Aaditya Thackeray Launches Scathing Attack on BJP's Congestion Tax Proposal for Mumbai
Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Aaditya Thackeray has vehemently criticized a recent proposal by BJP corporator Makarand Narwekar to impose a congestion tax in Mumbai, labeling it as an attempt to "loot" the city without providing any substantial benefits in return. The political clash erupted just a day after Narwekar formally submitted his demand to the municipal commissioner on February 8, 2026.
BJP Corporator's Proposal for Traffic Management
Earlier this week, BJP corporator Makarand Narwekar wrote a detailed letter to the Mumbai municipal commissioner, advocating for the implementation of a congestion tax in several central business districts across the city. This proposed tax is a fee levied on vehicles entering densely populated and high-traffic areas during peak hours, with the primary objective of reducing vehicular load in already heavily congested zones. Similar congestion tax systems are operational in numerous Western cities, including London and Stockholm, where they have been implemented to manage urban traffic flow and environmental concerns.
Thackeray's Fiery Social Media Response
In a strongly worded post on the social media platform X, Aaditya Thackeray expressed his outright opposition to the BJP's initiative. He accused the BJP of consistently exploiting Mumbai without reciprocating with meaningful development or budgetary allocations. "What a shame that the BJP only looks at Mumbai to loot and not give anything back," Thackeray stated in his post. He highlighted the absence of prominent provisions for Mumbai in the national budget throughout the BJP's tenure at the Union government, despite the city's significant contributions to the national treasury.
Thackeray further alleged that industries and job opportunities have been systematically diverted away from Mumbai under BJP rule. He referenced a series of alleged scams over the past four years, including road and beautification scams, which he claims have financially drained the city. The Shiv Sena (UBT) leader posed pointed questions to the BJP, asking, "For every bus reduced from the BEST, by the BJP, to benefit private bus companies, will we get our tax back? For every bit of SPM (suspended particulate matter) that we breathe from the terrible AQI, will the BJP give Mumbaikars tax back?"
Mumbai's Ongoing Air Quality Concerns
The controversy unfolds against the backdrop of Mumbai's persistent air quality issues. According to data from the Central Pollution Control Board's (CPCB) dashboard, Mumbai recorded an Air Quality Index (AQI) of 117 on Monday, February 9, 2026, which is classified as moderate. This level is considered unhealthy for sensitive groups, particularly children and senior citizens. Throughout February, Mumbai's air quality has consistently remained in the unhealthy category, following a troubling trend from January, where the city experienced unhealthy air for 23 days.
Further analysis of CPCB data reveals that out of the 28 operational AQI monitoring stations in Mumbai, 26 stations reported moderate AQI levels. The Colaba (Navy Nagar) area recorded the worst AQI at 171, followed by Deonar and Malad, each registering an AQI of 144. These figures underscore the urgent need for comprehensive environmental and traffic management strategies in the metropolitan region.
Political Implications and Public Reaction
The proposal and subsequent criticism have ignited a significant political debate, with Thackeray's remarks resonating among residents concerned about additional financial burdens and the city's deteriorating air quality. The congestion tax discussion brings to the forefront broader issues of urban governance, public transportation infrastructure, and environmental sustainability in one of India's most populous cities. As Mumbai grapples with these challenges, the opposition from Shiv Sena (UBT) signals potential resistance to future policy moves by the BJP-led administration, setting the stage for continued political friction over urban development and fiscal policies.
