India Budget 2010-11: Social equity takes back seat
With a promise to bring double digit economic growth, while the Union Budget 2010-11 has increased overall plan allocation, it has not shown the same commitment towards the social sector. Schemes such as NREGS, education and health sectors have got a minor increase in allocations.
New Delhi, India: While the FM in his Budget Speech committed to crossing the double digit growth barrier; the commitment towards propelling social development has been missing.
- Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee presented Union Budget 2010-11 on 26th Februray/ Photo credit: Trak
Among the positives of Union Budget 2010-11, the overall Plan Budget has increased by 15.7%.
The increases in budgets of Ministry of Women and Child Development (MWCD), Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment (MSJE), Ministry of Minority Affairs (MMA) is welcome.
Significant attention has been paid to infrastructure development (46% of Plan Budget). For example there has been a welcome increase in the unit costs in Indira Awaas Yojana (IAY), although the overall budget for this scheme is unchanged.
Schemes for the poor
Outlays for Rajiv Awaas Yojana, a scheme announced last year for slum dwellers and urban poor, have jumped to Rs 1,270 crore as compared to Rs 150 crore in 2009-10. Expansion of banking facilities in rural areas, extending agricultural thrust to Rainfed / Dryland Areas (RKVY) are welcome steps to promote rural development and agriculture.
Setting up of a National Social Security Fund for the unorganised sector workers is also appreciable. The FM’s move to finance capital expenditure requirements in social sector schemes through proceeds from disinvestment is laudable.
Moving beyond mere increases in allocations, revision of amounts provided under Post-Matric Scholarship scheme under MSJE is a positive step with long term impact.
Meagre increase in social sectors
On the other hand, the Union Budget 2010-11 provision for NREGS-the most successful initiative of the UPA-has been raised by a meager 2.5%, from Rs 39,100 crore in 2009-10 to Rs 40,100 in 2010-11.
Further, increase in the budget for education is grossly inadequate keeping in mind the need for a complete revamp of the expenditure norms in the Central schemes (like SSA) if Right to Education Act is to be implemented properly.
The budget for the Ministry for Human Resource Development (MHRD) at Rs 49,904 crore for 2010-11 accounts for just 0.72% of GDP, remaining at the same level (as proportion of GDP) that was reached in 2009-10 BE.
Though the initiative for conducting Annual Health Survey in all districts marks an improvement in planning for this sector, the increase in the budget provision for Ministry of Health & Family Welfare (MHFW) is insignificant.
The budget for the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare at Rs 25,154 crore for 2010-11 accounts for just 0.36% of GDP, which is almost the same as last year’s level of 0.35% of GDP in 2009-10 RE.
Maternal and child health
The persisting problems in maternal and child health have not caught the attention of the government despite the Eleventh Five Year Plan’s commitment to address the same for which only two years are left.
The persisting deficits in development of children, pertaining especially to nutrition and pre-school education, have been neglected in the Budget yet again, as the allocation for ICDS in 2010-11 has been increased by less than 10%.
While the overall budget for MWCD has been increased, tough working conditions and scant remuneration provided to women who are the frontline service providers in the social sectors is likely to continue in 2010-11, since the Budget does not propose any changes in this regard.
Marginalised sections
Likewise, while the budget for Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment has been increased, the Union Government does not yet seem to recognise the need for implementing Scheduled Caste Sub-Plan and Tribal Sub Plan across its Ministries.
Although the FM in his Budget Speech has recognised the need for providing more resources for food security, education and health, the same does not seem to have happened in this budget. With a clear indication of the economy reviving fast, the government should have taken an expansionary fiscal stance not only for economic growth but also for social sector development.
