Selim Raihan: As the first budget of the new government following the February election, it is undoubtedly politically ambitious. The budget speech repeatedly refers to the aspirations of the mass uprising, democratic reconstruction, economic justice, inclusion, good governance, and the rebuilding of state institutions. In this sense, the budget is not merely a statement of revenues and expenditures; it also serves as an expression of the new government's political vision.
In particular, the language used to describe transforming the economy from one controlled by a few groups into a more participatory system involving a broader segment of the population is consistent with public expectations. However, there is an important caveat. After the mass uprising, people expect not only a new political narrative but also visible changes in the distribution of power, resources, opportunities, and public services. The budget acknowledges those expectations, but it has not yet translated them sufficiently into a practical and implementable economic action plan.
The problem is that a clear gap remains between public expectations and the realities of economic management. The rhetoric of reform in the budget is strong, but in many areas the roadmap for reform remains unclear. Major changes have been proposed in the banking sector, revenue administration, public expenditure, project implementation, social protection, and employment. Yet the budget should have provided greater clarity on what reforms will be undertaken, when they will occur, who will lead them, how they will be implemented, and by what indicators their success will be measured.
After the mass uprising, people are no longer inclined to be highly patient. They do not want to hear promises alone; they want to see relief in the marketplace, greater employment opportunities, easier access to public services, restored confidence in the banking sector, and visible action against corruption. That is where this budget faces both its greatest weakness and its greatest test. It has given voice to public expectations, but it has not yet clearly demonstrated the reliable institutional mechanisms needed to fulfill them.
