The budget is a plan for how to spend the revenue earned or raised in the state in fulfilling the constitutional, international commitment and public responsibility. Priorities should be determined according to what goal the state has taken in the national budget and how it can support that goal.

First, it is within the responsibility of the government to fulfill the declared goals mentioned in the constitution. Second, it is important to keep the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals 2030 in the center. Third, according to the election manifesto, there is an obligation to meet the expectations of the people.

budgets have certain characteristics. (1) There should be a balance between expenditure and income. However, often resources are not budgeted. Finding revenue or non-revenue sources is done based on priority. (2) What decision-making process should be followed in allocating resources, to whom and how to authorize spending? It is arranged that (3) the revenue accumulated in the government treasury should be spent and what should not be spent? The right to choose that remains vested in the concerned government.

This means, from the right to determine the above-mentioned processes, what kind of society will be built and which class will be locked in the hands? Especially among public, private and co-operatives, the responsibility of moving the economy forward is vested in the government. 

In the constitution of Nepal, it is mentioned in the preamble that 'to build a prosperous nation by being committed to socialism based on democratic values ​​and principles, including a competitive multi-party democratic governance system of the people and the concept of the rule of law'.

Socialism mentioned in the preface is not only a word that makes citizens aware of their rights and duties, but also how to minimize the widening inequality in the economic and social fields, making the life style of common citizens easy and simple.

One of its purposes is how to actively involve and participate in the production process from policy making to the general public. It is necessary to review at the civil level that the periodic plans, policy programs and budgets made by the state in building the society envisioned by the constitution did not play a role in fulfilling that purpose. 

The Government of Nepal is also a participating country in the determination of the Sustainable Development Goals-2030 at the United Nations General Assembly. Nepal has also committed to certain principles and objectives of 17 sustainable development goals. The budget has to cover them somehow. Are current budget allocations and implementation sufficient/not sufficient to achieve these goals? This needs to be discussed.

Mainstream political parties in Nepal seem to believe that promises made during periodic elections are often forgotten by the people by the time the election period is over. Arguing about it is kind of pointless. Nepal is not only a multilingual, multi-religious country, but also a multi-class society. There are mutual contradictions between the sections of the society regarding the economic policy in the country.

In such a multi-class society, experts have suggested that a very serious debate on the economic policy to be adopted by the government is necessary. Especially in the field of public finance, the financial policy that the government adopts will suppress economic issues.

Because public policy itself debates the market over the pricing of goods and services, the allocation of spending across different macroeconomic sectors to the respective sectors, production, employment growth, wages and salaries, investment, and the role of the market itself. receives feedback and sets priorities for policy formulation and implementation (Persson, Torstein, Guido Tavellini (2003), The Economic Effects of Consciences, The MIT Press Cambridge). At this time, let's discuss the principles and ideas on which the government brought forward the policy program and presented the budget: 

Inconsistent objectives

Finance Minister Bishnu Prasad Paudel has said that the first objective of the budget is to achieve high sustainable and broad economic growth and alleviate poverty. The economic growth that the budget prioritizes and puts in the driving seat of the economy, talking about economic growth, cannot imagine a broad economic growth. For broad economic growth, it is necessary to address the structural difficulties seen in the special economic components of the Nepalese economy such as agriculture, industry, tourism, and infrastructure construction. 

(1) Agriculture: This time, the contribution of the agricultural sector to the gross domestic product has been estimated to be 25.16 percent. Last year contribution 24. was 71 percent. According to the agricultural census conducted in the year 2021/22, out of the total population of 291 million 60 thousand, 1 million 94 million 40 thousand Nepalis are dependent on agriculture.

Among them, 49.1 percent of men and 50.9 percent of women are involved in agriculture. According to the calculation, 62 percent of the households in the country are engaged in agriculture. In 2011/12, the family size was 5.4 people and in 2021/22, that size has dropped to 4.7 people. This means that the strong arms of men in agriculture continue to shrink, there are elderly mothers and children at home and women have to farm. Due to this, the land is becoming barren and will continue to grow.

The migration from the mountains and hills to the plains and cities is intensifying. Those who go for foreign employment from villages are intending to migrate to Madhesh and cities according to their groups. What will be the effect of such unilateral Terai-Madhesash migration in the near future and in the long term? But the government's policy program and budget are not ready to think about why this rapid migration is happening. 

