Ex-MP flays repeated resort to vote on account

PUDUCHERRY

Former Member of Parliament M. Ramadass said that the passing of another vote on account, for the 12 th consecutive year, for Rs. 3,613 crore to defray the Government expenses for the next five months does not augur well for the growth of the Territory and adherence to sound fiscal procedure.

In a statement, Mr. Ramadass said a vote on account is only an exception and presented in abnormal situations. But unfortunately, Puducherry Government has made it a rule by presenting vote on account successively for 12 years–a strange spectacle not found in any other State.

The deleterious impact of vote on account has not been realised by the rulers, including the Lt.Governor, who has the constitutional duty to direct the Government to present a full fledged Budget, he said.

He pointed out that Article 27(1) of the UT Act, 1963 mandates that “the Administrator of each Union territory shall in respect of every financial year cause to be laid before the Legislative Assembly of the Union territory, with the previous approval of the President, a statement of the estimated receipts and expenditure of the Union territory for that year, in this Part referred to as the “annual financial statement”.

He urged the LG to clarify to the public why did she not fulfil the duty of directing the government to present the annual financial statement for the year 2022-23 as laid in the Act? He wanted to know whether she realised the dereliction involved in approving the vote on account especially after knowing that it is 12th of its kind. He also sought to know whether the Government had any reason for not submitting the annual financial statement and whether there existed any exceptional situation warranting a vote on account budget.

Mr. Ramadass said when the Government of India had offered a financial assistance of Rs. 1,729 crore to Puducherry as early as February 1, the State could have scientifically forecasted the remaining receipts from other sources of Revenue ( including GST compensation ) on the basis of emerging trends in the last 10 months. With these estimates and Expenditure proposals, a Draft Budget could have been prepared for Central sanction and the Chief Minister could have presented the Budget March 30, he said.

According to Mr. Ramadass, while the rationale for a vote on account was that the additional financial assistance of Rs.2,000 crore requested by the Chief Minister from the centre has not yet been granted and that there was uncertainty about the amount of GST compensation, even if so, the Lt .Governor could have easily sorted out these two issues within a week by talking to the Union Finance Minister which could have facilitated a full fledged Budget.