The three farm bills are making history.

Two of these bills were passed by the Rajya Sabha by voice vote when, according to Congress leader Abhishek Manu Singhvi, the Lok Sabha chamber -- where several Rajya Sabha MPs are seated due to Covid-19 protocol -- did not have an audio.The Rajya Sabha members created what many are saying an unprecedented din in the house.

It was possibly the first occasion when Rajya Sabha -- also called the House of Elders sometimes -- members broke the microphone of the chair.

Deputy Chairman Harivansh was presiding over the business.It was the first instance when a no-confidence motion was moved against the deputy chairman of the Rajya Sabha.

Though the Lok Sabha has seen at least three no-confidence motions against the Speaker beginning from the days of the first Lok Sabha Speaker GV Mavalankar, the Rajya Sabha never came to such a situation before.While all the no-confidence motions against the Speaker were defeated after discussion in the Lok Sabha, the Rajya Sabha move fell through as it did not pass the constitutional test that requires such a motion to be moved after a 14-day notice.On one hand, while Parliament has seen unruly scenes over the three farm bills -- the oldest ally of the BJP withdrew from the Narendra Modi government -- on the other hand, the protest by farmers, in whose name the Members of Parliament have created this ruckus, is very limited in nature.PERIMETER OF PROTESTProtests are largely limited to Punjab and Haryana.

Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh which in recent past saw aggressive agitations by farmers have reported sporadic and minor protests over the farm bills.

Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and West Bengal, whose ruling party's leader Derek O'Brien has taken on the Modi government and Harivansh head on, have not seen any major protest by farmers over the farm bills.In contrast, the BJP in Haryana is on the defensive over the farm bills at a time when Prime Minister Narendra Modi has been seen pushing the three farm bills aggressively.

Its ally the Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) was forced to make a U-turn on the bills -- after supporting it at least between first week of June and early days of September.This perplexing nature of protests by farmers and politics over the farm bills has a link with the nature of procurement of foodgrains by government agencies, the mechanism of the Minimum Support Price (MSP) and the nature of land holdings of farmers in the country.The lion's share of the procurement done by the government comes from Punjab and Haryana.

For a majority of the farmers in the country -- in more than half the states -- the local markets are the main buyers.

That is, the mandis approved under the APMC laws are of little or no value to them.MSP: MAIN STIMULATOR OF PROTESTSThe NSSO report for 2012-13 said less than 10 per cent farmers sell their produce at the MSP.

It is estimated now that only about six per cent of the farmers in the country get MSP pricing for their produce.The remaining 94 per cent of the farmers sell their produce to the market.

The six per cent farmers have an assured income and a vast majority of them are from Punjab and Haryana.One of the farm bills -- The Farmers Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Bill -- authorises farmers to sell their produce outside APMC mandis.

This may impact the farmers who till now have had assured income due to higher procurement by the governments in their states.A glance at this report of the Department of Food and Public Distribution shows that Punjab and Haryana farmers traditionally depend on the APMC mandis for their assured incomes, and that explains why the farmers from these states are known for launching campaigns for higher MSP.The record for 2019-20 shows that Punjab and Haryana procured about 80 per cent of the paddy produced by farmers in these states.

In the case of wheat, the procurement has been about 70 per cent.Other states present a picture of similar dependence of the farmers on the APMC mandis and government procurements.

Telangana showed marked improvement in the procurement of paddy last year but that has not been the norm.Bigger states such as Uttar Pradesh, Bengal and Bihar have far lower procurement by the government.

Farmers in these states already depend on the market for a better price.

Bihar in fact is the first state in India to have de-legislated the Agriculture Produce Market Committee Act in 2006 paving the way for private sector to get involved in procurement of agricultural produce.THE CONSUMER FARMERSThis MSP linkage to the protest by farmers against the three farm bills has another connection -- with the size of land holdings.

According to the last Agriculture Census done in 2015-16, around 86 per cent of all farmers are small or marginal in nature.

That is, they have a land holding of less than two hectares.Practically, these small and marginal farmers are net buyers of food because their land holdings are not big enough to meet their own annual requirement.So, when MSP is raised, while their brethren in states such as Punjab and Haryana benefit, these farmers end up paying more for food just like rest of the consumers.

And, land holding size is particularly worrisome for farmers in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and West Bengal.This explains why the protest is limited to certain pockets of the country, and primarily led by the Opposition parties with governments in states.

The Congress is being driven by the protest in Punjab, which will elect a new government in 18 months.

Interestingly, in Maharashtra such protests are not being voiced by the Congress in a high pitch.The Trinamool Congress has been vociferous and it is going to seek re-election in Bengal in April-May next year.

The farmers in Bengal are largely unaffected by the three farm bills.

It is understandable from the fact that procurement of paddy -- the main crop for farmers in Bengal -- has not touched even 20 per cent-mark since 2015-16.