nrj
Ambassador
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2009
- Messages
- 9,658
- Likes
- 3,911
FDI in Multi Brand Retail Sector - Discussion
- Thread starter nrj
- Start date
nrj
Ambassador
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2009
- Messages
- 9,658
- Likes
- 3,911
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2009
- Messages
- 43,132
- Likes
- 23,835
I heard Vandana Shiva on Headlines Today.
What she said was real scary.
If someone can fish that panel discussion out, it would be worth it since she spoke with statistics which none could refute.
She proved that small time farmers were wiped out in the West.
One bloke who has done some study tried to prove that Singapore is doing well with this Retail Giants. I wish I was there on the panel to inform this idiot that Singapore produces nothing. Everything is imported!!
What she said was real scary.
If someone can fish that panel discussion out, it would be worth it since she spoke with statistics which none could refute.
She proved that small time farmers were wiped out in the West.
One bloke who has done some study tried to prove that Singapore is doing well with this Retail Giants. I wish I was there on the panel to inform this idiot that Singapore produces nothing. Everything is imported!!
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2009
- Messages
- 43,132
- Likes
- 23,835
You may like to see what Vandana Shiva had to say on Headlines Today.
Param
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2010
- Messages
- 2,810
- Likes
- 653
That will be the biggest mistake in the the history of Agriculture in this country.
Within no time these private sector contract farming companies or whatever will start using GM seeds. And as a result those farms will have to use the same kind of seeds forever.
Walmart will take over retail and Monsanto will takeover agriculture.
nrj
Ambassador
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2009
- Messages
- 9,658
- Likes
- 3,911
You can not stop liberalization. You can only delay it. Neverthless hold onto your fears.
--
Farmers deserve more options looking at what govt has been able to provide them. The entire domestic racket of politicians & desi industries who are exploiting agri wealth need tight competition.
--
Farmers deserve more options looking at what govt has been able to provide them. The entire domestic racket of politicians & desi industries who are exploiting agri wealth need tight competition.
god for india and good for inflation, these baniya shops need more competition. they are selling at higher up prices to the consumer.
In the end neither and consumer nor the farmer is getting a fair price. when manmohan singh opened the economy in 1991, people
said the same thing. when ever you go for change people will protest. even BJP protested in 1991 heavly, despite knowing well enough
that it would help india in the log run. they are not leaders, but are just vote pickers thats all.
Param
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2010
- Messages
- 2,810
- Likes
- 653
I was talking about allowing private companies to lease Agricultural land, not retail FDI.
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2009
- Messages
- 13,811
- Likes
- 6,734
Carrefour is getting ready to swarm India with hypermarkets. If we can get in early we can knock off Walmart as #1.
Adding FDI retail and expertise will make retail more efficient. This will help in curbing the vast amount of wastage that happens during the entire procurement period.
The FDI is not being allowed without rules. There are conditions, rules and safeguards around this. For example 50% fdi has to be in the backend section which will improve inter-mediation (the middle man that transport goods from villages to cities) and also make India self sufficient. Nowadays, it is cheaper to import Apples from China to Mumbai than from Himachal Pradesh because of our outdated backend transport and intermediation system.
On top of that, foreign stores can open only in large cities, so the kirana stores will still thrive in the rest of the towns and villages. And they will also be able to partly take advantage of the backend investment that will happen when FDI comes in. Yes there will be some loss of jobs, but this will be made up in jobs creation by the retail sector as well.
Here is a 2010 discussion on this with Karan Thapar, so do keep in mind that this has been going since 2008 with the govt. putting out a discussion paper in 2010 to be discussed in the parliament
This should have happened in 2010 itself, so it would be very wrong on parties other than the left that are ideologically opposed to such an economic philosophy to opportunistically oppose FDI in retail.
We don't want political dramas when it comes to important economic policy discussions. Seriously when will politicians be true to their party economic ideology rather than be opportunistic.
FDI in retail: Will set Walmart store on fire, threatens Uma Bharti - The Economic Times
The FDI is not being allowed without rules. There are conditions, rules and safeguards around this. For example 50% fdi has to be in the backend section which will improve inter-mediation (the middle man that transport goods from villages to cities) and also make India self sufficient. Nowadays, it is cheaper to import Apples from China to Mumbai than from Himachal Pradesh because of our outdated backend transport and intermediation system.
On top of that, foreign stores can open only in large cities, so the kirana stores will still thrive in the rest of the towns and villages. And they will also be able to partly take advantage of the backend investment that will happen when FDI comes in. Yes there will be some loss of jobs, but this will be made up in jobs creation by the retail sector as well.
Here is a 2010 discussion on this with Karan Thapar, so do keep in mind that this has been going since 2008 with the govt. putting out a discussion paper in 2010 to be discussed in the parliament
This should have happened in 2010 itself, so it would be very wrong on parties other than the left that are ideologically opposed to such an economic philosophy to opportunistically oppose FDI in retail.
We don't want political dramas when it comes to important economic policy discussions. Seriously when will politicians be true to their party economic ideology rather than be opportunistic.
