On why economic reforms are not reflected in this budget, despite the absence of the Left:
Even Western votaries of reforms have realised they can’t be allowed free rein. The Congress has always been a left-of-centre, pro-poor party but it has never resisted change. We are committed to economic reforms but they can’t be done blindfolded. Congress took a positive initiative in reforms in 1985 and then moved gradually but surely. The Left took credit for programmes proposed in our CMP, such as NREGS, RTI. It was the Congress agenda.
On whether it’s a victory for the anti-reforms lobby:
The budget isn’t a victory for any lobby. It outlines a comprehensive strategy to fulfil our election promises; stimulate the economy in a recessionary period for higher economic growth; and close the gap between rich and poor.
On whether this is a ‘political budget’:
Politics is for people’s welfare, not merely a means to attain power. It is about drawing up a well thought-out plan to maximise growth and improve people’s quality of life. We are the seventh-wealthiest country, but have the largest number of people suffering from malnutrition. Poverty is a central issue. How can a government elected on certain promises turn its back on the mandate it has received?
On whether the budget was influenced by the many Congressmen who linked successive electoral defeats in the 1990s to economic reforms:
I can’t answer that. In the ’90s, the Congress lost the confidence of the minorities. We’d lost our most popular leader, Rajiv Gandhi. That’s why it took so long to gather momentum again. This election proves the Congress has got its act together and if all goes well, we’ll be able to return to the position we had in the 1970s and ’80s.
On disinvestments:
Disinvestment need not be reflected in the budget, but has to be linked to market conditions. It is not off the shelf.
