LEFT and several other Opposition MPs staged a protest in the Parliament House complex on April 1 against the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2026, and demanded that the proposed legislation be withdrawn. The Opposition also demanded a discussion on the West Asia crisis, focusing on the impact on India's LPG, crude oil, and fertiliser supply.

Speaking on the Appropriation Bill in the Rajya Sabha, John Brittas said the primary purpose of this is to authorise the government to withdraw or appropriate funds from the Consolidated Fund of India to meet its expenditure. Is it not a fact that calculations of the finance minister have gone for a toss? Is it not a fact that the budgetary estimates would go awry, would go haywire on account of the headwind that we are facing, the global crisis which is there because of the immoral and illegal war that is being waged. I had expected that the finance minister, as a preamble, would briefly explain about the situation before pursuing this Bill. A Covid-like situation has arisen. Restaurants are being shut everywhere. In Kerala, colleges are being shut. Even hospitals are being closed down because canteens cannot function. Two ships which sailed to our shores were publicised as though we have broken this conundrum. Petroleum Minister Hardeep Singh Puri will vouch for the fact that for two days of consumption, we need to have three ships to reach our shores. Despite the government’s priority for domestic gas consumption, there is a shortage. And, he would also agree that there is black-marketing and hoarding. The impact is going to be faced in other sectors too, and that also should be understood and underscored. The fertiliser industry is the backbone for food security. There is a shortage there. The government has said that even they will get gas 70% of what they were availing. All other sectors will be getting only 80%. There has been a shortage of 20-30%, done mandatorily by the government to all the industrial verticals of this country. What would be the impact of this crisis on the economy? Is the finance minister aware of that? The pertinent question that is staring at us at this time of crisis is: Have we forfeited our right to be one of the leaders of the non-aligned nations? Our silence is a criminal silence. Our country was seen as a cheerleader for the war mongers. That is the unfortunate chapter. While we deal with this financial situation, we need to take all these factors into consideration. There is a tendency in the Budget to concentrate the financial powers at Delhi. I will point out some statistics which you also will understand. In 2016-17, Rs 1.99 lakh crore was mopped up in the form of cess and surcharge. The cess and surcharge have tripled. Now, it is Rs 6.3 lakh crore. And even the money available to the states is blocked on one pretext or the other. The money that is due for Kerala, Rs 6,000 crore, has been blocked here. So, what is the purpose of these estimates? What is the purpose of this Appropriation Bill if the government has no sincerity to adhere to the basic principles of division of resources between the Union and the State? My submission is that the country has to stand up. Our energy security is at stake.

Speaking on the Demand for Grants in the Lok Sabha, Amra Ram said that even today, the majority of the country’s population depends on agriculture — a sector that once contributed 36% to the nation’s GDP. Today, after 78 years of independence, that contribution has dropped to 15% and continues to decline gradually. Currently, the country is grappling with drought on one hand and floods on the other. While droughts cannot be entirely eliminated, we can certainly find relief from them by conserving every single drop of water. Today, following the introduction of liberalisation and privatisation policies — whether it concerns seeds, fertilisers, diesel, or pesticides — everything has effectively been handed over to private corporations. It is futile to merely argue that “previous governments did this” or “this government did that”. What is the actual plight of the farmer today? DAP fertiliser, which once cost Rs 400, is now being sold for Rs 1,400; and even after paying Rs 1,400, it remains unavailable. Factories producing counterfeit fertilisers are frequently busted, yet no punitive action is ever taken against them. When a farmer goes to demand fertiliser, he is met with lathi-charges. Such is the farmer’s predicament today that, even 78 years after the country’s independence, he is being driven to suicide under the crushing burden of debt. Who is responsible for this? The government’s anti-farmer policies — specifically those that have been implemented continuously from 1990 right up to the present day — are solely responsible. It recommended that farm loans be waived. I firmly believe that if a legal guarantee is provided for the Minimum Support Price (MSP), the farmers of this country will become developed and prosperous. India’s prosperity cannot be achieved merely through slogans. Can half of this country’s population remain unprosperous while the nation as a whole becomes prosperous? I fail to understand how that could possibly happen. As it stands today, procurement at the MSP does not actually take place. I hail from Rajasthan. Among the 29 states, Rajasthan accounts for the highest production of bajra (pearl millet). If anyone can demonstrate that even a single quintal of bajra from Rajasthan has been procured at the MSP over the last 12 years, I am prepared to accept whatever the minister says. The crops produced in the largest quantities are guar and moth. Just 10-12 years ago, guar was being sold for anywhere between ₹33,000 and ₹36,000 per quintal. Today, there is no one willing to purchase it even at ₹3,000 per quintal. Even today, 70% of the cultivation during the kharif season remains dependent on rainfall. The primary crops grown during the kharif season are guar and moth — neither of which currently has an MSP. An MSP ought to be declared for all such crops; currently, the MSP is applicable to only 22 crops. Similarly, there are other crops such as potatoes, onions, and tomatoes that are produced in very large quantities. Under the provisions of the Market Intervention Scheme, the central government used to allocate a fund of ₹2,000 crore. Whenever the market price of a specific crop fell below its cost of production, the scheme facilitated its procurement and subsequent distribution to the public. Any losses incurred during this process were shared, with the central government contributing 50%. For farmers, the cost of production for onions works out to be between ₹8 and ₹9 per kilogram; yet, they often struggle to find a buyer even at a price of ₹5 to ₹6 per kilogram. Conversely, once those very same onions leave the farmer's hands, the average consumer is forced to purchase and consume them at a price of ₹60 per kilogram. The situation is exactly the same regarding garlic. In Mandsaur, Madhya Pradesh, when farmers went to demand a fair price for their garlic produce, they received not a fair price, but bullets — and six farmers lost their lives.  Undoubtedly, the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana is heavily skewed in favor of the insurance companies. Certainly, a crop insurance scheme is necessary. However, if this scheme were truly effective, why has it not been implemented in Gujarat? Among the 29 states of our country, Punjab is the largest agrarian state. There is no crop insurance scheme there; yet, across the entire nation, all the major insurance companies have certainly flocked to participate in this crop insurance scheme. The most dangerous aspect is the deal struck with America. I find it regrettable that, for a population of 1.4 billion people, it is US President Donald Trump who dictates from where we should purchase oil. A farmer cannot achieve prosperity merely through slogans. It was promised that by the year 2022, farmers’ incomes would double; however, while incomes certainly did not double, the cost of production has multiplied several times over.

