Survey across country to work out new formula for sharing sale proceeds between small growers and bought-leaf factories

Writes : Avijit Sinha

The Tea Board of India has engaged a private consultancy to conduct a survey across the country to work out a new formula for the sharing of sale proceeds between small growers and bought-leaf factories (BLFs).

Rajanigandha Seal Naskar, the controller of licensing at the Board, issued a circular on June 19, saying the consultancy would conduct the survey in all tea-producing districts in India.

People who cultivate tea on not more than 10 hectares of land are defined as small growers. Unlike tea estate owners, small growers don't have their own factories for processing tea leaves. So, BLFs — standalone factories — procure tea leaves from growers, process the same and sell the processed tea.

In Bengal, the grower gets 52 per cent of the proceeds, while the remaining 48 per cent goes to the BLF as of now.

Bijoygopal Chakraborty, the president of the Confederation of Indian Small Tea Growers Associations, said the formula had been adopted along the lines of the system in Sri Lanka.

“However, it didn’t work here. In Sri Lanka, the entire produce is auctioned off. Only around 42 per cent of the tea produced in the small tea sector of our country reaches auction centres. The remaining portion is sold in private and there is a lack of transparency. As a result, we growers receive lower prices, which at times don’t even cover our cost of production,” he said.

In India, the small tea sector contributes around half of the total production.

Sources in the Tea Board said the consultancy had been asked to make field visits and speak to small growers, BLF owners, tea research associations, tea planters associations and other stakeholders in major tea-producing states like Assam, Bengal, Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Tripura.

“They will also conduct virtual interactions with stakeholders in some other states where a comparatively lesser amount of tea is produced. The firm has been asked to submit a comprehensive report on the price-sharing formula within six months,” said a source.

A team from the firm has reached Bengal and will speak to the stakeholders in Jalpaiguri, Siliguri, Darjeeling and Islampur. They will also visit plantations and BLFs, said sources.

A veteran grower based in Siliguri said there had been a demand for quite some time that the Tea Board rework the price-sharing formula.

“We welcome the initiative. During the team’s visit, we will provide details to them to prove that to produce 1kg of green tea leaves, the minimum cost is Rs 18.52. In many cases, we have to sell the same at Rs 15 or Rs 16 a kilo,” he said.

source: The Telegraph

Bengal panchayat elections: List of ‘sensitive’ booths not given, says BSF official; Rajiva Sinha denies allegations

Writes : Kinsuk Basu

The BSF coordinator for the deployment of central forces for Saturday’s Bengal panchayat elections never received a list of the sensitive booths from the state election commission despite several reminders, a BSF official has claimed, but the state poll panel chief called this a “wrong allegation”.

“We have been seeking for (sic) the list of sensitive booths from the state election commission since July 5 through several letters,” BSF deputy inspector-general S.S. Guleria was quoted as saying in an interview with ANI on Sunday. The BSF inspector-general was the coordinator for the central forces.

“We held a few coordination meetings. In a reply to one of our letters, we were informed that out of a total of 61,636 polling booths, 4,834 were sensitive but no details about them were provided,” Guleria said.

State election commission head Rajiva Sinha told The Telegraph: “Wrong allegation. List of sensitive polling stations was provided to them by DM/ SP (district magistrates and superintendents of police) as was decided in the meetings with them.

“The same was done with state armed police (Bengal). We provided the numbers district-wise. It is recorded in our communication with IG BSF also. They confirmed too. If this was not the case, how come they placed their force at every sensitive polling station?”

The central forces had largely been invisible amid the violence on Saturday that claimed 18 lives, a trend highlighted by both the ruling Trinamul Congress and the Opposition parties. Guleria’s comments were clearly aimed at deflecting the blame for the mayhem on the state poll panel and the Bengal administration.

“We were told that district magistrates and police superintendents at the ground level will inform us about the location of these sensitive booths,” he said.

“The monitoring about deployment of forces in sensitive booths that should have happened from the level of the force coordinator did not take place.”

Guleria suggested that had the coordinator been provided with the list of sensitive booths, the central forces could have reached them earlier and carried out proper area domination.

“There was no casualty in places where the central forces remained deployed. In one or two places where hooligans tried to disrupt, the forces handled the situation very professionally,” Guleria said.

“We had to fire two rounds in the air at one place and at another a stun grenade had to be used to disperse the crowd. The BSF captured five persons in a booth when they were trying to capture it and handed them over to the state police.”

A senior IPS officer questioned the state poll panel’s assessment of the number of sensitive polling stations.

About 9.9 percent of the 5,438 booths in Murshidabad were identified as vulnerable (sensitive). The district witnessed five deaths on Saturday.

Of Howrah’s 3,031 polling stations, 353 were marked vulnerable while 317 of Cooch Behar’s 2,385 polling stations were so identified. Both districts witnessed widespread violence and malpractice.

“There was some error in the way booths were assessed for their vulnerabilities. It can’t be based on the records from the previous elections alone,” the IPS officer said, seeking anonymity.

“There are several other considerations, including the location of a booth and the political situation.

“The forces were deployed at the (officially identified) vulnerable booths on Saturday but since there was an error in assessment, the results did not show.”

Sinha, however, told this newspaper: “In any case, with the decision of hon’ble (high) court there was no distinction between sensitive and non-sensitive booths. All booths were to be provided with CAPF (central armed police forces). Later on, hon’ble court talked about feasibility (of such a measure). Still, all sensitive booths were provided with CAPF first.”

The state election commission had demanded 822 companies of central forces from the Union home ministry. By 11am on Saturday, 649 companies had reached the state.

A team of 73 Punjab police personnel had reached Bhangar around 4pm, by when polling across most of the booths in this politically volatile pocket had been over.

