BMC Budget 2024: Congress MP Varsha Gaikwad Slams ‘Adani-Friendly’ Allocations, Calls for Transparency

Mumbai: Mumbai’s civic body, the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), has come under sharp criticism over its 2024-25 budget, with Congress MP Varsha Gaikwad alleging corruption, financial mismanagement, and favoritism towards Adani Group-linked contractors. Through a scathing tweet, Gaikwad accused the BMC of burdening Mumbaikars with ₹2.32 lakh crore in liabilities while benefiting corporate entities at the expense of public welfare.

Rising Liabilities: Who Will Pay the ₹2.32 Lakh Crore Debt?

The BMC’s latest budget outlines a massive ₹2.32 lakh crore liability, raising concerns over how this financial burden will be shouldered. Gaikwad argues that the common Mumbaikar will ultimately bear the brunt of this debt, questioning the financial planning and prudence of the civic administration.

Civic Reserves Drained: ₹30,954 Crore at Risk?

Gaikwad has also raised alarm over the BMC’s plan to deplete ₹30,954 crore from Mumbai’s civic reserves. She warns that exhausting these funds will put the city’s financial future at risk, calling it a reckless move aimed at short-term gains rather than long-term fiscal stability.

Ballooning Infrastructure Costs: Favoring Adani-Linked Contractors?

One of Gaikwad’s strongest accusations is against the alleged cost escalations in infrastructure projects, which she claims directly benefit contractors linked to the Adani Group. Calling the BMC administration an “Adani Sarkar,” she asserts that public funds are being funneled into projects that serve corporate interests rather than benefiting Mumbai’s residents.

The ‘Adani Tax’ on Mumbaikars?

Gaikwad has also hit out at the new taxes introduced in the budget, branding them an “Adani Tax” that will disproportionately impact small businesses and common citizens. She argues that while Mumbaikars will bear additional taxes and charges, corporate interests like Adani remain shielded, deepening the economic burden on ordinary residents.

Selling Mumbai’s Public Land?

Another major concern Gaikwad raises is the BMC’s move to lease, monetize, and commercialize prime public land in Mumbai. She warns that this will result in the city losing control over its most valuable assets, likening the move to “selling Mumbai’s future” for short-term financial gains.

Neglecting Essential Services: Health, Education, and Transport Underfunded

The Congress MP has criticized the minimal budget allocation for critical sectors. According to Gaikwad, only 1% of the capital expenditure is dedicated to primary education, while public health gets a mere 5%. The lack of focus on public transport, especially the struggling BEST services, has also been flagged as a serious concern.

Infrastructure Chaos and Air Pollution Crisis

Gaikwad has highlighted the long delays and cost overruns in key infrastructure projects, particularly road concretization efforts, accusing the BMC of inefficiency and corruption. She also criticizes the civic body’s failure to address Mumbai’s worsening air quality, which continues to endanger the health of millions.

Unspent Budget and Poor Financial Planning

A staggering 21% of last year’s capital expenditure remains unspent, according to Gaikwad, which she sees as proof of severe inefficiency. With the BMC achieving only 48% of its income targets by December, she questions how the civic body plans to meet its financial goals for the current year.

Demand for Accountability: Call for a White Paper

Gaikwad has called for immediate action, demanding a white paper on the escalating costs of BMC projects and greater transparency in public fund management. She has also insisted that the civic body recover ₹9,750 crore owed by the Adani Group, urging Mumbaikars to speak out against what she describes as “daylight robbery.”

As Mumbai’s residents grapple with the implications of the budget, Gaikwad’s strong stance has ignited a debate on financial accountability, transparency, and the need for a people-centric budget. Will the BMC address these concerns, or will the allegations of corporate favoritism continue to haunt its administration?