Shiv Sena (UBT) calls Maharashtra govt's Rs 5,000 drought relief for farmers a 'fraudulent gimmick'

The Shiv Sena Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray has criticised the Maharashtra governmentrsquos announcement of an advance payment of Rs 5000 to droughtaffected farmers calling it a fraudulent and hollow gimmick in an editorial published in the partyrsquos mouthpiece SaamanaThe editorial argued that the government had failed to provide adequate relief to nearly 15 crore farmers affected by drought across Maharashtra It alleged that the assistance came with a 33 per cent croploss condition that could exclude a large number of distressed farmers from receiving financial aidThe criticism follows the state governmentrsquos announcement of advance assistance for eligible farmers in droughtaffected areas ahead of Diwali The government has said the payment is intended to provide immediate financial support to farming households facing losses during the Kharif seasonOpposition questions 33 per cent croploss conditionThe Saamana editorial alleged that the governmentrsquos announcement of Rs 5000 in advance assistance had been undermined by eligibility restrictions According to the editorial the relief is limited to areas where cropdamage assessments known as panchnamas have been completed and crop losses exceed 33 per centThe editorial claimed that these conditions could leave a substantial number of farmers without assistance despite widespread drought conditionsIt accused the ruling government of making announcements without ensuring that the benefits reach all those facing financial distress The party argued that relief measures should reflect the scale of agricultural losses and the difficulties confronting rural communitiesFarmers face water and fodder shortagesThe editorial also highlighted the challenges facing farmers as the Kharif harvest suffers and prospects for Rabi sowing weaken because of inadequate rainfallIt said rural communities were dealing with shortages of drinking water and fodder adding to the financial pressure caused by crop losses and mounting debtsThe article questioned whether government directives against private finance companies and moneylenders allegedly harassing farmers over loan recoveries were being enforced effectively It claimed that coercive recovery practices continued despite warnings of strict actionThe editorial also referred to reported farmer suicides in Nanded and Latur linking the cases to debtrelated distress and questioning the reach of the governmentrsquos relief and enforcement measuresEditorial questions late water conservation measuresThe editorial also criticised the Soil and Water Conservation Departmentrsquos reported move to dig waterabsorption pits after the monsoon had withdrawn describing the effort as postmortem effortsIt questioned how such measures would help villages facing water shortages without fresh rainfall and alleged that the projects risked benefiting contractors and middlemen rather than providing meaningful relief to residentsThe editorial further argued that government announcements were being undermined by administrative delays and eligibility conditions which it portrayed as additional obstacles for droughthit farmersParty questions implementation of relief measuresThe Saamana editorial concluded that the gap between government announcements and their implementation was worsening the difficulties faced by rural communities It compared bureaucratic hurdles and eligibility requirements to an ldquoEl Ninordquo more damaging than the drought itself