Chandigarh:
The Union Budget 2026 has reignited a familiar but unresolved debate in Haryana—whether national economic planning adequately addresses the realities of agrarian states. While the ruling BJP in the state has hailed the budget as growth-oriented, opposition leaders and farmer representatives have strongly criticised it for failing to confront what they describe as deep-rooted agricultural distress.
Haryana’s economy remains closely tied to farming, with large sections of its population dependent on agriculture and allied activities. Opposition leaders argue that despite repeated assurances, the budget once again sidesteps critical farmer issues such as guaranteed Minimum Support Price, rising input costs, declining groundwater levels, and climate-induced crop risks.
Leaders from opposition parties accused the central government of focusing disproportionately on infrastructure and industry while treating agriculture as a secondary concern. They pointed out that while budget allocations may show nominal increases, there is little in terms of structural reform or direct income security for farmers. According to them, announcements lack specificity when it comes to implementation timelines and ground-level impact.
The Haryana government, however, has defended the budget, asserting that long-term agricultural resilience cannot be achieved through short-term populism. Chief Minister Nayab Singh Saini has argued that investments in irrigation, rural infrastructure, agri-technology, and crop diversification are more sustainable solutions than blanket subsidies.
Yet, farmer unions remain unconvinced. Representatives say that policy language does not translate into field-level relief, especially for small and marginal farmers facing debt pressure and market volatility. They also note that recent protests and mobilisations reflect a persistent trust deficit between policymakers and the farming community.
Politically, the issue is significant. Rural Haryana has historically influenced electoral outcomes, and agrarian discontent has reshaped political narratives in the past. Analysts believe that how governments respond to farmer concerns today could have a lasting impact on voter sentiment well ahead of the 2027 and 2029 electoral cycles.
The budget debate has thus become more than an economic discussion; it has evolved into a test of political credibility. Whether the ruling establishment can bridge the perception gap between policy intent and lived rural realities remains one of the most pressing political questions in Haryana.