In the Lok Sabha, R Sachithanantham spoke on the Finance Bill, 2026. It is not really clear why we keep looking to successive Union Budgets for significant economic policy changes. By now, experience should have taught us that we should neither believe the declared Budget estimates of revenue and expenditure in the coming fiscal year, nor have much faith in the schemes and outlays that were promised in the Budget speech. Even so, we keep looking, perhaps because we realise that some unstated priorities and approaches are revealed, at least through the actual pattern of resource raising and spending.  In this context, three features of the current Budget stand out, none of them particularly surprising. First, this Budget will do little if nothing to address the central problems facing the Indian economy today: sharp increase in inequality leading to depressed mass consumption demand, related to this, the serious employment crisis reflected particularly in largely stagnant real wages, worsening conditions of self-employment and a real distress in finding jobs, especially for the youth; and all this then resulting in sluggish private investment, not just among corporates, but also among all medium enterprises that see much reduced possibilities of profitable economic activity. Dealing with this would have required significant changes in policy orientation, more public spending in health, education, agriculture and rural development; proactive employment generation policies, not just through genuine employment guarantees in rural and urban areas, but also through the systematic package to create financial viability and technology access for small and medium enterprises; and greater no-strings generosity to state governments that are also better positioned to make such changes on the ground. The Modi government’s miserly, bordering the exploitative attitude to state governments as well as its overtly partisan, approach has come out clearly in fiscal policy. The 14^th Finance Commission recommended increasing the states’ share in total divisible pool from 32 per cent to 42 per cent, to be implemented over the period 2015-2020. Yet the government has effectively managed to circumvent this by significantly increasing the share of cesses and surcharges on tax, which do not have to be shared with the states. This has brought down the share of tax revenues going to states to 34 per cent in the last few years. This is also evident from the revised estimates of the current year. The government’s politically partisan approach to states has also been evident for some time. The Opposition-ruled states have been denied central funds even in the face of natural calamities. Meanwhile, the states are openly promised more funds if only their people choose to elect a double-engine government in a brazen denial of basic principles of federalism.

In the Lok Sabha, Amra Ram participated in a discussion under Rule 193 regarding the eradication of Naxalism. The country faces very grave challenges. This country is currently witnessing the highest levels of unemployment seen in the last 45 years, yet the government is unwilling to facilitate a discussion on this matter. Undoubtedly, this constitutes extremist politics. My point is that the government simply has no time to discuss the actual problems facing the nation. Regarding other such matters — specifically this issue of extremist politics — let me state that no one is in favour of it. It is certainly inappropriate to focus solely on the manner in which people are being killed by extremists, merely to exploit the situation and serve their own political ends. If you wish to discuss substantive issues, we are ready to do so. What is the situation today? Today, the most prominent tribal region of this country — home to the 120 million tribal people — also possesses its greatest mineral wealth. The Constitution granted rights to tribal communities, stipulating that their land could not be acquired unless permission was granted by their gram sabha in accordance with the PESA Act; however, since the advent of this government, those rights have been completely obliterated. Consider the Forest Rights Act of 2006: this legislation was intended to protect the livelihoods of tribal communities who have sustained themselves within these forests for generations—for thousands of years, indeed, since the very dawn of human civilization. Yet, even after the enactment of this law, the applications of 90 per cent of these people have been rejected. I recently visited Udaipur and Dungarpur in Rajasthan on the 15th and 16th of this month; even today, notices are being issued to evict those very tribal communities who have inhabited that land for generations. Given the manner in which the police and Forest Department officials are terrorizing them, I am compelled to conclude that — despite 90 per cent of the relevant legislation having been passed by Parliament — these people have still not been granted rights over the very land they have been cultivating.