NEW DELHI, Feb. 10 -- The Treasury and Opposition benches sparred on Monday in the Lok Sabha over the Union Budget proposals, with Opposition members arguing that it offered only a "sugar rush" in tax relief without any long-term benefits. Meanwhile, the ruling side defended it as a "booster shot" for the economy.
Participating in the ongoing debate on the Union Budget for 2025-26 in the Lok Sabha, Opposition members expressed concerns over issues such as the depreciating rupee, rising government debt, and the plight of farmers. They claimed that the budget was "election-centric" and ignored the interests of a vast majority of the population.
DMK MP Dayanidhi Maran said that preference had been given to corporates rather than the common man. He claimed that the rising prices of essential commodities were hurting the poor and middle classes.
The DMK leader also accused the Modi government of presenting successive budgets focused on poll-bound states to secure political gains.
He argued that the tax relief for the middle class was like an "economic sugar rush," which was unsustainable in the long run. Calling the budgetary provisions "unjust," he said they failed to address the interests of the people. Congress MP Manish Tewari claimed that over the past decade, government debt had soared, creating problems for future generations. He described the rising debt as an "inter-generational burden."
The Congress leader asserted that while the common man continued to struggle due to the government's economic policies, the agriculture sector was also in distress. He questioned why MNREGA workdays were increasing if the farm sector was truly prospering.
During their speeches, both Maran and Tewari questioned the absence of Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman. The Chair responded that the Minister of State for Finance was present and that the Finance Minister was in the Rajya Sabha.
BJP MP Anurag Thakur hailed the budget as a "force multiplier." "Rahul Gandhi is calling this a 'band-aid budget.' I want to tell him that this is not a band-aid budget but a 'booster shot' budget. It is a force multiplier," he said.
The Hamirpur MP highlighted the measures taken by the government to support start-ups in the country and alleged that the Congress was preoccupied with "its own start-up."
NCP MP Supriya Sule welcomed the tax rebate but maintained that "all is not well."
"I urge this government to acknowledge that the economy is slowing down. You have given a good tax rebate, and I welcome that, but I am unsure whether it will deliver the superior results the government expects. I request the government to introspect-just winning elections does not mean all is well," Sule said.
TMC leader Kalyan Banerjee alleged that the budget was anti-people and harmful to the country's economy. He also opposed the proposal to increase the foreign direct investment (FDI) limit in the insurance sector.
"The budget ignores the immediate challenges of growing unemployment, inflation, and inequality," he said, adding that the income tax benefit would help only a limited number of people.
He also accused the Centre of neglecting West Bengal. "If you ignore us, the people of West Bengal will give you an answer in the 2026 assembly elections," he warned.
Iqra Choudhary (SP) argued that the budget was merely a headline-grabbing document that neglected farmers, youth, and the poor. "It is not an inclusive budget," she said, adding that no steps had been taken to reduce unemployment. She also demanded an increase in MPLAD funds from Rs 5 crore to Rs 25 crore.
Congress MP Amrinder Singh Raja Warring contended that the budget favoured the rich and was designed for electoral gains.
He demanded an increase in wages under MNREGA to Rs 600 and a legal guarantee of 200 days of wage employment.
In the Rajya Sabha, the Opposition launched scathing criticism of the government on rising inflation, joblessness, and growing income inequalities, alleging that the Union Budget for 2025-26 did not adequately address the concerns of the poor and rural population.
Initiating a discussion on the Union Budget, Congress leader P. Chidambaram described it as a "politically-driven budget" crafted with an eye on the Delhi elections, while ignoring the needs of the poor and the bottom half of the population.
"There ought to be a philosophy behind the Budget, but I cannot find one in this Budget. I shall not attempt to do so because, after going through the Budget speech and numbers, I believe there is no philosophy behind it," he said.
Chidambaram further stated, "It is obvious that the budget was politically driven. I shall not elaborate on that, but I congratulate the Finance Minister for achieving one of her objectives a couple of days ago."
The senior Congress leader also sought explanations for the reduction in allocations for the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), questioning whether the government was closing down embassies and consulates, thereby diminishing India's global presence.
DMK MP Tiruchi Siva noted that Prime Minister Narendra Modi had described the Budget as a road map for 'Viksit Bharat,' but "the numbers reveal that the path seems only a mirage."
He argued that the Budget was presented as a proclamation of progress while conveniently concealing realities such as stagnant growth, increasing inequality, and the loss of a sizeable demographic dividend.
Trinamool Congress MP Ritabrata Banerjee pointed out that the youth unemployment rate had risen sharply in 2023-24.
"The latest Economic Survey data shows that real earnings among self-employed male workers have been steadily decreasing since 2017-18," he added.
Debashish Samantaray of the BJD criticised the Budget speech for failing to mention measures to improve the working conditions, wages, and rights of factory and industrial workers. He also highlighted the absence of support for low-income workers and noted that "no measures" had been announced by the Finance Minister to control inflation.
M Thambidurai (AIADMK) demanded a greater allocation of funds for Tamil Nadu, arguing that the money provided by the Central government for the affordable housing scheme was insufficient.
Ramji Lal Suman of the Samajwadi Party called the Budget "disappointing" and dismissive of the rural sector, asserting that the MNREGA scheme's allocation had been reduced. He described the Budget as "anti-farmer, anti-youth, and anti-rural."
Congress leader Akhilesh Prasad Singh criticised the government for "systematically neglecting" Bihar since its bifurcation. He argued that achieving a USD 5 trillion economy by 2047 required addressing regional imbalances and demanded special category status for Bihar.with agency inputs
Published by HT Digital Content Services with permission from Millennium Post.