The Hindu : Vote on account: State may put the blame on Centre

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Tuesday, Jan 20, 2004

Kerala

Kerala

Vote on account: State may put the blame on Centre

By K.M. Tampi

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, JAN. 19. The Government's original decision to discontinue the vote on account system which has been in force for several years and go in for the passing of the full budget before the commencement of the next financial year would have benefited the State considerably.

The two areas in which it would have paid rich dividends were the management of the State's finances and the implementation of the Plan measures announced in the budget.

In both the areas, the Government would have been able to do away with the ad hocism of the first four months of the financial year and the rushing through of the measures for one full year announced in the budget within the remaining eight months of the year.

The Constitution allows the provision for passing the vote on account — Article 206(1). It is meant for overcoming the situation which prevents the Government from completing the consideration of the budget and make appropriation for the new financial year before the commencement of the year.

The exigencies include the dissolution of the Assembly, the possibility of a change of Government before or in the course of a budget session (before completion of the financial business) and in an election year when detailed consideration of the budget may be put off and to be taken up by the new House.

When that happened, the Assembly made an advance grant for meeting the estimated expenditure of part of the new financial year which is what the vote on account is all about.

Successive governments have been taking recourse to the vote on account practice even when there was no valid reason for it.

They have been refraining from passing the full budget before the commencement of the new financial year even during normal times.

The vote on account system offered an easy way out to them. If it was passed before March 31, the Government received a reprieve of sorts for four months for getting the budget discussed and passed.

The Governments were thereby making an exception the rule.

When they did that, they seemed to be oblivious of or not bothered by the drawbacks of the system.

The vote on account system made financial planning for the year impossible. It also made a mess of the plan programme announced in the budget.

Anything meaningful could be done in both the areas only from the fifth month of the financial year. In short, it reduced the budget to a document for eight months instead of one for a full year.

The vote on account system seemed to have got entrenched so to say with the creation of the subject committees.

The demands had to be scrutinised by the committees before they were finally passed.

It turned out to be one more hurdle or formality which the budget had to cross.

Because of the time consumed for completing the whole process, the impression after the introduction of the subject committee system was that the passing of the full budget before the commencement of the new fiscal year had become a thing of the past.

It was in that context that the Government's original decision to pass the full budget before March 31 this time seemed to show that where there was a will there was a way.

The Finance Minister, K.Sankaranarayanan, could have taken the full credit for it.

He may not have the dynamism of an Oommen Chandy or the financial acumen and sharpness of a K.M. Mani, both former Finance Ministers.

But he could have proved the dictum which says that slow and steady wins the race, whether it is in politics or in finance had the full budget been passed before March 31. Now the situation is back to square one and the State Government can put the blame for it on the Centre's decision to go in for early polls to the Lok Sabha.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Kerala