State Congress president Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury alleged on Sunday that the Centre had helped the ruling Trinamul by ensuring the central forces were deployed late and left inactive.

“It was part of an understanding between Didi and the Centre — the way the central forces were deployed gave Trinamul an edge in the polls,” Chowdhury said. “Central forces reaching at noon on polling day! The state BJP leaders should rise in protest.”

The state BJP has accused the Bengal government and the state poll panel chief of deliberately keeping the central forces away from the action. Suvendu Adhikari, leader of the Opposition, said the Bengal BJP would make sure that “this is the last election under the leadership of Mamata Banerjee” in Bengal.

Trinamul said the poll violence was the result of provocation by the Opposition and the governor, whom it accused of acting as a BJP spokesperson.

“Some incidents have occurred. There were provocations from different corners by the Opposition and the most respectable governor, who acted as the BJP’s spokesperson, and as a result these incidents took place,” Trinamul leader and minister Chandrima Bhattacharya said. “All deaths are tragic but Trinamul Congress workers and candidates have been victims too.”

Via : The Telegraph

Death stench over Bengal panchayat polls: 18 killed in clashes, question mark on central forces

Writes : Meghdeep Bhattacharyya

Bengal on Saturday reaffirmed its reputation as the country’s most politically violent state, reporting at least 18 deaths on the day of the panchayat elections after a body count of 22 in the run-up to the vote.

Seventeen of the dead, including seven who died on Saturday, were from the Trinamul Congress, a point the ruling party emphasised as it sought to deflect most of the blame for the bloodshed on the Oppositio

Five years ago, at least 19 people had died on polling day – even with 34 per cent of the seats uncontested – after 14 had been killed during the campaign.

According to figures that chief minister Mamata Banerjee had cited repeatedly during the campaign this time, at least 39 deaths had been witnessed during the 2013 panchayat election process, 36 in 2008 and 70 in 2003.

The rampant violence on Saturday that left scores of people grievously injured was accompanied with allegations of various kinds of electoral malpractice. From polling personnel to voters, many people across the 22 districts that voted were seen weeping in sheer helplessness in the face of intimidation and obstruction.

Yet, a healthy 66.28 per cent turnout had been recorded till 5pm. With lakhs among the total 5.67 crore registered voters still in queue at the time, the final figure is expected to rise substantially.

The lack of security in and around the polling booths stood out despite the deployment of 660-odd companies of central forces (against the allotment of 822 companies).

The discourse in the run-up to the elections had been that the central forces, if somehow deployed, would be a single-pill cure to most, if not all, of the problems and ensure peaceful elections.

In reality, they were barely visible despite the judiciary’s orders and the assurances from the BJP-led Union government.

Numerous booths across swathes of North and South 24-Parganas, Malda, Murshidabad, Cooch Behar and East Midnapore that were supposed to receive security cover from the central forces got none.

The crucial confidence-building activities that the central forces perform during elections, such as area domination, were virtually non-existent.

The central forces fiasco prompted the Congress and the CPM to allege a “setting” between Mamata and Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

The BJP insisted that the utilisation of the central forces was completely in the hands of poll panel chief Rajiva Sinha and the state government, and that they had made sure the troops were rendered ineffective.

"State poll panel chief Rajiva Sinha did not do anything to contain the violence.... He should be held responsible for all the deaths," said leader of the Opposition Suvendu Adhikari of the BJP.

Adhikari visited the state election commission in the evening and put a lock on the office gate.

Although the Opposition was united in blaming Trinamul for all the trouble, a feature of the day was the so-called “resistance”, as part of which the BJP, Congress and the CPM gave back as good as they got in their pockets of strength across north and south Bengal.

The last panchayat election in Bengal to witness a similar trend was the one of 2008, when the then ruling Left Front was handed out this brand of “resistance” by an ascendant Trinamul.

The Congress and the CPM slammed Trinamul. “This valley of death is not my land…. Even if half or more of them (the dead) were with Trinamul, are those deaths not utterly regrettable? What have we been reduced to?” asked CPM central committee member Sujan Chakraborty.

State Congress chief Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury saidBengal had witnessed “mayhem”.

The BJP alleged a “total collapse of law and order” in Bengal and demanded President’s rule. The party has decided to raise the poll violence before the high court on Tuesday.

“This state government cannot be allowed to continue,” state BJP spokesperson Samik Bhattacharya, said.

Trinamul tried to clear its name by highlighting its own body count, playing down the scale of violence, and blaming the Opposition and the central forces. However, the Opposition blamed the Trinamul deaths on alleged infighting.

“There are 14 districts where the entire election procedure has been smooth. Major incidents of violence have occurred in nine booths, and minor incidents in 60-odd booths,” Trinamul state general secretary Kunal Ghosh said.

“The total number of booths across the state is 61,539. So the percentage works out to 0.00097.”

If 69 booths were affected by violence among 61,539, the percentage comes to 0.11.

Ghosh flagged alleged instances of malpractice and violence by the BJP, Congress and the CPM in Cooch Behar, North 24-Parganas, Nadia, Malda, Murshidabad and North Dinajpur, and accused them of trying to malign Bengal.

“The question worth raising is, where were the central forces, which the Opposition had demanded, and why couldn’t they control the violence?” he said.

“The Opposition parties have realised that they lack the support of the public and are therefore making absurd statements. This is a classic case of sour grapes.”

A political scientist who teaches at a state-run university said that none of what took place during the campaign or polling was out of character for Bengal.

“A peaceful election in Bengal, especially under the state’s poll panel and administrative machinery – irrespective of which party is in power – remains a pipedream even in 2023,” he said.

“It’s embarrassing and rather tragic for an otherwise largely gifted and liberal people. Regrettably, this is unlikely to change drastically in the foreseeable future.”

source : The Telegraph