The Lok Sabha results had raised hope of a new government that would be more federal and co-operative than what we have seen in the last 10 years. But the budget session is clear proof the Modi-Shah coterie has no such intentions. A united opposition that put up a spirited defence of democracy in parliament is heralding a new change.  

FOR the BJP and the Modi-Shah coterie that controls it, the results of General Elections 2024 ought to have been a sobering one. The heartland has begun to slip away and minor gains in the south and the east couldn’t make up for that. So one would have safely assumed the new dispensation in New Delhi would finally have got the message and climbed down from their high horse. For starters, everyone expected a discernible shift in the content and format of parliamentary discourse. 

But that was not to be. The Modi administration seems intent on maintaining the illusion that nothing has changed in national politics. An analysis of the recently concluded parliament session serves as a sobering reminder of the administration's hubris and disregard for democratic discourse. Contrary to expectations of a more nuanced approach given the electoral drubbing, the government doubled down on its autocratic tendencies, exhibiting intolerance towards the issues raised by the opposition, and pushing forward with its communal agenda.

One of the most telling examples of this was the introduction of the Waqf Amendment Bill, a legislative move designed to fundamentally alter the character of the Waqf administration. This bill, introduced without meaningful consultation, underscores the government's determination to impose its agenda regardless of the broader implications for communal harmony and the concerns of dissenting voices.

Yet, the essence of this session cannot be solely encapsulated by the government’s overreach. It also heralded a profound transformation in opposition politics. All non-NDA parties, long sidelined and silenced in parliament, displayed firm resolve, challenging the government's authoritarian tactics. Their spirited performance marks a significant departure from the past ten years’ norm of stifling opposition voices. This resurgence signals a potential realignment in the balance of power within parliament, as the opposition refuses to be steamrolled by the ruling party's majority. The opposition fought tooth and nail against the BJP's authoritarian tactics, resolutely refusing to be silenced or sidelined.

The highlight of the session was undoubtedly the budget presentation by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, which was transformed into a “Kursi Bachao (save the chair)” budget. The dependence of the government on the two crutches, TDP and JDU, were amplified in the budget, with multiple references to Andhra Pradesh and Bihar. However, a deeper analysis reveals that these references were more rhetorical than substantive. Intriguingly, some of the statements echoed the 2014-15 budget presented by the late Arun Jaitley.

The Economic Survey preceding the budget was equally underwhelming. It offered a tepid acknowledgment of the severe challenges facing the country. It subtly admitted the folly of overemphasizing the manufacturing sector and lamented the failure of the agricultural sector to generate sufficient employment. The survey also snivelled about the private sector’s reluctance to invest in capital infrastructure, despite reaping the benefits of tax breaks and incentives. It also highlighted the irony that while corporate profits have quadrupled, the sector has failed to contribute meaningfully to employment growth. During the past years, the government slashed corporate tax rates, promising that the benefits would trickle down to the masses. Yet, what we witness today is a starkly different reality. Despite the quadrupling of corporate profits, the contribution of corporate tax to GDP has shockingly declined from 3.4 per cent in 2018-19 to a mere 3.1 per cent in 2023-24. In contrast, the burden of the common man went up as the government mopped up more from indirect taxes and also income tax. This skewed distribution of tax obligations underscores the government's disregard for the financial struggles of ordinary citizens while continuing to cozy up to the corporate sector.

A new dictum has been introduced- ‘No job but internship’ by the FM which was exposed by the opposition in general debate. The schemes purportedly aimed at tackling unemployment were more about optics than substance. The first scheme offered a one-month wage subsidy of up to Rs 15,000 for new employees entering the workforce in the formal sector, specifically those registered with the Employees' Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO). This provision, however, ignores the vast majority of the Indian workforce employed in the unorganised sector, rendering the scheme largely ineffective. The second scheme proposed to incentivise both employees and employers by subsidising their EPFO contributions for the first four years of employment. But the reality is that most private employers remit only the maximum obligatory 12 per cent of the Rs 15,000 wage ceiling, amounting to a mere Rs 1,800. The budget failed to specify what percentage of this paltry amount would be subsidised, making it a hollow promise. The government missed an opportunity to raise the EPF wage ceiling of Rs 15,000, which would have genuinely benefited employees. The third scheme announced that the government would reimburse employers towards their EPFO contributions up to Rs 3,000 per month for two years for each additional employee hired. However, this is misleading. Given the current EPFO contribution ceiling, the maximum obligatory employer contribution is Rs 1,800 per month as explained above. The government’s use of the phrase "up to Rs 3,000" is a deliberate obfuscation, intended to create an illusion of substantial support where there is little. This comes at a time when the government has consistently ignored the pleas of pensioners to increase the minimum EPF pension from Rs 1,000 to at least Rs 9,000, a demand made even more urgent by the tragic stories of pensioners living in abject poverty. The government's handling of the Supreme Court’s recent judgments on EPF higher pensions is equally appalling. The Employees' Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO) has been accused of distorting and misinterpreting the apex court’s rulings to deny rightful claims, a move that has driven several desperate pensioners to depression, with one even committing suicide at an EPFO office in Kerala.

