MULTAN, Aug 25: The Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock (Minfal) is reportedly doing things by halves against the recommendations of its Agricultural Pesticides Technical Advisory Committee (Aptac) to remove flaws in the multi-billion pesticides market of the country.

Aptac had recommended a number of amendments to the Agricultural Pesticides Rules (APRs) in its 36th meeting held on May 31, 2003, under the chairmanship of Minfal secretary Salik Nazeer Ahmed.

Salient features of the Aptac recommendations were:

1. The importers/formulators should themselves undertake repacking/refilling of pesticides imported or formulated locally at a plant under their strict supervision, responsibility and label for quality and then pass on to the distributors in retail packing with effect from November 1, 2003.

2. The importers should give legal warranty to the distributors or the dealers, as the case may be, at the time of delivery and the distributor whenever involved should give warranty to the dealers.

3. All registered/permitted pesticides may be sold under local brand names.

4. A particular pesticide should be sold in packing containing uniform quantity either of 250ml, 500ml or 1000ml.

5. The price mentioned on the label should be the same as that of written on the invoice.

However, the draft of amendments, to be made in the APRs in the second week of September (2003) through an SRO, has mentioned only items No 1 and 2 while the items No 3, 4 and 5 are missing for becoming part of the amendments.

When approached, agriculture experts and farmers’ representatives said ‘half-done’ amendments to the APRs could not produce the desired results whereas the Aptac recommendations were aimed at ending exploitation of the farmers at the hands of pesticides firms.

They said the local brand names would stir a competition among the pesticides’ firms to establish their respective brands on the basis of quality and price as, at present, a product under its same generic name could be marketed by different companies/distributors, thus making it difficult for buyers to find out the ‘culprit’ in case of substandard product supplied to him.

Similarly, the distributors hoodwinked the farmers by marketing their products in the packing of 360ml, 480ml and 900ml.

According to them, the pesticides firms earned exorbitant profits by evading GST and exploiting the farming community through difference between the price given on the invoice and the MRP prices given on the label of a product. They said the government could get collect more revenue from the pesticides business by implementing the Aptac decision that the price mentioned on the label should be as that of given on the invoice.

The draft of amendments in APRs is also silent on a vital subject of auction of the confiscated/abandoned pesticides merited to be looked into by the Aptac. Currently, anyone can take part in the auction of the confiscated/abandoned pesticides and the phenomenon gives way to sale of the substandard pesticides under legal cover. The Aptac had recommended that only the holders of registration of the pesticide being auctioned by the custom authorities could participate in the bidding.