Union Budget 2026 Faces Backlash in Punjab Over Perceived Neglect
The Union Budget 2026 has sparked significant criticism across Punjab, with voices from civil society, Parliament, and industry largely expressing disappointment that the state was "left wanting" in the financial blueprint. While the budget introduces certain structural reforms, sectoral incentives, and simplification measures, critics argue it fails to present a clear, Punjab-focused vision that addresses the region's unique challenges.
Mixed Reactions from Civil Society and Activists
Former banker and social activist Avnish Khosla described the Union Budget as a mixed bag, acknowledging select reforms while highlighting substantial omissions for Punjab. Khosla pointed out that the much-anticipated seven high-speed rail corridors notably bypass the state, representing a missed opportunity for enhanced economic integration and connectivity.
However, he noted that proposals such as developing city economic regions and temple towns could potentially benefit Amritsar if implemented with sincerity and adequate resources. Khosla also welcomed the textile sector package and the prospect of establishing mega textile parks, initiatives that could provide crucial support to Amritsar's traders and bolster the local economy.
Parliamentary Criticism and Specific Grievances
Member of Parliament Vikramjit Singh Sahney was more categorical in his assessment, stating unequivocally that there was "nothing specific for Punjab" in the Union Budget. He emphasized the absence of concrete support for crop diversification, despite Punjab being at the forefront of this agricultural challenge, requiring substantial policy intervention and financial backing.
Sahney also highlighted the long-pending modernization of the semiconductor laboratory in Mohali, stressing that the promised Rs 10,000 crore funding must finally transition from announcement to actionable implementation. While welcoming initiatives for sports goods and textiles, the MP cautioned that industries in Jalandhar and Ludhiana would ultimately judge the Union Budget by tangible results on the ground, rather than mere proposals.
He further flagged the lack of a special border-area or economic package, despite Punjab's significant debt burden and strategic location, which necessitates targeted developmental support.
Industry Perspective and Broader Discontent
Industry veteran Gunbir Singh, past chair of CII Punjab, summed up the Union Budget as "bland," capturing a growing sense of dissatisfaction among business circles. While acknowledging positives such as tax holidays for data centers, the IT push, and new waterways, he criticized the absence of farm-based import substitution measures, employment generation strategies, and genuine ease-of-doing-business reforms.
"One is left searching for spice and salt," he remarked, underscoring the perception that the budget document lacks visionary elements and fails to address Punjab's pressing economic needs. From missed infrastructure opportunities and inadequate tax relief to the absence of border-area and farm-specific support, the budget was described as "incremental" at best and "devoid of vision" at worst, reflecting broader concerns about the state's developmental trajectory.
