On Friday (September 20), the lead news of a national daily confirmed the fishery adviser's earlier stance that no hilsa would be exported to India this year. However, just the next day, on Saturday (September 21), a statement released by the commerce ministry gave the go-ahead to the export of 3000 tonnes of hilsa to the neighbouring country before the Durga puja festival to begin on October 8. In response to reporters' query, fishery adviser said it (permission to export) was given independently by the commerce ministry. And this was done upon a request on the occasion of Durga puja in India, she added. Interestingly, the permission for hilsa export is usually given by the fishery and livestock ministry.
In this connection, the commerce adviser told the media after holding a meeting with the IMF representative that the decision to export hilsa to India was made in the greater interest of the country. Now the question is, did this realisation (that hilsa-export to India is a matter of 'greater national interest') of the commerce adviser occurred suddenly to him? If that is the case, then why the fishery advisers' stance, which she reiterated on several occasions in the past including in an interview with the BBC (the interview was published on September 11), was never challenged by him or other advisers before?
There is nothing wrong about the export of hilsa or any other listed commodity to India.
According to the nation's export policy (2015-18), hilsa is listed as an exportable commodity where conditions apply. And during the last five years of the past government, export of hilsa to India took place regularly before the Durga puja festivals. NBR data show that during 2019-20 fiscal when hilsa export to India began, only 476 tonnes of hilsa were exported that earned the country USD3.9 million. In the last fiscal (2023-24), hardly above 800 tonnes of the fish was exported to India which fetched USD8 million. The amounts of the country's national fish finally reaching the markets of West Bengal in India was actually far less than that permitted by the government. So, from that perspective, as a foreign exchange earner, hilsa has not contributed much so far to the national exchequer through its export to India. So, the furore created over exporting or not exporting hilsa to India did never made an economic sense.
But the question here is about the government's overall policy, say on hilsa export. The hilsa issue gives one the reason to believe that the government has taken an adhocist approach to many issues among which hilsa export is one. Also, it shows that its policy stance is amenable to pressure or request. This may send a wrong signal to the business community who can capitalise on the government's wavering resolve. This also speaks of a lack of coordination among the advisers. The interim government needs to come out of its attitude of tentativeness on issues of serious national importance.
Given Bangladesh's dependence on the readymade garment (RMG) as the major export earner, the government needs to look for other potential export earners to diversify its export base. Hilsa, is one aquatic product whose export potential needs to be fully exploited. Though hilsa is caught also in Myanmar and India, Bangladesh is the world's largest producer of this fish and fishermen haul around 600,000 tonnes of hilsa annually, most of them from the sea. This accounts for 12 per cent of the country's total fish production.
So, special attention should be given to this unique exportable item from Bangladesh so it may earn more hard currency for the country than it has been doing so far.
[email protected]
