The crux of the whole matter, therefore, is the inability on the part of the Government to manipulate the prices in a manner whereby it may be possible to achieve crop planning in order to achieve the desired results. As long as this price structure is allowed to move in the manner in which it is moving today, whatever may be the policy of the Government, howsoever much credit they may pump into the agricultural sector, whatever the amenities they may give to the agriculturists, it will not be possible for us to achieve the targets in the manner in which we want to achieve. I would have been satisfied if as a result of this increased agricultural production the farmer was better off. But we find that whenever there is increased production in response to higher prices the markets slump down so heavily that ultimately the farmer stands to lose instead of to gain. Therefore, the farmer loses both ways and the country also loses. The farmer puts in more money, more resources, in the production of crops for which he expects higher returns and he loses all that money because the prices are not rising to his expectations and instead the prices fall down rather precipitously and the country is also losing because there is a very uneven development of agriculture. Therefore, the crux of the whole problem is not just to hold the price-line or just to see that black-marketing is avoided. That is only one part of the job, a very important part of the price policy and that has got to be kept in mind. I am not against it; in fact I am all for it and I blame the Government for not being able to do it so far but this is another aspect of the price policy to which the Planning Commission, it seems to me, has not applied its mind properly so far, namely, the use of price policy, as an instrument of crop planning, and as long as that particular tool is not utilized for this objective, it will not be possible for us to have a planned development of our economy. Then, there is the question of incentives. We are now told every time that unless incentives are given, it will not be possible for us to develop our economy. We are hearing daily about our export promotion. Now, the problem of incentives also has to be viewed in terms of the objective of the development of a socialist economy in our country and not just from the point of view of earning more and more foreign balances. I am not in any way belittling the problem of foreign balances, but ultimately the problem of foreign balances has significance and meaning only in terms of the objectives that the Tenth Plan has set before it. Therefore, when we are talking of incentives in order to earn more foreign balances, we have also to think of incentives in terms of achieving the objectives that we have got in mind. I was, therefore, disappointed to read the speech of the Planning Minister, as he said as the Planning Minister at the Indian Labour Conference in which he seems to have indicated a new approach to the problem of wages. His approach has passed through three stages. In the first stage, just after the general election, the Planning Minister came out with a statement that he was thoroughly dissatisfied with the way in which the wage structure had developed and that he meant to do something about it. He categorically stated that the real wages had not increased because of intransigence of the management and he further stated that he wanted to do something about it. Then, there came about a discussion as to what could be done and all the industrialists themselves and the financial newspapers in this country came out with the theory that wages could be increased only if productivity is increased and, therefore, wages should be linked with productivity. That was the second stage, viz., increase productivity and wages will be increased. That was the slogan or that was the principle which was accepted even by the industrialists. But what do we find in the speech of the Planning Minister to the Indian Labour Conference? There, he says that even if productivity increases, the first charge will be in respect of projects which are meant for further employment or creation of more employment opportunities. That means even if productivity increases, it is not that the workers will immediately benefit in terms of higher wages so that it may be possible for them to improve their standard of living a little bit. Even if productivity rises, the fruits of productivity will go to schemes for creating further employment opportunities in the country. How long are the workers to wait and what exactly will be the stage at which it can be stated that enough employment opportunities have been created and, therefore, the stage has come for increased wages? Submit