FDI in retail: Will set Walmart store on fire, threatens Uma Bharti - The Economic Times
Last edited by a moderator:
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2010
- Messages
- 4,768
- Likes
- 10,311
FDI in Retail: The Dangers Ahead
'Hundreds of thousands of Indians who earn their livelihood from the 12 million existing retail outlets may be put out of business by Big Retail.'
Bhavdeep Kang assesses the likely impact of the government's decision to allow 51% FDI in the retail sector.
The much-awaited go-ahead for FDI in multi-brand retail has raised fears not only of unemployment -- as Union Minister Dinesh Trivedi [ Images ] observed -- but of creation of monopolies in the food sector.
The government has sought to sweeten the deal by restricting the entry of Walmart, Carrefour et al to 37 urban centres with a population of one million or more -- but this is no hardship for the multinationals, as it is unlikely that smaller centres figure in their initial rollout plan in any case.
The rationale for the decision is ostensibly to control food prices, as suggested by the Inter-Ministerial Group, IMG, on inflation. Permitting farm-to-fork retail is seen as a means of containing food inflation. India [ Images ] being apparently too resource-poor to achieve this, the retail sector had to be opened to FDI.
FDI enthusiasts say the entry of Wal-Mart and its ilk will ensure that the producer gets a better price, the consumer gets cheaper products (as the company purchases directly from the farmgate, there is no middleman) and jobs and infrastructure are created.
This rosy picture must be taken with a pinch of salt. To begin with, the FDI proposal was initiated long before food inflation became an issue, so clearly it has been pushed through because of considerations other than rising prices.
Essentially, a vertical integration of the food supply chain is proposed on the assumption that it will have a positive impact on all the stakeholders. The caveat that 50 per cent of investment must be in the rural sector is meaningless; building a supply chain from farmgate to shelf would naturally entail investment in storage and transportation infrastructure in rural areas wherever the supply bases are located.
The primary producers are expected to get better prices. But nowhere in the world have the farmers who supply goods to big retail chains benefitted. It is difficult to understand how they would benefit, when players like Wal-Mart look for the cheapest possible suppliers. To sell cheap, they buy even cheaper. To begin with, they might offer better remuneration, but that would be only until traditional channels like ahratiyas are eliminated and the farmers have no choice but to sell to Big Retail -- at any price. In his book Stuffed & Starved, Raj Patel gives a moving account of such exploitation.
The contention that FDI will create jobs is also open to question, as it is more likely to create large-scale unemployment. The unorganised retail trade in India accounts for over 40 million jobs and 98 per cent of the total trade. This includes pansaaris, kirana shops, hardware stores, convenience stores, weekly haats, paan and tobacco shops, as well as a whole range of teh-bazaari (pavement vendors). It is informal, with credit traditionally extended on trust and based on an intricate web of relationships.
The majority of consumers, who buy essentials from their neighbourhood stores on credit and pay bills on a monthly basis, will also suffer with the disruption of the traditional system.
Hundreds of thousands of people who earn their livelihood from the 12 million existing retail outlets may be put out of business by Big Retail. Some may find employment with Big Retail although this is doubtful given their lack of language skills or education -- the minimum requirement for staff at any sizeable store is a command of English. Even if they did, there would not be enough jobs to go around.
Global retail giants are highly capital intensive and create fewer jobs. A single Wal-Mart store could put tens of thousands of mom and pop stores out of business -- as it did in the US -- while generating perhaps 3,000 jobs.
Traditional retail will struggle with the likes of Wal-Mart and lose, because Big Retail with its deep pockets, would resort to predatory pricing. Nor should we expect ethical practices from multinational players.
In a highly publicised case, the Punjab [ Images ] excise and taxation department raided 'Best Price,' a joint venture between Bharti and Wal-Mart. The company was only licensed for wholesale cash-and-carry trading, in which 100 per cent FDI is allowed. According to press reports, it was found to be carrying out retail trade through the issue of membership cards to those who did not have a valid VAT number.
Drawbacks to allowing FDI in retail were pointed out by the Standing Committee of Parliament in June 2009. In the absence of a level playing field between Indian retail and the MNCs, it suggested comprehensive steps to strengthen the former before opening the gates to FDI. Otherwise, it said, the economy would suffer and widespread unemployment would lead to social unrest.
The third great myth about FDI in retail is that it will improve infrastructure by attracting investment in storage and transportation. Why Indian companies in the retail sector have not invested in the back-end along with the front-end is yet to be explained.
By allowing the entry of Big Retail, we run the risk of creating Western-style monopolies. In the US, a handful of companies control food, right from the seed to the shelf. This cannot work in our highly decentralised Indian context, characterised by a multi-tiered marketing system.
The other big fear is that FDI in multi-brand retail is just the thin end of the wedge. At the end of the day, Big Food wants to create its own captive supply base, which is more reliable than contract farming. The existing regulatory framework on agriculture does not permit corporate ownership of farmland.
