Letters to the Editor

Budget 2019

 

IT has now become the fashion for ruling dispensations at the Centre and in the States to rain sops on people at the end of their tenures in the belief that this will get people to vote them in for another term (Cover Story, March 1). This amounts to bribing voters with taxpayers’ money.

The Supreme Court should take cognisance of the issue and ban such grants on the eve of elections to ensure that the public exchequer is not wasted to benefit a few politicians. Taxpayers’ money should be spent on roads, potable water, good and affordable health care, quality education and so on.

N.R. Ramachandran, Chennai

IN the Cover Story, the Budget presented by Finance Minister Piyush Goyal was described using cricket terms. In cricket, the night watchman is a lower-order batsman who is sent in when a wicket falls close to the end of the day’s play. This Budget presentation can be taken as the efforts of the “night watchman”.

Also, as in cricket, he had to resort to defensive techniques and had only a few occasions to score big, which he used effectively, going by the reactions to the Budget as pro farmer, pro women, pro middle class, pro cow and even pro fisherman. The Budget does not make any tall claims, is development-oriented and aims to solve the economic crisis.

A.J. Rangarajan, Chennai

WITH r egard to the Prime Minister’s Kisan Scheme, Piyush Goyal should have taken a leaf out of Odisha Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik’s book and formulated a more realistic policy rather than the piecemeal approach he has taken.

Goods and services tax was thrust upon the people and is proving to be a thorn in the flesh for the Narendra Modi dispensation. The Centre taking a larger share of the revenue from GST than the States is an attack on the federal structure of the nation.

There is no respite for the common man who has already been made to suffer through the fiascos of GST and demonetisation. With the economy in the doldrums and people fuming, they may not be swayed by the BJP’s Budget.

S. Murali, Vellore, Tamil Nadu

Chanda Kochhar

IT is unfortunate that Chanda Kochhar had such an ignominious exit from ICICI Bank (“Fall of an icon”, March 1). A deviation from the norm on bank loan sanctions by Chanda Kochhar led to her downfall after an independent commission held her responsible for lack of due diligence with respect to annual disclosures as required by the bank’s code of conduct. It was a clear case of conflict of interest.

It is a sad end to a brilliant career. She commanded respect and admiration and was a shining example of how a woman could rise to great heights on her own merit and hard work.

D.B.N. Murthy, Bengaluru

Farmers

IT is no surprise that the defeat of the BJP in the Hindi heartland States is largely due to farmers’ distress (“Rural rumbles”, March 1).

Mere promises from political parties will not be sufficient for farmers. These have to be followed by action on the ground. Farm loan waivers are short-term measures. Long-term measures are now more important.

Anish Esteves, Mumbai

Sedition law

IT is not difficult to understand why the British introduced Section 124A, “the sedition law”, into the Indian Penal Code (Cover Story, February 15). They had no moral right to rule and subdue a nation thousands of miles away from their homeland, so they needed such laws to suppress Indian freedom fighters. Unfortunately, politicians in power in independent India still maintain the colonial attitude and continue to retain the undemocratic section and use it against whoever raises the voice of dissent. The draconian clause should be scrapped without delay.

Sanjit Ghatak, Kolkata

THE picture on the cover effectively conveyed the message even more than words. The sedition law has been used as a tool by various governments to suppress dissent.

The Supreme Court clearly stated in one of its judgments that an act should be treated as sedition only when it causes or tends to cause any social disruption. Where is the proof of sedition in all the recently booked cases? The mere expression of one’s opinion does not amount to sedition. How else can people express their displeasure at the government’s actions?

Vidhya B. Ragunath, Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu

Conscientious people need to ensure that in the coming general election they elect only those representatives who swear either to fine-tune or use with caution in extraordinary situations or do away with altogether Section 124A of the IPC and other draconian laws that are being used to crush the voices of dissent. The present rulers with a dictatorial attitude are freely misusing and abusing such laws to shut up any voice of dissent. The irony is that those out of power today condemn such laws until they themselves come to power. Then, they find it convenient to ignore those issues most relevant for the healthy growth of democracy.

Even Jawaharlal Nehru, who whole-heartedly condemned Section 124A of the IPC during the debate in Parliament on the first amendment to the Constitution, did nothing to get rid of it.

M.N. Bhartiya, Alto-Porvorim, Goa