Budget lacks larger vision: BPAC

BPAC welcomes the proposals of the Tourism Vision Group. Says the budget needs to have a systematic plan to implement.

Bangalore Political Action Committeee (BPAC) conducted a Google Hangout panel discussion on the budget, on February 14th, 2013. The panelists included BPAC President Kiran M Shaw, Vice-president TV Mohandas Pai, social entrepreneur Ashwin Mahesh and urbanist V Ravichandar. The debate was moderated by Revathy Ashok of BPAC.

Mohandas Pai said though in terms of growth the average of the state is better than the national average, he wants to see a large vision in the budget to develop the entire region and industries in terms of infrastructure. He said he wasn’t happy with the 7.2 % growth in service economy, as the field consists only of Bangalore, in which IT and BT haven’t seen much growth because of lack of adequate infrastructure. He said he was happy with the allotted plan expenditure.

Budget allocated to tourism was satisfactory, said V Ravichandar, adding that notification of Kaveri Tourism Authority and other initiatives were good for tourism. Cubbon Park Management Authority with Private-Public Participation, convention centre at 435 acres to be formed at Devanahalli airport and proposal to open part of Turahalli forest near BSK 6th stage to the public were very encouraging, he added.

Kiran Shaw said she wants to see proper planning in whatever the government is doing, before implementation. She welcomed the tourism budget, and lauded the tourism vision group for its initiatives which the government accepted. She said some money could be spent on experts, and the model of implementation needs to be robust. She said she was disappointed that only Rs 10,000 crore was allocated to urban development out of total Rs 1,40,000 crore budget.

Ashwin Mahesh agreed with the point that the budget lacked vision. He said the traditional departmental allocation doesn’t deliver the outcome. Instead the government should work on the physical, social and financial infrastructure needed in each part of the state and then devolve the expenditure to each area. Also there is lack of vision on how much government can do and what needs to be done by others – education institutions, corporates, development institutions. He added that the money allocated to certain projects like rejuvenating lakes, do not actually take place and get pushed to the next year, which continues year atfter year.

Related Articles

BPAC launches leadership training to clip the wings of misgovernance in the city

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Similar Story

The real estate shift: How Karnataka’s proposed apartment law shortchanges homeowners

Karnataka apartment owners may not get a fair share of their land as the KAOMA 2026 replaces value-based UDI with an area-only formula.

The Karnataka Apartment (Ownership and Management) Bill, 2026 (KAOMA) changes how a homeowner's share of the land is calculated — and the new formula gives the individual less than what the old law, that is the Karnataka Apartment Ownership Act, 1972 (KAOA), promised. The KAOMA Bill was passed by the Karnataka legislature in August, but is yet to receive assent from the Governor, who has sought clarifications on certain provisions. What is UDI and why does it matter? When you buy an apartment, you buy two things: The flat — a depreciating asset (buildings lose value over time). Your Undivided…

Similar Story

Big promises, unheard residents: Bengaluru’s new parking rules need a rethink

The draft rules meant to manage road space demand end up expanding supply, outsourcing enforcement, and pricing residents out of their streets.

On August 11, the Urban Development Department quietly published the draft Greater Bengaluru Authority (Parking) Rules, 2026 — the legal framework  meant to give teeth to Bengaluru's much-discussed Parking Policy 2.0. Citizens have thirty days to send in objections. Yet, few will read all eighteen pages of the notification. Fewer still will notice that a law framed as a way to curb traffic demand is, on close reading, a plan to expand parking supply and hand over enforcement to private players, while leaving the ordinary resident worse off.  That gap between the promise and what’s on paper matters, because parking…