Election season in India has become synonymous with a flurry of promises and the announcement of free welfare schemes. Be it Assembly elections or the Lok Sabha polls, political parties of every stripe are engaging in a competitive race to outdo one another with grandiose commitments in their manifestos. The Delhi Assembly elections, scheduled for February 5, are no exception. AAP, BJP, and Congress are all deploying promises of free benefits as a central strategy to woo voters. However, this trend raises critical questions about its feasibility and long-term implications.
Welfare schemes have long been a cornerstone of governance in India, addressing poverty, unemployment, and other socio-economic challenges. From free rations to pension plans for widows and the elderly, such programmes serve as lifelines for millions. They stem from the recognition of deep-seated poverty across the nation. Yet, the political landscape has shifted from addressing systemic issues to leveraging welfare as a short-term electoral strategy.
The recent promises in Delhi’s elections underline this shift. For example, AAP’s pledge of Rs 2,100 monthly to women is met with BJP’s counter of Rs 2,500. AAP’s 200 units of free electricity is matched by Congress’ promise to increase the limit to 300 units. Congress has further expanded its manifesto with promises like the ‘Pyari Didi Yojana’ for women and ‘Jeevan Raksha Yojana’ for healthcare. On the surface, such schemes appear to cater to the needs of citizens, but they come at a steep cost.
Governments, both at the State and Central level, often lack the financial bandwidth to fulfill these promises without plunging into debt. Experts estimate that fulfilling the current slate of promises in Delhi could push the city’s traditionally surplus budget into a deficit. The expected expenditure may exceed Rs 6,000 crore, jeopardising long-term fiscal stability. The precedent in other States like Punjab is instructive, where AAP failed to deliver on its financial commitments to women after coming to power.
In Maharashtra, the BJP-led alliance deployed a similar strategy with the ‘Laadli Bahin’ scheme, which promised Rs 1,500 per month to women. While this helped the alliance secure a victory, its implementation faltered post-election. Beneficiaries have faced delays and scrutiny, eroding trust and exposing the pitfalls of promises made without adequate planning.
AAP’s dominance in Delhi politics owes much to its free welfare initiatives. In its maiden tenure in 2013, the party introduced free electricity and water schemes, which were instrumental in its resounding victories in 2015 and 2020. This strategy has forced rivals BJP and Congress to follow suit. For instance, BJP’s manifesto now includes a promise to provide Rs 21,000 and six nutrition kits to every pregnant woman, subsidised LPG cylinders, and increased pensions for senior citizens. These populist measures might sway voters, but they also signal a worrying trend of financial imprudence.
The issue of free schemes has not escaped judicial scrutiny. Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay’s petition in the Supreme Court argues for the need to differentiate between essential welfare measures and gratuitous freebies. He advocates for a standardised format for election manifestos that includes financial disclosures on debt levels and repayment plans. This transparency, Upadhyay contends, is crucial to curbing the burgeoning debt crisis. When he first filed the petition in 2022, India’s debt stood at Rs 150 lakh crore. It has since escalated to Rs 225 lakh crore, with Delhi’s debt rising from Rs 55,000 crore to Rs 1 lakh crore.
A report by *Moneycontrol* highlights the financial strain posed by Delhi’s existing schemes. Subsidies for electricity (Rs 3,600 crore), water (Rs 200 crore), and bus fares (Rs 70 crore) already weigh heavily on the budget. If AAP’s promise of Rs 2,100 per month to women is implemented, an additional Rs 10,000 crore would be required by 2026. These figures underscore the unsustainable nature of such promises.
Freebies resonate with voters, particularly in a country where poverty persists despite decades of economic growth. However, this reliance on short-term handouts diverts focus from structural reforms and investments in employment generation, healthcare, and education. Over time, this can erode public trust when promises are not fulfilled, leading to political and social unrest.