FDI in Retail: The Dangers Ahead - Rediff.com Business
'Hundreds of thousands of Indians who earn their livelihood from the 12 million existing retail outlets may be put out of business by Big Retail.'
Bhavdeep Kang assesses the likely impact of the government's decision to allow 51% FDI in the retail sector.
The much-awaited go-ahead for FDI in multi-brand retail has raised fears not only of unemployment -- as Union Minister Dinesh Trivedi [ Images ] observed -- but of creation of monopolies in the food sector.
The government has sought to sweeten the deal by restricting the entry of Walmart, Carrefour et al to 37 urban centres with a population of one million or more -- but this is no hardship for the multinationals, as it is unlikely that smaller centres figure in their initial rollout plan in any case.
The rationale for the decision is ostensibly to control food prices, as suggested by the Inter-Ministerial Group, IMG, on inflation. Permitting farm-to-fork retail is seen as a means of containing food inflation. India [ Images ] being apparently too resource-poor to achieve this, the retail sector had to be opened to FDI.
FDI enthusiasts say the entry of Wal-Mart and its ilk will ensure that the producer gets a better price, the consumer gets cheaper products (as the company purchases directly from the farmgate, there is no middleman) and jobs and infrastructure are created.
This rosy picture must be taken with a pinch of salt. To begin with, the FDI proposal was initiated long before food inflation became an issue, so clearly it has been pushed through because of considerations other than rising prices.
Essentially, a vertical integration of the food supply chain is proposed on the assumption that it will have a positive impact on all the stakeholders. The caveat that 50 per cent of investment must be in the rural sector is meaningless; building a supply chain from farmgate to shelf would naturally entail investment in storage and transportation infrastructure in rural areas wherever the supply bases are located.
The primary producers are expected to get better prices. But nowhere in the world have the farmers who supply goods to big retail chains benefitted. It is difficult to understand how they would benefit, when players like Wal-Mart look for the cheapest possible suppliers. To sell cheap, they buy even cheaper. To begin with, they might offer better remuneration, but that would be only until traditional channels like ahratiyas are eliminated and the farmers have no choice but to sell to Big Retail -- at any price. In his book Stuffed & Starved, Raj Patel gives a moving account of such exploitation.
The contention that FDI will create jobs is also open to question, as it is more likely to create large-scale unemployment. The unorganised retail trade in India accounts for over 40 million jobs and 98 per cent of the total trade. This includes pansaaris, kirana shops, hardware stores, convenience stores, weekly haats, paan and tobacco shops, as well as a whole range of teh-bazaari (pavement vendors). It is informal, with credit traditionally extended on trust and based on an intricate web of relationships.
The majority of consumers, who buy essentials from their neighbourhood stores on credit and pay bills on a monthly basis, will also suffer with the disruption of the traditional system.
Hundreds of thousands of people who earn their livelihood from the 12 million existing retail outlets may be put out of business by Big Retail. Some may find employment with Big Retail although this is doubtful given their lack of language skills or education -- the minimum requirement for staff at any sizeable store is a command of English. Even if they did, there would not be enough jobs to go around.
Global retail giants are highly capital intensive and create fewer jobs. A single Wal-Mart store could put tens of thousands of mom and pop stores out of business -- as it did in the US -- while generating perhaps 3,000 jobs.
Traditional retail will struggle with the likes of Wal-Mart and lose, because Big Retail with its deep pockets, would resort to predatory pricing. Nor should we expect ethical practices from multinational players.
In a highly publicised case, the Punjab [ Images ] excise and taxation department raided 'Best Price,' a joint venture between Bharti and Wal-Mart. The company was only licensed for wholesale cash-and-carry trading, in which 100 per cent FDI is allowed. According to press reports, it was found to be carrying out retail trade through the issue of membership cards to those who did not have a valid VAT number.
Drawbacks to allowing FDI in retail were pointed out by the Standing Committee of Parliament in June 2009. In the absence of a level playing field between Indian retail and the MNCs, it suggested comprehensive steps to strengthen the former before opening the gates to FDI. Otherwise, it said, the economy would suffer and widespread unemployment would lead to social unrest.
The third great myth about FDI in retail is that it will improve infrastructure by attracting investment in storage and transportation. Why Indian companies in the retail sector have not invested in the back-end along with the front-end is yet to be explained.
By allowing the entry of Big Retail, we run the risk of creating Western-style monopolies. In the US, a handful of companies control food, right from the seed to the shelf. This cannot work in our highly decentralised Indian context, characterised by a multi-tiered marketing system.
The other big fear is that FDI in multi-brand retail is just the thin end of the wedge. At the end of the day, Big Food wants to create its own captive supply base, which is more reliable than contract farming. The existing regulatory framework on agriculture does not permit corporate ownership of farmland.
FDI in Retail: The Dangers Ahead - Rediff.com Business
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2010
- Messages
- 4,768
- Likes
- 10,311
BJP to strongly oppose FDI in retail sector
Bharatiya Janata Party [ Images ] on Thursday asserted that it would use all mediums of democratic protest to oppose the move to allow Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in multi-brand retail, saying this would harm self-employed retailers.
