CK Saji Narayanan
THE budget is not only disappointing to labour, but is anti worker, anti poor and anti farmer, The issues raised by the central trade unions during the two days strike have been neglected.
The comment about poor people of the nation in the budget as “face of poor who look to the government for a little help, a scholarship or an allowance or a subsidy or a pension” is highly deplorable. It is the attitude of the UPA Governemnt that is reflected here.
ICDS which is dedicated to the basic development of Indian villages is only given a marginal increase, even though its commendable performance is acknowledged in the budget. Similarly agriculture that gives employment to more than half the population is also not given its sufficient due. The demand of interest waiver for farmers in the background of farmer suicide is also ignored. Allocates to backward districts is also disproportionate to the required development.
It is unfortunate that the long pending demand of Trade Unions for a Social Security fund for the 43 crore of unorganised sector workers has been ignored and not even a single paise was allocated. Even though the unorganised Workers’ Social Security Act was passed in 2008, nothing has been done substantially inspite the passing of 5 years. Workers are not satisfied with mere future promises.
BMS also oppose the linking of Provident Fund, Pension Fund and insurance with share market which has proved to be highly risky from the experience of countries like the US. This is being consistently opposed by BMS in PF trust meetings.
Handloom and textile sectors which are in distress are allocated only a meagre amount. Only 110 crores is allocated to support disabled people. Indian medical systems like ayurveda etc. are allocated only 1069 crores where as 1,650 crores is allocated for six AIIMS institutions alone.
Even though inflation, especially food inflation is around 50 per cent, the demand of Trade Unions that the said taxable limit has to be raised is not met. The FM should have taxed sufficiently the high income group and given relief to the low salaried people.
Public sector banks which are one of the strongest in the world and which could withstand financial crisis are again tied up with the failed advices of foreign agencies like Basel III regulations. The proposal of permitting private insurance companies to open branches without the control of IRDA is already in controversy regarding the Insurance law amendments. Similarly reputed Banks being asked to become “brokers” of private insurers is it high risk in view of the previous history of many foreign insurance companies.
Not only luxury vehicles but also highly luxury articles should have been taxed and the benefit should have been given to the people below poverty line. Mobile phones have become a widely used essential article of common man, still the FM has proposed to tax the common man upon it.
India which was the second fastest growing country in the world has been pushed to third position next to China and Indonesia by 2012 in the UPA II regime. India’s growing economic concerns like high inflation,slowing down of economy, farmer suicide, huge current account deficit, job losses, lack of decent work, increasing contract labour, highest external trade deficit since 1950, declining exports and increasing imports, greater vulnerability to external shocks on integration with international market due to reforms, slowing down of industrial and manufacturing sector, 47 per cent private participation in roads and infrastructure development which encourage the toll system, widening social and economic disparities etc are not properly addressed in the budget. India which was once the second largest of country with domestic savings could withstand financial crisis because of its house hold savings. Now its domestic savings has fallen by 6 per cent points.
India’s collapse of external trade and current account deficit mentioned in economic survey are due to the wrong economic policies, import policy, import of edible oils, ASEAN FTA etc. The corrective proposals are more dangerous which will make situation worse. The proposal to reduce subsidy, leave pricing including petroleum prices to market forces is deplorable, said BMS. This is in effect shifting the burden of India’s external trade failure to common man. All the other three ways to correct it as proposed in the budget viz. FDI, FII and external borrowing are detrimental to our retail sector and India’s economic interests. Instead of encouraging self sufficiency in economy, the major solution proposed is encouraging foreign investment. Lack of vision is displayed when economic policy and economic welfare are seen as separate entities.
The poor people, workers and farmers have nothing to gain from the budget.
(The writer is national President of Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh)
