The Muttahida Qaumi Movement seems to be sticking to its conventional stance when it comes to the agriculture part of its manifesto.

But one can only be happy that a party, which largely has urban roots, is alive to agricultural issues, has a perspective on it and offers solutions on what it thinks ails the sector.

As expected, its manifesto starts by calling an end to ‘the prevailing medieval feudal system’. The way to do it is: land reforms. The party commits itself to reforming land ownership structure because, “reforms in the past have not restricted ceiling of large estates and have failed to distribute the land acquired from these estate holders to the landless cultivators or those owning land below subsistence level.”

The party plans to restrict individual ownership to 36 acres in irrigated and 54 acres in the non-irrigated areas. In fact, it has already moved a bill — Redistributive Land Reforms Bill — in the National Assembly back in October 2010. Its 2013 manifesto is continuation of the same bill. It complains that the bill “is still pending as the feudal dominated parliament is unwilling to surrender land in excess to the earlier fixed ceiling. The MQM is committed to land reforms and will strive for the bill to be passed by the parliament.”

Apart from regulating land ownership, the party promises to “curb illegal practice of establishing private jails for forced labour, frequent ejection of haris, treatment of the womenfolk and children of cultivators as chattels by the landlords. In this connection, Domestic Violence Act needs amendments.”

The urban perspective is also reflected in its pledge to “increase share of cultivators from 50 per cent to 60 per cent under the existing crop sharing system.” Declaring peasants as labour, it advocates legislation “on the pattern of labour laws for them, to stop ejection of tenants at will.”

In addition to social engineering through reforming land structure and rewriting labour laws for the rural areas, the party also plans to “to amend the constitution and impose tax on agriculture income.” The MQM has many economists on its side when it says that a sector with a share of 21 per cent of the national gross domestic product (GDP) has almost no contribution to the national taxation pool.

But the MQM needs to remember that agriculture tax is a provincial subject, which should be agitated in the provincial assembly where the party has had enough numbers to force its agenda, but it has not done so during the last two decades of its presence there.

The MQM has its hand on the agricultural pulse of the country when it commits to “devise alternate inputs — quality seed, fertiliser, pesticides, water, particularly to tail-enders, short term credit — delivery system at the doorstep of farmers to facilitate the formation of private cooperative marketing societies to eliminate the role of middleman.”

The party also plans to “computerise land record despite resistance by the patwaris (lowest rung officer of the revenue department) and mafia that manipulates records for money. (The also pledge to) Resolve the woes of the haris-cultivators and to save them from landlords and government functionaries. This needs drastic amendments, including establishment of Hari Courts, under Sindh Tenancy Act, 1950.”

Its particular sensitivity to agriculture loaning and its mechanism can only be welcomed. The party says that, “introduction of district level micro finance credit on the pattern introduced and followed by Grameen Bank of Bangladesh” would be introduced and “rural dwellers (will) be provided loans by the House Building Corporation on the same terms and conditions and ceiling limits as provided to urban dwellers.”

Apart from agriculture, the MQM also has eyes on water issues, when it claims: “Pakistan is known to have one of the best irrigation systems since the British era. But over a period of time because of inefficient management, lack of maintenance and expansion, losses in transmission and low cost recovery of irrigation fee and heavy subsidies have led to persistent losses and wastage of billions of rupees.”

The party thus plans “construction of dams, even at small scale, to conserve the water and or to generate electricity by artificial water-falls. Growers committees can be formed to evolve formula for distribution of water on equitable, area and crop basis. Before the revision of water rates, stringent measures are required to be taken against big landlords, who in connivance with village revenue officials, do not pay even the prescribed water charges and cause wrongful loss to the provincial exchequer.”

“The cropping pattern also needs to be changed, keeping in view of the national interest and experts should be employed to teach and train farmers into improving their per acre yield and the knowledge about which crop to be harvested during different times of a year. Each province should draw a provincial policy on agriculture and irrigation to optimise per acre yield.”

The manifesto makes good theoretical attempt to suggest solutions of complex agriculture problems. How far the party can translate these promises into actions and policy measures remains to be seen. However, the party should have also explained what it did for the sector in its more than two decades of on-off rule.

Apart from making good sound bites in the manifesto, the party history is not on its side on most of these problems. One hopes that the MQM makes a difference the next time if it is provided another opportunity by the electorate to serve the people.