Leader of Opposition in Rajya Sabha Arun Jaitley [ Images ] said a Cabinet note has been circulated on allowing FDI in multi-brand retail- where "everything conceivable under the sun is available".
"BJP is completely opposed to FDI in retail sector. Our economy is dominated by the services sector which accounts for 58 per cent of India's [ Images ] GDP. The retail chains in India, both small and big, account for a major segment of this sector. FDI with deep pockets entering this segment will have an adverse impact on our growing domestic retail sector," he said.
The party maintains that self-employment in India is the single largest source of jobs with an overwhelming section of the population being self-employed.
United Progressive Alliance-I had already allowed 51 per cent FDI in single brand retail which aims at the well-off. BJP favours a fragmented market so that the consumers have a wide choice and feels consolidated markets make the consumer captive.
"No one player should be allowed to dominate the market. Allowing foreign players, with deep pockets, enables such a consolidation. It will sweep aside competition and involve a loss of jobs, both in the manufacturing and services sector," Jaitley said.
He insisted that BJP will use all mediums of democratic protest inside and outside Parliament to oppose FDI in multi-brand retail.
Jaitley rued that the government had not discussed this issue with the opposition extensively and said it would have been better if this had been done.
"We have made our position on this issue public. We will oppose this issue," he said. The small and big traders constitute a big chunk of the BJP votebank.
"Jobs in the retail sector will be lost in the name of eliminating middlemen. Jobs in the manufacturing sector will also be lost because structured international retail makes purchases internationally and not from domestic sources. This experience has been felt in most countries which have allowed FDI in retail," Jaitley said.
He argued that this was the case as the international retail players operate on buying at the lowest and selling at the highest prices.
"They indulge in predatory pricing, which initially eliminates competition and eventually creates monopolies. This can result in food chains of large nations being controlled by foreign organisations," the party said.
It further maintained that the number of retail establishments as at present will get substantially reduced in favour of large establishments. "International retail does not create additional markets, it merely displaces existing markets," Jaitley said.
BJP also feels India's case should not be compared with China as the latter is predominantly a manufacturing economy.
"China is the largest supplier to Walmart and other international majors. It generates huge number of manufacturing jobs by being such a supplier. India on the contrary will lose both manufacturing and service sector jobs," Jaitley said.
BJP to strongly oppose FDI in retail sector - Rediff.com Business
Bharatiya Janata Party [ Images ] on Thursday asserted that it would use all mediums of democratic protest to oppose the move to allow Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in multi-brand retail, saying this would harm self-employed retailers.
Leader of Opposition in Rajya Sabha Arun Jaitley [ Images ] said a Cabinet note has been circulated on allowing FDI in multi-brand retail- where "everything conceivable under the sun is available".
"BJP is completely opposed to FDI in retail sector. Our economy is dominated by the services sector which accounts for 58 per cent of India's [ Images ] GDP. The retail chains in India, both small and big, account for a major segment of this sector. FDI with deep pockets entering this segment will have an adverse impact on our growing domestic retail sector," he said.
The party maintains that self-employment in India is the single largest source of jobs with an overwhelming section of the population being self-employed.
United Progressive Alliance-I had already allowed 51 per cent FDI in single brand retail which aims at the well-off. BJP favours a fragmented market so that the consumers have a wide choice and feels consolidated markets make the consumer captive.
"No one player should be allowed to dominate the market. Allowing foreign players, with deep pockets, enables such a consolidation. It will sweep aside competition and involve a loss of jobs, both in the manufacturing and services sector," Jaitley said.
He insisted that BJP will use all mediums of democratic protest inside and outside Parliament to oppose FDI in multi-brand retail.
Jaitley rued that the government had not discussed this issue with the opposition extensively and said it would have been better if this had been done.
"We have made our position on this issue public. We will oppose this issue," he said. The small and big traders constitute a big chunk of the BJP votebank.
"Jobs in the retail sector will be lost in the name of eliminating middlemen. Jobs in the manufacturing sector will also be lost because structured international retail makes purchases internationally and not from domestic sources. This experience has been felt in most countries which have allowed FDI in retail," Jaitley said.
He argued that this was the case as the international retail players operate on buying at the lowest and selling at the highest prices.
"They indulge in predatory pricing, which initially eliminates competition and eventually creates monopolies. This can result in food chains of large nations being controlled by foreign organisations," the party said.
It further maintained that the number of retail establishments as at present will get substantially reduced in favour of large establishments. "International retail does not create additional markets, it merely displaces existing markets," Jaitley said.
BJP also feels India's case should not be compared with China as the latter is predominantly a manufacturing economy.
"China is the largest supplier to Walmart and other international majors. It generates huge number of manufacturing jobs by being such a supplier. India on the contrary will lose both manufacturing and service sector jobs," Jaitley said.
