Atishi slams Delhi Budget as ‘Hawa Hawai,’ calls it baseless
Atishi remarked that if the budget were to be summed up in one phrase, it would be a “hawa-hawai budget.”
AAP took to the streets on Saturday against the BJP government in Delhi, alleging its failure to fulfil the poll promise of providing an honorarium of Rs 2,500 to women in the national capital.
Statesman News Service | New Delhi | March 22, 2025 7:41 pm
X/@ANI
AAP took to the streets on Saturday against the BJP government in Delhi, alleging its failure to fulfil the poll promise of providing an honorarium of Rs 2,500 to women in the national capital.
The party carried a printed placard resembling a cheque with ‘Bank of Jumla’ written on it, lotus symbols facing downward on both sides and an image of PM Modi at the bottom, symbolically representing the failed promise.
Advertisement
During the demonstration, Leader of the Opposition in the Delhi Assembly, Atishi, said that before the Assembly elections, PM Modi had promised women that Rs 2,500 would be deposited in their accounts on March 8. However, no money was credited.
Advertisement
Moreover, AAP Delhi chief Saurabh Bharadwaj alleged that PM Modi had assured that every woman in Delhi would start receiving Rs 2,500 per month from March 8. “But March 8 has passed, and Delhi’s women are still waiting. That is why AAP has given women cheques from the ‘Bank of Jumla’ with Rs 2,500 written on them. We are handing out these cheques to remind the BJP of its promise. We hope this will bring some shame to the BJP and force them to fulfil their commitment,” he added.
Advertisement
Atishi remarked that if the budget were to be summed up in one phrase, it would be a “hawa-hawai budget.”
TMC and Congress MPs held a protest in Parliament on Tuesday against the Union government for allegedly stoppping MNREGA funds to West Bengal.
The Budget session of the Delhi Assembly commenced on Monday with AAP MLAs walking out of the House following Speaker Vijender Gupta's decision to skip the name of one of its legislators during a discussion under Rule 280, citing repetition of the matter.
Advertisement