The implementation of the pro-agricultural policy is now puzzled: the big grain growers have to return subsidies to retail investors.

In order to encourage the development of new agricultural operators, in recent years, the state and local governments have begun to subsidize them. In Chongqing, the subsidy standard is divided into 160 yuan and 230 yuan per mu according to the scale of operation. However, in grass-roots operations, many retail investors have become "field bosses," and large grain growers have to "return" part of the subsidy to them. in some districts and counties, the subsidy is about 90 yuan per mu, and in some places it is even less than 10 yuan.

The similar phenomenon reflects the confusion of the "last kilometer" of the new pro-agricultural policy, that is, some government measures to strengthen and benefit farmers originally have a strong orientation, but in the face of complex interests and farmland rights within rural areas, the effect is greatly reduced. With the further strengthening of national support for the new agricultural main body, how to improve the closeness, pertinence and effectiveness of the pro-agricultural policy is an important issue in front of decision-makers.

If the subsidy is not returned, the land will be resumed.

In order to stabilize grain production and reduce the adverse impact of rising costs on large households growing grain, Chongqing stipulates that large households with an area of 50 mu to 100 mu will receive a subsidy of 160 yuan per mu, and those with an area of more than 100 mu will receive a subsidy of 230 yuan per mu. However, the implementation of this pro-agricultural policy encountered confusion.

The reporter recently interviewed in Liangping, Dianjiang, Zhongxian, and other places in Chongqing, and found that most of the large grain growers have to face the requirements of "subsidy and profit sharing" from retail investors. Although farmers who transfer their land do not grow grain, they are also required to share the subsidy funds for large households in comparison with the agricultural material subsidies and direct grain subsidies that other grain farmers can enjoy.

"the effect of the implementation of the new preferential agricultural policy depends not only on the intensity and scope of government capital investment, but also on the relationship between farmers' interests and farmland rights. For example, in land transfer, although the rights of land use and management have been transferred to large households, retail farmers still retain the right to contract land. Under the background of the current weak binding force of rural contracts, if large households cannot meet the interests of retail investors, retail investors are likely to recover their land. " Liu Baofan, deputy director of the Committee of Agriculture of Dianjiang County, said that it is very difficult for the government to implement the requirement that "whoever grows grain will be subsidized." In the process of land transfer, there is actually a game of interests between the large investors who transfer to the land and the retail investors, who want to rent the land, usually on the premise of returning part of the subsidy funds.

In Lingyun Village, Xinmin Town, Dianjiang County, Pan Zhicai, a major grain grower, transferred 103 mu of land last year. According to the standard of 230 yuan per mu, he can get a subsidy of more than 23000 yuan. "what I can actually get is 16000 yuan, and the rest of the money will be 'returned' to the farmers who transferred the land to me." Pan Zhicai said that although these farmers no longer farm their own land, they also ask for subsidies, and if they do not give money, they will not transfer land.

The reporter visited more than 30 large grain growers in Chongqing and found that nearly 70% of the large households' land transfer area is in the range of 50 mu to 100 mu. After the government subsidies are deducted from retail investors, the subsidies actually received by large households are generally only 4,000 to 5,000 yuan. In some places, there is even the situation that "retail investors take a large amount of subsidies, and there are few large households left."

Major grain growers in various places reflect that at present, many farmers regard the subsidy fund as a universal welfare of the government, rather than a special fund for the state to encourage grain production, and feel that the subsidy should have its own share. In addition, in some places, the land transfer is not standardized, some are oral agreements, some do not sign formal contracts, the farmers who transfer the land are relatively strong, if they do not return the subsidies, they will take back the land.