BJP to strongly oppose FDI in retail sector - Rediff.com Business
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2010
- Messages
- 4,768
- Likes
- 10,311
FDI in retail plan meets fierce opposition
NEW DELHI: The government faces a fierce political backlash over its decision to allow FDI in multi-brand retail with traders' associations preparing for a nation-wide bandh next week and opposition parties along with Congress allies like DMK and Trinamool Congress opposing the move.
Fear was growing in ruling circles that the decision, intended to signal that UPA-2 is not bogged down by graft scandals, internal bickering and opposition attacks, might instead prove to be ill-timed and become a lightning rod for the government's critics ranging from BJP to the Left as also regional parties.
The fallout was evident on Friday as Trinamool Congress joined opposition groups in the well of Lok Sabha to protest the FDI decision. Trinamool leader Sudip Bandhopadhyay said the party would not give up its protests after railway minister Dinesh Trivedi presented the party's case in the Cabinet. In Rajya Sabha, DMK could be seen joining the protests.
The powerful traders' lobbies were readying for a showdown with a bandh planned for December 1. "The bandh on December 1 will mark our protest. We are also speaking to all chief ministers to support us," said Praveen Khandelwal, secretary general of the Confederation of All-India Traders.
With trader bodies preparing to down shutters, BJP plans to ramp up its protests and is not ruling out street demonstrations. Keeping in view the sharp reaction of the trading community, a constituency it values as a support base, BJP may explore means to increase the government's discomfort in Parliament by exploiting its numerical frailty.
Concerns of some ministers at Thursday's Cabinet meeting that opening retail be put off till after the approaching assembly elections, particularly the Uttar Pradesh poll, and that the move could prove to be a rallying point for the opposition seemed to be proving prophetic.
Congress circles conceded that the decision could have an adverse fallout for party's prospects in UP where Vaishyas constitute a sizeable and increasingly assertive constituency.
The ruling party looked deeply isolated as parties across the political spectrum condemned the decision to allow multi-brand retail, questioning the government's claim that it would create 10 million jobs by arguing that at least half that number would be lost. Clarification from the government that the stipulation that 30% of procurement by retailers should be from small and medium scale industry did not bind them to source one-third of their supplies from local SMEs only complicated matters. Commerce minister Anand Sharma had showcased the clause to argue that letting in foreign retailers would boost small domestic business.
Playing on the fear that big retailers would wipe out mom-and-pop stores, offsetting any advantage to farmers, BJP, Left and other parties said the loss of employment would be on a massive scale. The recent controversy over government statistics showing "jobless" growth in the UPA-1 years does not add to the Centre's comfort.
"The decision seems politically deficient," said a minister while another felt it reflected a suicide wish. The charge that the government managers were "politics proof" is a damning one, and is being increasingly heard as opposition leaders question the wisdom of announcing the retail decision in the first week of an embattled Parliament session.
Congress's worries can increase as both Samajwadi Party and Bahujan Samaj Party have opposed the decision, calculating that traders are a significant vote bloc in UP with its many cities and towns. They are also organized and can be seen as opinion-makers in kasbas and towns.
Maverick BJP leader Uma Bharati's threat to set fire to Walmart stores was immediately denounced by senior party leader M M Joshi, but the former Madhya Pradesh CM is clearly seeing an opportunity in UP where she is part of the BJP brains trust.
"FDI is not required in retail sector. Cold storage facility is not rocket science, government must increase investment in this area," BJP spokesperson Prakash Javdekar said.
Bihar CM Nitish Kumar said he opposed the decision "tooth and nail" as it would ruin local retailers and increase unemployment.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/10876530.cms
NEW DELHI: The government faces a fierce political backlash over its decision to allow FDI in multi-brand retail with traders' associations preparing for a nation-wide bandh next week and opposition parties along with Congress allies like DMK and Trinamool Congress opposing the move.
Fear was growing in ruling circles that the decision, intended to signal that UPA-2 is not bogged down by graft scandals, internal bickering and opposition attacks, might instead prove to be ill-timed and become a lightning rod for the government's critics ranging from BJP to the Left as also regional parties.
The fallout was evident on Friday as Trinamool Congress joined opposition groups in the well of Lok Sabha to protest the FDI decision. Trinamool leader Sudip Bandhopadhyay said the party would not give up its protests after railway minister Dinesh Trivedi presented the party's case in the Cabinet. In Rajya Sabha, DMK could be seen joining the protests.
The powerful traders' lobbies were readying for a showdown with a bandh planned for December 1. "The bandh on December 1 will mark our protest. We are also speaking to all chief ministers to support us," said Praveen Khandelwal, secretary general of the Confederation of All-India Traders.
With trader bodies preparing to down shutters, BJP plans to ramp up its protests and is not ruling out street demonstrations. Keeping in view the sharp reaction of the trading community, a constituency it values as a support base, BJP may explore means to increase the government's discomfort in Parliament by exploiting its numerical frailty.
Concerns of some ministers at Thursday's Cabinet meeting that opening retail be put off till after the approaching assembly elections, particularly the Uttar Pradesh poll, and that the move could prove to be a rallying point for the opposition seemed to be proving prophetic.
