The Union Budget received more criticism than kudos in the city on Friday. Opposition parties and trade circles slammed the budget and dubbed it as “anti-common man.”
“The budget does not provide any relief to the common man, industry, or agriculture,” they said.
“The budget betrays the trust of the common man. It will lead to further rise in prices, which in turn will hit the common man below the belt,” felt several opposition parties. Andhra Chamber of Commerce and Industry president M. Murali Krishna and secretary Ch. Prasad said the budget was not encouraging to agriculture and industry. There were no proposals to tide over the power crisis, which was looming over the country. The government should have increased the cap on Income Tax limit up to Rs.2.5 lakh instead of Rs.2 lakh, they said. Vijayawada Chamber of Commerce and Industry expressed the view that the budget was utterly against the trade circles. The increase in excise and customs duties would pave way for black money. Though the government claimed that the budget would give a boost to agriculture, the budget would not increase farmers' prosperity, it said.
Fertilizer subsidy
CPI(M) district secretary R. Raghu said a cut in fertilizer subsidy by Rs.6,000 crore would fuel prices. The prices of petrol, diesel, and kerosene would go up as the government cut subsidies to the tune of Rs.25,000 crore, he said. BJYM State Executive member Ch. Rajanikanth said the budget hardly won the hearts of people and would not address the basic needs of the commoner. CPI(M) city secretary Ch. Babu Rao said the government's proposal to pay subsidy directly to the beneficiaries was nothing but shelving the welfare schemes.
The Income Tax limit of Rs.2 lakh would not help the salaried class in any way if the inflation was to be considered. The allocations for NREGS were meagre. The budget benefited corporate bodies than the common man, as the government announced concessions to the tune of Rs.5.50 lakh to corporate houses, he said.
CITU district committee secretary M. Srinivas said the budget was anti-labour.
‘Lacks focus'
Former Rajya Sabha member Yelamanchili Sivaji said that budget lacked focus on the widening rich-poor divide and it did not address the issues concerning the agriculture sector on which 63 per cent of the population were still dependent for their living.
Besides, there were no policy measures aimed at preventing farmer suicides. The budget outlook was such that distress, squalor, and poverty would be aggravated. The social sector allocations were meagre. The government created “islands of wealth” by opening up oil exploration, education, power purchases, and other areas of the economy to private players without pondering over the consequences.
The benefits of wealth thus generated were not properly channelled. Overall, the budget was disappointing. It was not expected from Pranab Mukherjee, who was adjudged one of the best Finance Ministers India had over the last two decades.
