Senior Congress leader and former Union Finance Minister P. Chidambaram on Sunday responded sharply to Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s recent statement that the central government allocated three times more funds to Tamil Nadu for development in the past decade compared to the pre-2014 period.
Chidambaram took to social media to debunk Modi’s claim, stating that even a first-year economics student could easily point out that economic metrics tend to show higher figures as time progresses. He explained that the economic size—whether it’s GDP, the central budget, or total government expenditure—has been growing year on year, making comparisons based on raw numbers misleading.
If you enjoyed reading this article, you can help support our journalism by adding OHeraldo as a preferred source.
In a post shared on X (formerly Twitter), Chidambaram questioned the validity of comparing figures without considering their relative share in the economy. “The Prime Minister and central ministers repeatedly claim they’ve allocated more money to Tamil Nadu in 2014-24 than in 2004-14. For instance, the Prime Minister said his government has allocated seven times more for railway projects in Tamil Nadu than before,” Chidambaram said.
He elaborated, saying that the size of the GDP, central budget, and total expenditure are all larger now compared to previous years, which naturally results in higher monetary allocations. “But is it higher in terms of GDP proportion or total expenditure proportion?” Chidambaram posed, emphasizing that simple numeric growth does not equate to better or proportionate financial support.
This criticism follows Modi’s visit to Tamil Nadu, where he claimed that the central government had allocated significantly more for the state’s development in the past decade. The ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) has raised concerns over the adequacy of these allocations, further fueling the debate over the state’s development funding.
Chidambaram’s comments underscore the importance of evaluating financial support not just by absolute figures, but by their context and impact within the broader economic framework.
(This story is published from a syndicated feed)