Congress circles conceded that the decision could have an adverse fallout for party's prospects in UP where Vaishyas constitute a sizeable and increasingly assertive constituency.
The ruling party looked deeply isolated as parties across the political spectrum condemned the decision to allow multi-brand retail, questioning the government's claim that it would create 10 million jobs by arguing that at least half that number would be lost. Clarification from the government that the stipulation that 30% of procurement by retailers should be from small and medium scale industry did not bind them to source one-third of their supplies from local SMEs only complicated matters. Commerce minister Anand Sharma had showcased the clause to argue that letting in foreign retailers would boost small domestic business.
Playing on the fear that big retailers would wipe out mom-and-pop stores, offsetting any advantage to farmers, BJP, Left and other parties said the loss of employment would be on a massive scale. The recent controversy over government statistics showing "jobless" growth in the UPA-1 years does not add to the Centre's comfort.
"The decision seems politically deficient," said a minister while another felt it reflected a suicide wish. The charge that the government managers were "politics proof" is a damning one, and is being increasingly heard as opposition leaders question the wisdom of announcing the retail decision in the first week of an embattled Parliament session.
Congress's worries can increase as both Samajwadi Party and Bahujan Samaj Party have opposed the decision, calculating that traders are a significant vote bloc in UP with its many cities and towns. They are also organized and can be seen as opinion-makers in kasbas and towns.
Maverick BJP leader Uma Bharati's threat to set fire to Walmart stores was immediately denounced by senior party leader M M Joshi, but the former Madhya Pradesh CM is clearly seeing an opportunity in UP where she is part of the BJP brains trust.
"FDI is not required in retail sector. Cold storage facility is not rocket science, government must increase investment in this area," BJP spokesperson Prakash Javdekar said.
Bihar CM Nitish Kumar said he opposed the decision "tooth and nail" as it would ruin local retailers and increase unemployment.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/10876530.cms
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2010
- Messages
- 4,768
- Likes
- 10,311
Food, inc
a must watch documentaries if u want to know one of the reason why "utubekhiladi" is against FDI
MEGAVIDEO - I'm watching it
Video: Food, Inc. | Watch NOW on PBS Online | PBS Video
more to follow....
FDI is just like east india company, they buy our own goods for the price of peanuts, they process it in their country and sell it back to indians for high prices. i think we are headed in the same direction. the policy of walmart is to buy products at the cheapest possible price and sell it at highest possible price.
when walmart's mission is to buy at cheapest price then i don't think they will pay reasonable price to our farmers. expect to see more cheap Chinese goods in Indian markets from now on. as rupee value is low, expect to pay high price for foreign goods.
walmart has his own sub-brands like "great-value" great value makes everything from condoms to toothpastes to groceries. which is designed to kill all competitions in the market.
it will be matter of days when our farmers are forced to sell their goods at low prices to these giant whole sellers. with the amount of capitals they have, they can easily overtake or eliminate all competitions in Indian markets. most of the walmart have unassisted "self-checkout".. so much for creating new jobs
you know what i mean?
a must watch documentaries if u want to know one of the reason why "utubekhiladi" is against FDI
MEGAVIDEO - I'm watching it
Video: Food, Inc. | Watch NOW on PBS Online | PBS Video
more to follow....
FDI is just like east india company, they buy our own goods for the price of peanuts, they process it in their country and sell it back to indians for high prices. i think we are headed in the same direction. the policy of walmart is to buy products at the cheapest possible price and sell it at highest possible price.
when walmart's mission is to buy at cheapest price then i don't think they will pay reasonable price to our farmers. expect to see more cheap Chinese goods in Indian markets from now on. as rupee value is low, expect to pay high price for foreign goods.
walmart has his own sub-brands like "great-value" great value makes everything from condoms to toothpastes to groceries. which is designed to kill all competitions in the market.
it will be matter of days when our farmers are forced to sell their goods at low prices to these giant whole sellers. with the amount of capitals they have, they can easily overtake or eliminate all competitions in Indian markets. most of the walmart have unassisted "self-checkout".. so much for creating new jobs
you know what i mean?
Last edited:
SPIEZ
Senior Member
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2011
- Messages
- 3,508
- Likes
- 1,021
Sir, I have been to some cities while my father has been to many. The problem he sights is that when retail comes in INFLATION is bound to rise sky-high, as evident from the fact that prices in most modern cities are high and it's becoming hard to find small time retailers.
Also in some places, these small time retailers hold the common man by the neck, increasing prices as they wish. In fact in some places certain commodities are sold a few Rs higher. Even Lays chips are sold at double the prices.
But, from now on, my mom won't be able to get curry leaves and coriander leaves for free!
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2009
- Messages
- 43,132
- Likes
- 23,835
This FDI business that is being suggested is not as wonderful as it is being made out to be.
It has its pluses and minuses.