Mainstream pundits argue that people should migrate from agriculture, which has the weakest economic growth. That argument is correct, but how can people survive and participate in sustainable and reliable development until industrialization is accelerated and education and training are provided accordingly? The answer to this question is given by the Oli government as land bank. It is considered correct not to allow the ancient agricultural culture to remain. But excessive commercialization of agricultural land through land bank does not mean that the Bhrikuti paper factory will not have to suffer.

Common people will not only be separated from their ancestral property, but it cannot be said that there will not be difficulties in obtaining citizenship due to unorganized residence and lack of land one day. Land banks are a failed system in America. It's surprising not to be serious about it. Those who are migrating are not only the poor and the poor. Why didn't he want to stay in the mountains, why did he fall and walk? There is no search policy. And, whose poverty will be alleviated? Can poverty be alleviated without production? 

The Minister of Finance who wrote the slogan 'Modernization in Agriculture: Transformation in the Economy' has allocated 57.48 billion budget to the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock. This is 0.29 percent of the total budget allocated. 0.29 percent allocation in the name of 66.67 percent of dependents (that too will be done by deducting two-thirds of ordinary expenses from employees' salaries) will the modernization and transformation of agriculture be done?

(2) Manufacturing Industry: The Minister of Finance has composed 28 points for the overall industry under the title of Industry, Trade and Investment Promotion. It is a good aspect of the budget to combine the development of the entire industrial sector with the promotion of trade and investment. But why are manufacturing industries not flourishing in Nepal? Why is there no investment in it? Have we misunderstood the definition of industrialization? Isn't it wrong to understand only foreign investment as investment? Why are we not able to have as much savings? What are the difficulties in primary storage?

One after the other, even though everything is being opened, why is it not being possible to invest in the employment sector? As pundits say, foreign investment has not come because of legal hurdles, trade union movement, market compatibility, and lack of a one-door system? In point 83 he discusses comparative advantage and competitive advantage export strategy. Till date no initiative has been taken in this country to gain comparative advantage and competitive advantage.

For example, our policymakers do not believe that soybeans are the number one commodity that China imports from the US. It is even more unbelievable that corn is the second number. It was unimaginable that we could gain a competitive advantage with America by producing on a large scale. The first thing to understand is that any foreign investment does not come to accumulate wealth, where to pour it. Investors first look at national/international markets, trends in national savings.

studies where the private sector of the country has invested, skilled and semi-skilled manpower, infrastructure required for industry and finally the consumption capacity and mindset of the people of the investing country. There are two dozen elite entrepreneurs in the country. Who have almost captured the country's economy. They are industrialists, bankers, insurers, importers and exporters and builders. These private sectors seen by the government do not invest in productive industries because they have sole dominance in business. 

Neither the finance minister nor the entrepreneur thinks that there will be any enterprise in connection with agriculture. Agriculture is being modernized. Individually or knowingly through agricultural cooperatives, people purchase tillers (hand tractors), harvesters, grass cutting machines, wood cutting saws, portable rice-maize processing mills, etc., and the use of these goods is increasing in the agricultural sector. Most of these goods are imported from China and run on diesel petrol. They are thrown away after spoiling.

The thought that you can open a factory of machines that can be powered by batteries by charging electricity and making a profit is nowhere to be seen in the planning and policy program. Renowned scientist Mahaveer Pun and his group had to sell books to run an agricultural implement factory. Finance Minister allocates budget in the name of innovation, his team is not a priority. Whether there is a competitive advantage or not, it will be practiced once. But they don't do that.

(3) Tourism: Tourism is not expanding beyond Kathmandu, Pokhara, Lumbini and Sauraha. Because the policy makers have no idea about it. How can the country benefit from tourism when it does not realize that tourism connects with the common people and it is necessary to connect? Tourists flying on foreign airlines, consuming foreign intercontinental food and drinks will bring some benefit to the hotel owner but overall there will be no added value.

(4) Infrastructure construction: The priority of infrastructure construction is occupied only by the constituencies of big leaders. National needs are not taken into account. If the tower built in Damak was built in Dhulabari in Jhapa, its business value would have been different. The Madhyapahari highway has shown that if the economic policy is not decided on how to build the infrastructure, who will be covered at what time, it will be like medicine after death. The

will finally squeeze out who the budget covers and who it ignores. A ready-made answer can be given on how resources are collected in the budget. The budget covered in 428 points covers the private sector of the pocket. Officials of the Federation of Commerce and Industry, CNI and Chambers of Commerce are all happy.