Sure we are. There is the fertiliser subsidy and other indirect subsidies. A clear example of indirect subsidy is the minimum price the government agency in this case Bernas must pay the farmers.As to the problems in this industry, it is too numerous that most smart people have got out of the industry.
At one time, we were aiming for self-sufficiency in case there is a security need. However, as usual, the government agencies lost track of their target. so, a lot of padi land were converted into mixed development and residential housing. Rice bowls are now almost gone in many states as housing developers encroached on the diminishing padi hectarage.
Now we have a Deputy minister asking an 'if' question. As if it is an issue to deal with rocket science!
So he said that Malaysia may continue to import rice if the cost of expanding the “Rice Bowl” areas in the country is higher than the cost of importing the commodity. Isn't this obvious?
Currently, the country was importing 30 per cent of the rice needs and the government was studying from the various aspects whether imports would be continued or otherwise. Who is studying may I ask? Another committee? A few PTD officers without field experience or some agricultural officers without policy experience?
“We are studying whether to produce 100 per cent of our rice consumption or to continue importing 30 per cent of the national consumption, " he waxed lyrical.
At the moment, he said, emphasis would be given to efforts at upgrading the areas under the Muda Agricultural Development Authority (MADA) to produce better quality rice. This has nothing to do with quantity, my good man!
“Under the 10th Malaysia Plan, the ministry is allocating RM140 million to upgrade the areas under MADA. It includes giving compensation to residents because the rivers and canals in the MADA area are located on their land,” he said.
But where if the beef, my good man?
No comments:
Post a Comment