will affect ease of doing business as well as restrict new molecule introductions so necessary for the farmers in an extremely complex environment and pest pressures.”

PMB