Perceived Growth-Centric Inclusive Development Union Budget
Gross Injustice to Emerging States like Telangana
Vanam Jwala Narasimha Rao
The Hans India (28-07-2024)
{Satisfying the demands of
‘Friendly States’ may contribute to political stability and support to the Modi
government, but neglect of emerging states like Telangana despite their growth,
which still require continued support for sustained development is against the
natural justice. “Perceived political motivations behind fund allocations lead
to accusations of bias and unfair treatment. Balancing regional development
needs with national growth objectives remains a critical challenge for the Modi
government} – Note by Editor Hans
Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman while
presenting Union Budget 2024 emphasized that it reflects Centre’s sustained
efforts for ‘Viksit Bharat’ (Developed India). The Focus
of the Budget as outlined by her is on four major groups, the Poor (Garib),
Women (Mahila), Youth (Yuva), and Farmers (Anna data). It basically underscores
Employment, Skilling, Support for MSMEs, and Middle Class, with
significant allocations. In addition, Finance Minister prioritized nine areas
in the Budget, namely, Agriculture, Employment, Human Resource Development,
Manufacturing, Services, Urban Development, Energy Security, Infrastructure,
Innovation, Research and Development, and Next-Generation Reforms.
Substantial, Special Fund allocations
for Bihar and Andhra Pradesh States is noticeable development in the Union Budget.
Both Congress and BRS Leaders including CM Revanth Reddy and BRS Working
President KT Rama Rao, strongly criticized and voiced disappointments on few
states receiving substantial benefits, and Telangana being entirely neglected
and overlooked, contrary to AP Reorganization Act. CM Revanth Reddy, alleged in
the Assembly, that southern states, are discriminated in getting their due. Significantly,
the Telangana State Assembly passed a Unanimous Resolution against the
injustice and discrimination done to the State in the Union Budget, demanding suitable
amendments. The CM Revanth Reddy announced abstaining NITI Aayog meeting
Allocation to Bihar and AP could be to
address specific developmental needs and commitments, potentially leading to
balanced regional development, besides political considerations. For instance,
in the case of Bihar, the reason could be in consideration of it being one of the
most underdeveloped states. With regards AP, the expedient excuse to allot
funds maybe that, the state was promised ‘Special Status, Special Assistance,
and Special Funds’ post-bifurcation. Another possible reason may be, that, the
‘Political Leadership’ shrewdly lobbied for additional funds, if not
special status, leveraging its political alliances.
‘Neglect of Telangana’ may be
due to ‘Perceived Self-Sufficiency’ and considerable ‘Economic Growth
and Industrial Development’ of the state, since its formation, thanks to
KCR. Endorsing this, the Socio-Economic Outlook released by State Government in
the Assembly has disclosed that, Telangana’s GSDP in 2023-24 is Rs 14,63,963
crore, which is 11.9% higher than the previous year, as against the growth rate
of 9.1% at the National Level. Similarly, the Per Capita Income is Rs 3,47,229
as against country's Rs 1,83,236, higher by Rs 1,64,063.
Telangana’s current and previous ‘Political
Dynamics’ including its relationship with the Central Government, may have prejudiced
leading to lesser fund allocation. Satisfying the demands of ‘Friendly States’
may contribute to political stability and support to the Modi Government, but neglect
of ‘Emerging States like Telangana’ despite their growth, which still
require continued support for ‘Sustained Development’ is against ‘Natural
Justice.’ ‘Perceived Political Motivations’ behind fund allocations
lead to accusations of bias and unfair treatment.
This way of higher allocations to few
states, and neglect of other states, reflect a complex interplay of
developmental needs, political considerations, and unethical strategic
priorities. It may be crucial to ensure a balanced approach, but, that does not
mean to overlook emerging states like Telangana. ‘Achieving Equitable and Inclusive
Growth’ requires careful consideration of both immediate developmental
needs and long-term regional development goals. While Uttar Pradesh,
Maharashtra, Karnataka, Gujarat etc. are favored in allocations, states ‘Worse
Off or Neglected’ are West Bengal, Kerala, Jharkhand, not to speak of
Telangana.
