India’s Union Budget Discussion Thrown Into Chaos as Opposition Alleges Rahul Gandhi Is Being Repeatedly Gagged
India’s Budget Session entered a fresh day of disruption on Monday, February 9, 2026, with the Lok Sabha adjourned for the day amid a continuing confrontation between the government and the Opposition over Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi’s insistence that he be allowed to speak before the general discussion on the Union Budget 2026-27 begins.
The stand-off unfolded as Parliament was scheduled to start its first full round of debate on the budget presented by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman on February 1, even as the Rajya Sabha proceeded with a day-long discussion on budget priorities, fiscal policy and competing claims about growth, jobs and the distribution of central resources among States.
 |
| File Photo of LoP RaGa; Via: Bharat Jodo on X |
The House was adjourned multiple times through the day, including soon after it resumed at noon and again after it reconvened at 2 p.m. During the afternoon sitting, Congress MP Shashi Tharoor was called to initiate the budget debate, but he yielded the floor to Rahul Gandhi, who said he had met the Speaker and that the Speaker had agreed to let him speak in the House.
Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju disputed that claim on the floor, stating that no such commitment had been made. The disagreement triggered renewed protests and the Chair adjourned the Lok Sabha for the day, pushing the start of detailed budget discussion in the Lower House to Tuesday.
The dispute is the latest escalation in a broader parliamentary deadlock that has carried over from the previous week, when the Lok Sabha adopted the Motion of Thanks to the President’s Address by voice vote without Prime Minister Narendra Modi delivering the customary reply in the Lower House.
Speaker Birla had said on February 5 that he asked PM Modi not to come to the Lok Sabha because he had “concrete information” that some Congress MPs might attempt an “unexpected act” of protest near the Prime Minister’s seat.
Congress leaders have rejected that account, arguing that the Speaker’s remarks maligned women MPs from the Opposition and were used to justify the Prime Minister’s absence from the House.
On February 9, Congress women MPs wrote to the Speaker objecting to what they called “false, baseless, and defamatory allegations” directed at them, and asserted that the Prime Minister’s non-appearance was “not due to any threat” but because, they alleged, he did not have the courage to face the Opposition.
The letter also alleged a pattern of parliamentary rights being denied to the Opposition during the ongoing Budget Session, including repeated disruptions around Rahul Gandhi’s attempts to raise certain issues during the Motion of Thanks debate.
At the centre of the continuing flashpoint is the Opposition’s insistence on airing points linked to the 2020 India–China military standoff in eastern Ladakh, including references to claims attributed to former Army chief General M.M. Naravane’s memoir.
The government has maintained that material from unpublished memoirs, or magazine reports based on such material, is not permissible to cite in the House under parliamentary rules. The resulting confrontation has repeatedly derailed scheduled business in the Lok Sabha over several sittings, including the day when eight Opposition MPs were suspended for the remainder of the Budget Session after unruly scenes in the House.
Those suspensions continue to animate protests, alongside renewed demands for a full discussion on the framework of the India–U.S. Bilateral Trade Agreement and related claims about possible tariff and market-access commitments.
Outside Parliament on February 9, Rahul Gandhi told reporters there was “no question” of Opposition MPs threatening the Prime Minister, and argued that Modi stayed away from the Lok Sabha because of “what I was saying.”
He also alleged that Defence Minister Rajnath Singh had made an incorrect claim about the publication status of Naravane’s book, saying that the memoir had been published and that he possessed a copy.
Rahul Gandhi said the Opposition was keen on a substantive budget debate, but argued that the government was avoiding discussion because the recent India–U.S. trade understanding, and its implications for farmers and sensitive sectors, would come under scrutiny.
The possibility of an Opposition-initiated no-confidence motion against Speaker Om Birla surfaced more prominently on February 9, with Congress sources indicating that INDIA bloc parties were exploring whether such a move should be pursued.
Reports also cited procedural requirements, including a notice period, and Opposition leaders framed the idea as a response to what they describe as repeated denial of speaking opportunities and uneven enforcement of rules. Tharoor, when asked later about the reports, said there had been no discussion with him on the matter, adding that some people were discussing it and “we will see what happens.”
While the Lok Sabha remained gridlocked, the Rajya Sabha proceeded with the budget debate and a sequence of interventions that highlighted both the government’s narrative of macroeconomic stability and the Opposition’s critique of data, jobs and fiscal choices.
Chairman C.P. Radhakrishnan repeatedly ruled that issues specific to the Lok Sabha could not be raised in the Upper House, telling members that “no one can force the chair” when slogans disrupted proceedings. At one point, Opposition MPs staged a walkout after protesting that Lok Sabha developments were being disallowed from discussion in the Rajya Sabha.
The budget debate itself ranged widely. Former Finance Minister P. Chidambaram, speaking for the Congress, described the budget as “forgettable” and questioned cuts or constraints in several heads, while also raising concerns about capital investment, private investment, and the pace of fiscal consolidation.
He argued that nominal growth had slowed in recent years and said unemployment remained a dominant concern in constituencies, citing youth unemployment figures and questioning the outcomes of the government’s internship scheme. He also criticised what he described as a slow reduction in the fiscal deficit and raised doubts about headline claims and underlying data.
Other members pressed regional and sectoral demands. MPs raised issues linked to Jammu and Kashmir, labour codes, education and teacher eligibility requirements, and healthcare capacity at major public hospitals. AAP MP Raghav Chadha argued for tighter regulation of virtual digital assets while bringing the sector “onshore,” framing it as a way to improve compliance and revenue.
Trinamool Congress MP Susmita Dev argued that the most consequential elements of the budget were not only what it addressed but also what it did not, and questioned the reliability of data used to substantiate claims on growth and poverty reduction.
BJP members defended the budget as expanding in size and scope and credited the government with inflation control, increased welfare targeting, and a push for infrastructure, manufacturing and new industrial corridors. Interventions from AIADMK and BJD members placed Tamil Nadu and Odisha-specific demands on record, including perceived gaps in allocations and concerns about rail and agriculture-linked provisions.
By early evening, the Rajya Sabha adjourned for the day with budget discussion set to continue on Tuesday, February 10. The Lok Sabha is also scheduled to reconvene the same day, with the immediate question being whether the government and the Opposition can agree on sequencing, whether Rahul Gandhi will be allowed to make a statement before the budget debate proceeds, and whether the House can move past the procedural fight to begin detailed scrutiny of Union Budget 2026-27 proposals.