In the 2026-27 Union Budget, Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman has noticeably reduced the election-time recklessness shown in previous years. The focus on infrastructure development, construction and fiscal discipline is a positive aspect of the budget. The GDP growth is estimated to be around 6.8 to 7.4 per cent. Railways, rare earth mining, clean energy, etc., are the main focus of the budget. At a time when there is severe instability and uncertainty in various sectors, including the economy, both globally and nationally, annual budgets cannot be stand-alone exercises. Each of them should be an extension of the other, as gradual, small steps towards long-term planning goals. The fact that Nirmala Sitharaman, who has presented nine budgets, has paid at least some attention to sustainability and continuity makes this budget stand out. The ill effects of abolishing the Planning Commission, which existed earlier for long-term planning, were evident in the previous budgets. The message that such a forum of a politically neutral group of experts who try to look ahead decades is essential is implicit in the budget. While the budget contains political resources for slogans, there seems to be a rethinking on the culture of giving money only to regions where elections are held.
Policy support is important to mitigate the damage that external pressures and interventions can cause to the economy. Efforts to reduce pegging to the dollar and to work with other groups, including the European Union, to counter the threat of US tariffs should strengthen the optimism in the budget. However, the budget does not guarantee that the benefits which should be derived from efforts to increase investment will be realised. While one part of economic growth is investment, the other part is the purchasing power of the people. The fact that the vast majority of investments are concentrated in a few corporates reveals the malaise of the Indian economy. It is not enough to produce wealth; it must also be distributed equitably. India, which ranks fourth in the world in GDP, is ranked 134th in per capita income. This means that although there is a lot of wealth, it is concentrated in the hands of a few among a huge population According to the Global Inequality Index released a month ago, India is the country with the most severe economic inequality in the world. The richest one per cent own more than 40 per cent of the country's wealth. When this inequality is eliminated, the purchasing power of the common people will increase, and the country will prosper as a whole. The budget is also a tool for this. However, there is no deviation from the tradition of tax breaks and loan waivers instead of additional taxes for the super-rich.
It is natural that there are pros and cons to the details of the budget proposals. However, the basic achievements expected from the budget are still far away: eliminating inequality and increasing employment are not even the goal. There are positive developments in the agriculture sector and the small industry sector, but the green initiative to overcome the climate crisis is not strong enough in this budget either. Perhaps the main disadvantage of this budget is the political narrow-mindedness seen in the Union budget for the past few years. The projects that Kerala hoped to get at least during the election season (AIIMS, Vizhinjam, rail, and increased grant allocation) are not part of this budget. Kerala has been denied for years the allocations it deserves even without electoral considerations. This points to the politics in the budget. The budget, which should be the engine of the country's economic progress and should be the only consideration for the good of the country beyond party politics, is becoming a victim of the BJP's narrow-mindedness. What is reflected here is not the patriotism of seeing the country as a country.