Divya Singh Rathore
london
Government budget is the official document, proposed revenue and spending for a fiscal year. It is normally presented by the finance minister to the nation and passed by the parliament and approved by the head of the state. The practice was started by first British prime minister Sir Robert Walpole. It was an attempt to restore the confidence of the public after the collapse of the South Sea Bubble in 1720. Now most of the government of the world follow the same pattern and present their budget before the parliament.
In Nepal the budget was started to present since 1951 and this year on 20th May 2016 finance minister Mr. Bishnu Paudel presented the budget of Rs 1,048,920,000,000, for fiscal year 2016-17 at the parliament. The size of the budget is 28 % more than the budget of current fiscal year (2015-016). Mr Paudel has targeted to achieve an economic growth of 6.8 % in the next fiscal year. He has allocated 140 billion for the post- quake reconstruction and rehabilitation work. Different economist, industrialist, political figure figures and intellectuals have made different comments in different dimension. Dr. Ramsharan Mahat, former finance minister has attacked it stating that it is the must populist budget. Prof. Bishumber Pyakurel commented that it will super-inflation. But former finance minister Bharat Mohan Adhikari and Barshman Pun (former finance minister) said that it is the most appropriate budget for the nation.
Thus there is the dilemma in the public. Although several comments have been made, this comment is superficial just on their basis of party line. Dr Mahat and Prof Pyakurel are the activist of Nepali congress who are in the power most of the time from 1989. Mr Adhikari and Mr Pun, they are former finance minister from communist parties: United Maxist Laminist (UML) and Maoist central. Who are in the coalition power at present. Therefore, their credibility is always questionable. Independent analyst has not made any critical analysis therefore this article may fill the gap. This article will be divided on different headings: 1. The objective of the budget Mr Paudel has underlined the main objective of the budget is to lead a socialist type of economy. In philosophy there are two types of socialist economy, one was started by V.I. Lenin of Soviet Union, other by the social democrats of the west. Lenin nationalised all the means of economic means of production such as land, transportation, market, industry, bank, health sector, educational institution and so forth. Then he tried to distribute equally to all the people. But Mr Paudel and his alliance Prachand has not done so, in all sector he is mainly focusing to private sector, which is against the spirit of communist lead socialism.
This is purely liberalism. Social democrat economic, system was 1st stared by john Mylord kings and his pattern was adapted by President Rosevelt in the united states under New deal programme in the UK by PM Clement Attle under the labour government, Most of the Scandinavian countries and western European adapted it. The nationalized their basic made of production and services such as railways, education institution, National health services and so an. The regulated the whole of the economy, imposed progressive taxation which means tax for riches and distribution the poor, the economy was in equilibrium. In minister Paudels budget we cannot find such element therefore his objective and allocation of budget is totally different, his pattern of budget is liberal feudal but his slogan is socialism.
2 Structure of budget distribution: Mr. Paudel has divided his budget into two parts general and development. In the general budget his talking about expenditure particularly, the salaries of the government employees which is 25%, it seems to be a big increment but if it is analysed deeply, it is a regret for us because:
a) this 25% fixed increment of the salary will definitely harm to the lower employees. Such as PM, Khardars and Baidars but there will be huge increment for the tops. For example, the president will have 150 lakhs per month salary whereas lower staff(peon) will have just 17000 per month. All the top ranks have resident’s health transportation, clothes, provident, pension, education and other facilities. But this lower ranks are forbidden from all these benefits. So this budget will create huge gap between ranks and files. Which definitely discourage the moral of the lower ranks. In Nepal, since we have no welfare benefit system, these lower ranks will have to suffer a hellish life. Therefore, this budget is for the top ranks only. Even in the capitalist country like UK and Germany they have progressive tax system supper led by welfare benefit system. Therefore, the society is in the equilibrium. In Nepal this budget will definitely will encourage another violent Maoist revolution lead by Netra Bikram Chand (Biplov). In the budget Mr. Paudel has increased the salary of the government. Employs but in Nepal 80% of workers are from the private sector, if the private sector does not increase their salary in the same ratio. There will be disturbances from the private sector workers. If it is increased as businessman Golcha says private sector cannot cope with that expenditure so that they are forced to close their industries.
B ) This budget is mainly focused for the urban areas such as Kathmandu, Pokhara, Jhapa and Bhairwa but the backward place like Humla , Dolpa, Kalikot are totally deprived from its benefit, where people are diving due to starvation. In the same way this budget is focused on urban elites not for the poor, such as, in Tarai, Mushar, Tharu in the meddle part Rautes and Chepang similarly in the Himalayan regions no education, no health, no shelter, no property, no medicine and not even social safety. Therefore, this budget cannot reflect the whole expiration of the Nepalese public.
C)The budget is allocated for the near expectation for impossible things we call it fishing expedition. Now Nepal is suffered with the earthquake and blockades and floods. From last one year the government has not built even a single home for the homeless, just one single bridge was constructed which is extremely less than the achievement of an individual couple such as Sitaram Katel (Dhurmus) and Kunjana Ghimire (Suntali) who created an integrated settlement of 20 houses.
D) The budget is allocated for purchasing of ship whereas we have neither sea nor any separate transit agreement with neighbouring countries like India and China. People have no place to stay but the budget to build a big villa accommodate 5000 people in Lumbini just for a day pilgrimage. A huge budget is allocated in the name of the foundation such as Madan Bhandari foundation, Pushpalal Foundation, Grija Prasad Koirala foundation, Krishana Sen foundation and so on. These foundations have no productive value. Therefore I like to quote Sheakspear’s famous sonnet where he says, “No marble no monument will save thy name but only the good faith of the public ‘’. Here Mr Paudel has tried to create big foundations but without the faith of the public which will destroy the credibility of their leaders.
Thus this budget is vague and has neither goal nor structure just a volume of digits which will not at all benefit the Nepalese public.
