Almost all parties criticised a proposed doubling in the import duty on gold to four per cent, as the debate on the Union Budget 2012-13 in the Rajya Sabha today saw even allies of the United Progressive Alliance like the Trinamool Congress and the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam joining the Opposition bandwagon on the issue, pressuring finance minister Pranab Mukherjee to consider a rollback.
All this, on a day when a nationwide strike by jewellers entered the 11th day.
In Parliament’s upper house, the main Opposition BJP was trenchant in its criticism of the Union Budget. Its member Prabhat Jha called the proposals garib virodhi (anti-poor). Citing statistics, the MP said that for every rupee the government spends, 29 paise goes towards debt and 18 paise as interest.
Also, the Budget targeted “nothing” for the youth, despite them expected to comprise half of the country’s population by 2016. Similarly women and the agricultural sector had been overlooked, he alleged. Ridiculing a “tall claim” by the government on bringing in Rs 40,000 crore through disinvestment, he noted that the real amount on this stood at Rs 14,000 crore.
Jha’s tirade came a day after his party colleague Arun Jaitley, leader of the Opposition in the house, tore into the details of the Budget, calling it “retrograde” and “harking back to the pre-1991 mindset”.
Today, N K Singh of the Janata Dal (United) described the Budget as “shallow”. He expressed concern over the “dangerous” situation of the fiscal deficit, and urged the government to give “credible” figures on debt-to-GDP ratio.
Further, he suggested the involvement of experts ahead of the proposed amendment to the Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management Act. In Singh’s view, the Budget had “neglected” disadvantaged states like Bihar, and therefore proposed the constitution of a national commission to enumerate regional inequality.
More From This Section
The DMK’s Kanimozhi, while appreciating Mukherjee’s Budget, was critical of its proposal to raise the import duty on gold, claiming it would lead to smuggling. “The demand for gold in India, the world’s biggest consumer, stood at 933 tonnes in 2011,” pointed out the MP from Tamil Nadu, while stressing on the strike by jewellers since March 17, protesting against both the import duty increase as well as the excise duty of one per cent on unbranded precious jewellery.
Kanomzhi urged the government to think of “other avenues” to raise capital instead of disinvestment. Expressing displeasure over the proposal to disinvest PSUs, she said the government should re-think on its proposal to raise Rs 30,000 crore through disinvestment.
When the AIADMK’s Rabi Bernard referred to the 2G scam in his speech, Kanimozhi (also an accused in the case) thought it appropriate to leave the House, but the chair assured her there were no allegations against her and she need not leave. The AIADMK went to the extent of labelling the government and its budget as “anti-Tamilian” in its attitude.
The BSP, which renders outside support to the government, minced no words in attacking the Budget. The party’s Veer Singh accused the Congress-led alliance of neglecting the poor. “The UPA has not paid heed to the plight of poor,” he said. “The Budget has schemes that provide facilities for affluent and not to the poor.” He demanded that 25 per cent of the total budget should have been allocated for uplift of the poor.
Even as parties put across their views on the budget in the Upper House, the finance minister replied to the Budget in the Lok Sabha.
The absence of any minister while T N Seema (CPI-M) was speaking on the Budget led to the Opposition demanding the debate be abandoned. It was then left to the chair to explain that rural development minister Jairam Ramesh had just stepped out for “personal reasons”. No sooner was there an uproar than Ramesh rushed back.
Mukherjee is expected to reply to the Budget in the Rajya Sabha tomorrow.