The SC had stressed that it can’t stop parties from announcing welfare steps for citizens. but agreed to distinguish them from irrational freebies.
Supreme Court, during past hearings on a clutch of PILs including the lead one by Ashwini Upadhyay, stressed that it can’t stop political parties from announcing welfare measures for citizens but agreed to distinguish them from irrational freebies like loan waivers, free TVs, among others, which strain budget of states, many of them facing financial constraints.
Chief Election Commissioner Rajiv Kumar has devised two data-hungry forms which EC proposes be filled by each political party, explaining financial implications of each freebie announced ahead of polls. Most parties have not responded to EC’s missive while major parties like Congress, AAP and CPM have opposed any fetter on their decision to announce sops.
Form A intends to mandate each party to list out freebies, number of target group people, expenditure per person on availing the benefit, and estimated total expenditure for each freebie. The promised schemes may include schemes/welfare measures such as distribution of free laptops for students, consumer durables, gadgets, loan waiver for farmers, free water, electricity, and transport.
Breakup of financial implications, as proposed to be sought in Form B, could cause consternation among political parties. If EC proposal is found workable, political parties will have to engage economists to answer queries about impact of financing funding of freebies on fiscal health of state/country, its effect on debt servicing, and whether the party, on coming to power, will resort to additional borrowings.