Sugar production this year is projected to reach around 25 million tonnes, against the estimated demand of 22.5 million tonnes. With an opening stock of nearly six million tonnes, coupled with imports, the net surplus, or the end-of-season stock, is likely to be around nine million tonnes. Unsurprisingly, therefore, the apex bodies of sugar mills – both private and co-operative – have stepped up their demand for raising import duty on sugar to at least 30 per cent to discourage imports. The half-hearted and unfinished reforms in the sugar sector have, in fact, left both sugar manufacturers and sugarcane growers discontented. While the industry is peeved at lower realisation from its output, farmers are hurt owing to non-payment of their sugarcane price dues. The controls that persist include sugarcane area reservation that binds farmers to supply only to the designated factories; minimum distance criterion between the mills; restrictions on the sugar industry’s primary by-products such as molasses and ethanol; and the dual (central and states’) control over sugarcane prices. The last is the most forbidding, since it totally delinks sugarcane prices from sugar prices.
The Rangarajan Committee, whose report formed the basis for removing the compulsory levy on sugar and dispensing with the sugar release mechanism, had also suggested a way to undo the input-output price disconnect. It had mooted a formula-based sugarcane price linked to the price of sugar and its primary by-products. This implies sharing the sugar industry’s profits with sugarcane growers, to the benefit of all. It would also mitigate the cyclicality in the production of sugarcane and sugar, which causes wide periodic fluctuations in sugar prices. Total decontrol of the sugar sector remains the ideal solution.