The Himachal Pradesh budget presented by Chief Minister Virbhadra Singh and dubbed as “forward looking” by him is a misnomer. While it may be the impact of the drubbing, the Congress got in the recent Assembly elections in Punjab and Uttaranchal, the HP government’s decision to provide subsidies of more than Rs 100 crore cannot certainly be forward looking.

It in fact is backward looking. For that matter Shanta Kumar, erstwhile Chief Minister of Himachal and the Union Minister for Civil Supplies had the vision to look ahead and bring down the subsidies. It did create a lot of hue and cry, however, the state has to provide the means to earn a living and not provide the living.

Facts and figures come later. Freebies have no value in today’s world. Secondly, should subsidies be given when as slated in the budget itself, per capita income of Himachal Pradesh is expected to reach Rs 40,000 in the next financial year from Rs 30,138 in the last. Although that too can be negated by the fact that the state also has a high per capita debt of Rs 29,000 as per the last budget.

The total loans of the government were likely to increase from Rs 17,484 crore in March 2006 to Rs 18,233 crore and to Rs 20,399 by the end of 2007-08. And approximately 25 per cent (about Rs 2,300 crore) of the entire budget of Rs 9684 crore, will come through SLR (statutory liquidity ratio) borrowings. SLR is that amount which a bank has to maintain in the form of cash, gold or approved securities. The highest outgo of 37 percent will be spent on salaries and pensions, followed by 28 percent on debt servicing and only 28 percent will be spent on development activities.

So where does this all leave the government by the end of the term? These populist measures by the government cannot appease the people of Himachal any more. People of Himachal, who are self-sufficient would like to pay a Rupee more, provided they are given quality and service. The danger bells had been sounded by Punjab and Uttaranchal, and the Chief Minister had one-year to go and make up for the lost time. Instead, he’s come out with a populist budget, which may not appease the general public as such who do not come under the PDS (public distribution system). These generally would look for development – good roads, good public transportation system, good education, good environment, good housing, good agricultural practices, employment opportunities, and there are very few signs of budget allocated to these in the budget.

Populist measures can be an eyewash and can work for a short time, and unfortunately for Singh, he has not days but months to go for the elections, and the public is bound to see through in the next 11 months. And unfortunately again, he won’t be able to up the populist measures in the last two three months of his term, with the media and opposition and the Election Commission keeping a strict vigil on his moves.