It is also quite complex and it will all depend on the manner in which it is implemented because in the teething years, there has to be governmental supervision or else it will be a steal for the Companies who are coming in to work the deal!
It has its pluses and minuses.
It is also quite complex and it will all depend on the manner in which it is implemented because in the teething years, there has to be governmental supervision or else it will be a steal for the Companies who are coming in to work the deal!
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2009
- Messages
- 43,132
- Likes
- 23,835
Corporate Hijack of Retail
On November 24, 2011, which was the third day of Parliamentary dead lock on issues of rising prices and neo- liberal economic policies that had created a severe economic crisis for the majority of Indians, the Government announced 51% Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in multi-brand retail. In other words, opening the door to retail giants like Walmart to devastate the Indian retail economy as they have destroyed every economy where they have entered. In effect, the Government was saying to the people of India and Parliament "we don't care about democracy", "we will push the agenda of corporate rule even as the model collapses in its own countries of U.S and Europe".
Commentators have presented the defense of the small farmers and the small retailer as ideology as if the blind commitment of the Government to giant retails is not an ideological commitment. The Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had made this ideological commitment in 2005 when he signed a US-India Knowledge Initiative in Agriculture to hand over India's seed sector to gene giants Monsanto, India's agricultural trade to grain giants like Cargill and ConAgra and India's retail to retail giants like Walmart. In fact these corporations sat on the board of the U.S – India Knowledge agreement.
There is a claim being made that opening up Indian retail to FDI will develop backend infrastructure. Firstly, for our decentralized economy we already have a functioning infrastructure of Bazaars, Mandis and Haats which work at low cost and generate high employment and support the livelihoods of millions of farmers and 400 million people who are involved in small retail. Dr. Vandana Shiva, Founder Director of Navdanya called this model "the model for retail democracy". The contrast is not between an organized retail controlled by Walmart and un-organised indigenous retail model. It is between self-organised and democratic retail vs a centralized corporate controlled model which profits at peoples cost by buying cheap from producers and suppliers. Secondly, the assumption that Walmart will develop backend infrastructure is totally falsified by the fact that since 2007, when Walmart was allowed to enter the wholesale distribution and Cash and Carry outlets in a joint venture with Bharti and it started to open Easy Day and Best Price box stores, it has invested nothing in the backend. It has in fact used the existing infrastructure offered by Indian companies. There is no reason to expect the next five years to be different. The Government must do an assessment of Walmart's Cash and Carry venture before opening up the retail market blindly to them.
The decision of the Cabinet to allow 51% FDI in multi-brand retail is also constitutionally violative of the federal structure of our country and takes away the powers over retail that States have under the Constitution. Since this issue has far reaching implications for the livelihood of more than half of India, it must not be implemented till the States make their democratic decisions. The centre cannot undermine India's federal structure by undemocratic decisions.
The so called conditions put on the FDI are an eyewash and are totally undone by the clause that says that corporations like Walmart will self certify whether they are meeting those conditions. Self certification by giant corporations is de-regulation.
Another myth that is constantly pushed to justify the corporate hijack of retail is the issue of waste. It is argued that 40% of horticulture produce in India is wasted because of the absence of the giant retail. This is totally false. In our decentralized and diversified economy nothing goes waste. Fruits and vegetables that go bad are eaten by cows or are composed. This recycling of organic matter is only possible in a decentralized system. In fact more and more data is now coming out that giant globalised retail is responsible for the waste of 50% of the food in the world as documented in recent books such as the "American Wasteland" by Jonathan Bloom and "Transforming Food Waste into a Resource" by Andrea Segre.
The final myth that is being promoted to justify Walmart entry is that farmers will get better prices. Nowhere in the world have corporations like Walmart and Tesco increased returns to producers. Their "Cheap Prices" policy is based on buying at extremely low prices from farmers often below costs of production, till the farmer is pushed out of farming after a few years of supplying to the retail chains. If the Monsanto model of seed monopoly has pushed our costs of production to such an extent that farmers are trapped in un-payable debt and 250,000 farmers have committed suicide, the Walmart model of retail monopoly will destroy farmers by buying below the cost of production and by robbing them of other markets through destroying other alternatives. This is a model for genocide. It cannot be allowed to spread in India
For further information, please contact
Dr. Vandana Shiva
Founder Director
Navdanya
A-60, Hauz Khas
New Delhi – 110 016
Email : [email protected]
Phone : 9810025169
Corporate Hijack of Retail
On November 24, 2011, which was the third day of Parliamentary dead lock on issues of rising prices and neo- liberal economic policies that had created a severe economic crisis for the majority of Indians, the Government announced 51% Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in multi-brand retail. In other words, opening the door to retail giants like Walmart to devastate the Indian retail economy as they have destroyed every economy where they have entered. In effect, the Government was saying to the people of India and Parliament "we don't care about democracy", "we will push the agenda of corporate rule even as the model collapses in its own countries of U.S and Europe".
