Promise over practice

IF ALLOCATIONS DO NOT BIND THE EXECUTIVE, IT RISKS BECOMING A RITUAL RATHER THAN A RULEBOOK

- RAJIV KUMAR SAMRIDDHI PRAKASH

EACH YEAR, THE Union Budget is presented as the government’s most consequential economic document.Budget-making is an exercise in foresight, prioritisation, and fiscal discipline. But a closer look at what happens after the Budget is passed reveals a growing disconnect between promise and practice. Increasingly, the Budget appears less like a binding fiscal commitment and more like an accounting statement of intent.

If allocations announced to Parliament are not followed through in execution, and if flagship schemes remain trapped within government files long after their announcement, it is worth asking: what is the purpose of the Budget if the government is not bound by it?

What’s happening to flagship schemes?

The table compares Budget Estimates with actual expenditure for a set of major schemes in 2025-26. The pattern is revealing.

Two features stand out. First, schemes that are central to long-term human development and infrastructure—such as Jal Jeevan Mission, housing, sanitation, nutrition, and urban programmes—consistently undershoot their Budgeted allocations, often by large margins. Second, fertiliser subsidies once again overshoot their estimates, with urea and nutrient-based subsidies together absorbing far more fiscal space than planned.