INDIA Bloc MPs led by Leader of
Opposition Rahul Gandhi protested in Parliament Premises over the
discrimination against opposition-ruled states in the ‘Kursi Bachao Union
Budget’ describing it as an assault on India's Federal Structure. Congress
MP from Telangana Mallu Ravi and seven other MPs addressed letter to PM Modi objecting
the injustice done to state in the Union Budget
Allocating significant funds to
infrastructure, health, and education sectors has clear benefits in terms of
economic growth, improved public services, and human capital development. For
instance, significant allocations to roads, highways, railways, and urban
development are aimed at ‘Economic Stimulus and Job Creation.’ The ‘Long-term
Benefits’ include, enhanced connectivity benefiting businesses and
consumers, and to attract domestic and foreign investments, boosting economic
activity. Increased Allocations to Health Sector will lead to improved public
health outcomes, ensure better Pandemic preparedness for future health crises,
and human capital development, though effective utilization of funds remains a
challenge.
An objective and impartial analysis of
the Union Budget including its Salient Features, as expressed by a cross
section of economic, social, and political experts, rationally, without going
in to the figures, is interesting. It is the shared view of many, though with a
quantum of difference, that, focus on ‘Economic Growth and Recovery;
Significant allocation for Infrastructure Development; Increased allocation for
the Health Sector; Investments in Education and Skill Development Initiatives;
Enhanced support for the Agricultural Sector to boost Rural Incomes; Moderate
Reforms in Taxation and Efforts to maintain Fiscal Discipline; Promotion of Digital
Economy Initiatives; Increased allocation for Social Welfare Schemes;
Initiatives aimed at promoting Sustainable Development’ etc. are unique in
the Budget.
SWOT Analysis that provide an overview
of the Budget's key aspects, aimed at offering a balanced perspective beyond
political interests reveal that, ‘Strengths of the Budget’ include, focus
on sectors critical for ‘Post-Pandemic Recovery, Fostering Balanced and Sustainable
Growth Trajectory; Long-Term Benefits by Significant Capital Allocation to Infrastructure,
including job creation and improved logistics; Addressing Foundational Aspects
of Human Development through Enhanced spending on Health and Education which is
crucial for long-term economic prosperity; and Efforts to maintain Fiscal Discipline
and manage the Fiscal Deficit.’
The Weaknesses are basically ‘Implementation
Challenges, Tax Compliance, Sectoral Imbalances’ etc. Execution of
ambitious projects, especially in infrastructure and social welfare, often
faces bureaucratic delays and inefficiencies. While tax reforms are positive,
the actual increase in compliance and revenue generation may take time to
materialize. Overemphasis on certain sectors may lead to neglect of others,
creating imbalances in economic development.
The opportunities are mainly ‘Private
Sector Participation, Global Investments, Sustainable Development’ etc. The
threats include ‘Global Economic Uncertainty, Inflationary Pressures, Political
and Social Instability’ etc. Global economic fluctuations and geopolitical
tensions could impact growth projections and external trade; Increased
spending, especially in infrastructure and social welfare, could lead to
inflationary pressures if not managed properly; Social unrest or political
instability could undermine economic progress and deter investment.
The Union Budget allocations reflect a
combination of economic priorities, political considerations, and the perceived
effectiveness of fund utilization. States like Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra,
Karnataka, Bihar, and Gujarat have received favorable allocations due to their
economic significance, development needs, and political influence. On the other
hand, states like, West Bengal, Telangana, Kerala, and Jharkhand have been less
favored, possibly due to political dynamics, previous fund utilization
concerns, and varying economic priorities. Balancing regional development needs
with national growth objectives remains a critical challenge for the central
government.
The Union Budget’s focus on ‘Infrastructure,
Health, Education, and Targeted Sectoral Support’ is poised to have a
positive impact on the Indian economy by ‘Boosting GSDP and Per Capita Income.’
While large and medium businesses are likely to benefit from increased
investments and improved business environments, small businesses and low-income
groups may gain from targeted support and social welfare schemes. However,
effective implementation and addressing challenges such as inflationary
pressures and regulatory compliance are crucial for realizing these benefits.
As a nation, it is time to introspect
where India stands in comparison to contemporary nations. ‘Piecemeal and Half-Hearted
Measures’ being taken sporadically will not suffice. There needs to be a ‘Paradigm
Shift in Institutional Structure.’ India precisely needs ‘Economic Reforms’
to improve ‘Ease of Doing Business, Attract Foreign Investments, and Resolve
Issues that Hinder Growth.’ There is a need for ‘Structural Reforms for Higher
FDI inflows.’ Bringing out an attractive and practical ‘Tax Amnesty Scheme’
for bringing ‘Black Money’ to the country and to invest it in
infrastructure, is indispensable. ‘Cooperative Federalism’ should be
adhered in ‘Letter and Spirit’ in Budget Allocations, not Political
Considerations.
No comments:
Post a Comment