Commentators have presented the defense of the small farmers and the small retailer as ideology as if the blind commitment of the Government to giant retails is not an ideological commitment. The Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had made this ideological commitment in 2005 when he signed a US-India Knowledge Initiative in Agriculture to hand over India's seed sector to gene giants Monsanto, India's agricultural trade to grain giants like Cargill and ConAgra and India's retail to retail giants like Walmart. In fact these corporations sat on the board of the U.S – India Knowledge agreement.
There is a claim being made that opening up Indian retail to FDI will develop backend infrastructure. Firstly, for our decentralized economy we already have a functioning infrastructure of Bazaars, Mandis and Haats which work at low cost and generate high employment and support the livelihoods of millions of farmers and 400 million people who are involved in small retail. Dr. Vandana Shiva, Founder Director of Navdanya called this model "the model for retail democracy". The contrast is not between an organized retail controlled by Walmart and un-organised indigenous retail model. It is between self-organised and democratic retail vs a centralized corporate controlled model which profits at peoples cost by buying cheap from producers and suppliers. Secondly, the assumption that Walmart will develop backend infrastructure is totally falsified by the fact that since 2007, when Walmart was allowed to enter the wholesale distribution and Cash and Carry outlets in a joint venture with Bharti and it started to open Easy Day and Best Price box stores, it has invested nothing in the backend. It has in fact used the existing infrastructure offered by Indian companies. There is no reason to expect the next five years to be different. The Government must do an assessment of Walmart's Cash and Carry venture before opening up the retail market blindly to them.
The decision of the Cabinet to allow 51% FDI in multi-brand retail is also constitutionally violative of the federal structure of our country and takes away the powers over retail that States have under the Constitution. Since this issue has far reaching implications for the livelihood of more than half of India, it must not be implemented till the States make their democratic decisions. The centre cannot undermine India's federal structure by undemocratic decisions.
The so called conditions put on the FDI are an eyewash and are totally undone by the clause that says that corporations like Walmart will self certify whether they are meeting those conditions. Self certification by giant corporations is de-regulation.
Another myth that is constantly pushed to justify the corporate hijack of retail is the issue of waste. It is argued that 40% of horticulture produce in India is wasted because of the absence of the giant retail. This is totally false. In our decentralized and diversified economy nothing goes waste. Fruits and vegetables that go bad are eaten by cows or are composed. This recycling of organic matter is only possible in a decentralized system. In fact more and more data is now coming out that giant globalised retail is responsible for the waste of 50% of the food in the world as documented in recent books such as the "American Wasteland" by Jonathan Bloom and "Transforming Food Waste into a Resource" by Andrea Segre.
The final myth that is being promoted to justify Walmart entry is that farmers will get better prices. Nowhere in the world have corporations like Walmart and Tesco increased returns to producers. Their "Cheap Prices" policy is based on buying at extremely low prices from farmers often below costs of production, till the farmer is pushed out of farming after a few years of supplying to the retail chains. If the Monsanto model of seed monopoly has pushed our costs of production to such an extent that farmers are trapped in un-payable debt and 250,000 farmers have committed suicide, the Walmart model of retail monopoly will destroy farmers by buying below the cost of production and by robbing them of other markets through destroying other alternatives. This is a model for genocide. It cannot be allowed to spread in India
For further information, please contact
Dr. Vandana Shiva
Founder Director
Navdanya
A-60, Hauz Khas
New Delhi – 110 016
Email : [email protected]
Phone : 9810025169
Corporate Hijack of Retail
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2010
- Messages
- 2,093
- Likes
- 1,112
The processing of goods are not from retailer's home country as seen from various other markets. Retails sells daily use products, perishables, cosmetics, other items which cant be made from outside, say US and bring it here to sell. It just needs common sense to realize that.
Regarding the impact.. well aren't we already having the worse of inflation, price rises, market manipulations,price hypes etc.
I can only laugh when somebody says " farmers will be forced to sell".... what at gun point??
Well they can choose to sell in local markets, locl retailers, desi retailer giants, desi-foreign retailers on the basis of remuneration reieved.
India is a vast country. There are lakhs of small retail shops. Only a handfull of walmart's or Tesco's will be coming , that too in metro's and their customer base is mainly from pantaloon retail, reliance fresh, birla's , TATA's who are pretty much on the same page as them.
Funny to see people crying ....oooo foreign maaal is coming... foreign anda, foreign dooth, foreign rasgula, foreign gulab jamun coming.....
Regarding the impact.. well aren't we already having the worse of inflation, price rises, market manipulations,price hypes etc.
I can only laugh when somebody says " farmers will be forced to sell".... what at gun point??
Well they can choose to sell in local markets, locl retailers, desi retailer giants, desi-foreign retailers on the basis of remuneration reieved.
India is a vast country. There are lakhs of small retail shops. Only a handfull of walmart's or Tesco's will be coming , that too in metro's and their customer base is mainly from pantaloon retail, reliance fresh, birla's , TATA's who are pretty much on the same page as them.
Funny to see people crying ....oooo foreign maaal is coming... foreign anda, foreign dooth, foreign rasgula, foreign gulab jamun coming.....
