Sharad Pawar criticises Maha Deputy CM Ajit Pawar’s ‘no vote no funds’ statement

The recent ‘no vote no funds’ statement Maharashtra Deputy CM Ajit Pawar made during his campaign for local civic body elections came in for sharp criticism from his uncle and Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) founder Sharad Pawar on Thursday.

During an election speech on November 21, Ajit Pawar had stated that rejecting his party’s (Ajit Pawar-led NCP) candidates in the Malegaon Nagar Panchayat elections could result in withdrawal of funds for the municipal council. “The Malegaon Municipal Council’s budget is only Rs 15 crore, and more funds are needed for development. I had given more funds to Baramati, which is why it is developed today. If you elect our candidates, I am committed to give whatever I have promised. But if you reject, I will also reject. You have votes, I have funds,” he had stated.

Advertisement

The statement evoked instant and sharp reaction from Opposition parties, which demanded that the Election Commission should take action against the deputy chief minister.

Reacting to his nephew’s “no vote, no funds” remark, Sharad Pawar said it was inappropriate to seek votes based on financial assurances. “Instead of seeking votes on the basis of work done, votes are being sought based on financial assurances. This is not at all appropriate. If the only goal is to win elections by offering financial incentives, then it is wrong,” Pawar told media persons in Baramati.

Pawar also criticised the Fadnavis government for lack of aid to farmers for the losses they suffered due to rains and floods. “The state government should have provided some financial assistance to those whose land was washed away in heavy rains to help them stand up again. In this regard, the state government has now decided on a policy that their loan recovery has been suspended for one year. But suspending loan recovery for one year will only be a temporary relief. It will not meet their needs,” Sharad Pawar said.

“I feel that considering the severe losses suffered by farmers, the government should have paid some amount. Also, if interest had been waived on some of the amounts and long-term installments had been paid, farmers would have benefitted. I do not think the assistance given by the government is sufficient,” Sharad Pawar said.