Opposition MPs, including those from the CPI(M), were resolute in revealing how the budget fell woefully short of its grand promises.

One of the most significant issues lies in the stark disparity between the promised and actual capital expenditure. The provisional actuals for FY 2023-24 reveal a capital expenditure of Rs 9,48,506 crore, which falls short of the budget estimate of Rs 10,00,961 crore. This underperformance is symptomatic of a broader issue: the government's inability to translate its lofty aspirations into tangible outcomes. The opposition also drew attention to a disturbing trend in the budget: the shifting of financial burden from the central government to the states. While allocations for centrally sponsored schemes have increased, thereby placing a greater financial strain on states (typically at 40 per cent), the allocation for central sector schemes – fully funded by the central government – has decreased. This trend is emblematic of the government's strategy of offloading responsibilities onto states without equipping them with adequate resources, exacerbating fiscal disparities and undermining the principle of cooperative federalism. 

Moreover, opposition also criticised the staggering increase in cess and surcharges from Rs 2,54,544.78 crore in 2019-20 to Rs 5,00,980.83 crore in 2023-24, which are not part of the divisible pool of taxes shared with states. This tactic not only diminishes the funds available for state devolution but also undermines the foundational principles of fiscal federalism.

Agriculture, the backbone of the Indian economy, has also been egregiously neglected. The share of Gross Value Added (GVA) from the agriculture and allied sectors in the total economy at current prices has been steadily declining, reaching a mere 17.7 per cent in 2023-24 from 20.3 per cent in 2020-21. The growth rate in agriculture has plummeted to 1.4 per cent in 2023-24, a sharp decline from the 4.7 per cent growth seen in the previous year. The budget fails to address the root causes of this decline, such as exorbitant production costs, inadequate crop insurance, the absence of assured Minimum Support Prices (MSP) based on the C2+50 per cent formula, the lack of a legal guarantee for MSP, etc. This neglect is further compounded by a massive 34.7 per cent reduction in fertilizer subsidy allocation compared to the 2022-23 actuals, amounting to a decline of Rs 87,339 crores. Additionally, the government's decision to allocate funds for agricultural research in a "challenge mode" and involve private sector entities like Bayer and Amazon jeopardises the future of Indian agriculture.

The budget's treatment of Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs), the backbone of the Indian economy, also reveals a deep-seated apathy. As per the statistics, over 13,000 MSMEs were shut down in 2022-23 alone, displacing nearly 91,000 workers. These numbers are more than mere statistics; they represent the shattered dreams and livelihoods of countless small entrepreneurs and their employees. Demonetisation, the COVID-19 pandemic, and the haphazard implementation of GST are the three main reasons that rang the death knell for MSMEs.

Unemployment, one of the most pressing issues facing the nation, was also inadequately addressed in the budget. The government's definition of ‘employment’ is misleading, painting a rosy picture that belies the harsh realities on the ground. Instead of creating meaningful employment opportunities, the government has resorted to offering internships—an ineffectual stopgap measure that does little to address the long-term problem of joblessness. 

From the underfunding of crucial sectors like health, education, and agriculture to the erosion of fiscal federalism and the shifting of financial burdens onto states, this budget exposed the government's hypocrisy and lack of commitment to the welfare of the nation. It is a budget of missed opportunities – a budget for the few, not the many.

FM has always been vocal about simplifying everything for the people, yet her actions have only added layers of confusion, obscuring the true picture from the public. A prime example is the treatment of six centrally sponsored schemes, branded as ‘Core of the Core Schemes,’ which were always prominently listed under the head “Outlay on Major Schemes” in the budget documents. These included vital programmes like NREGA, the National Social Assistance Programme, the umbrella programmes for the development of minorities, Scheduled Castes, etc. However, this time, they have been submerged in a pile of other schemes, with even the nomenclature altered, making it difficult to discern allocations for these crucial areas. Similarly, the delay in publishing the pink book for railways, a significant departure from previous budgets, while selectively releasing snippets to the media by the railway ministry, has further muddied the waters.

One of the other notable aspects of the last session, as evident from any careful analysis, is the noticeable decline in the quality of answers provided to questions on the floor. Ministers, once expected to deliver detailed and substantive responses, now frequently rely on evasive or perfunctory replies. This shift from comprehensive explanations to terse, evasive and non-committal statements underscores a broader erosion in the commitment to transparency and accountability. It appears the government has perfected the craft of sidestepping with a finesse that deserves, if not applause, at least a slow clap.

The reluctance of the government to allow discussions on crucial ministries like home and defence was exposed by the opposition. Though the Rajya Sabha chairman had admitted discussion on the ministry of cooperation it was abandoned without giving any sound rationale. It was obvious that the treasury benches do not want Amit Shah to be subjected for a parliamentary scrutiny.

This session may have concluded, but the points it highlighted –the intolerance of the Modi government and the reinvigorated opposition – are poised to shape the political discourse in the months to come. The battle lines have been drawn, and the stage is set for a more vibrant and charged parliament, where a revitalised opposition stands ready to hold the government accountable. The government, having tasted the resolve of this united opposition, is now forced to rethink its strategies to cope with the fierce challenges ahead.