Picture for representation. | Photo Credit: PTI
The Common Parliamentary Committee (JPC) on one nation, which on Wednesday, reviewed the legislation on current surveys, met three economists – Montek Singh Ahluwalia, Arvind Panagariya and Surejit S. Bhall – who submitted two contrasting views on this matter.
Mr. Ahluwalia, former vice -chairman of the planning Commission, rejected the claim that current elections would lead to economic growth. On the other hand, Mr. Panagariya and Mr. Bhalla argued for it in favor. A high -level committee report, led by former RAM NATH KOVIND, said the synchronized election cycle assumed a 1.5% impact in GDP.
JPC at the head of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MP PP Chaudhary.
Mr. Ahluwalia claimed that election expenses would remain unaffected whether public opinion surveys were held at the same time or not, the sources said. There was no evidence to point out the wound of GDP. It was no hard data to support this claim, said Mr. Ahluwalia panel. “He argued that economic growth and election cycle did not have a clear connection,” said the panel member on condition of anonymity.
At the beginning of the day, talking about two legal regulations – the Constitution (129. Amendment), 2024, and the trade union laws (amendment), 2024, Mr. Panagariya, who chair the 16th Financial Commission, claim that “great academic evidence” before the government expenditure leads to higher Fiscal goals. Government expenditures in this period are moving away from capital expenditure for revenue expenses, which indicates the deterioration of the quality of expenditure, Mr. Panagariya said.
There are at least 13 rounds of elections in the five -year election window, Mr. Panagariya said, and the elections were held in average every 4.5 months in the country. As an example that supported his justification, he stated that the financial committee, a constitutional body to submit a report to be moved to the states of the state, was influenced by the general elections of 2024 and the following state elections, which led to a delay in its consulting process. Mr. Panagriya, sources said, claimed that inhuman elections were not an obstacle to structural reforms at the same time.
Published – September 2025 23:07
