Kerala Assembly: LDF boycotts proceedings over Finance Bill’s Subject Committee bypass
The protest came after Chief Minister VD Satheesan submitted the bill for consideration.
LDF argued that the Bill should be subjected to detailed scrutiny by the Subject Committee before being brought before the Parliament.
Also Read: Day 12 of CJP protest: Wangchuk says he is steady but tired; AISA flags health concerns of fasting students
Former finance minister KN Balagopal raised a point by saying that the bill was introduced in “great haste” and was mainly related to liquor policy.
“Normally, a Finance Bill of this nature should be referred to the Subject Committee. That did not happen in this case,” he said, adding: “Almost all of the important provisions relate to liquor. There are almost no other important provisions.”
He said members were assured that such an important proposal would be implemented only after detailed discussions, but this commitment was not fulfilled. Balagopal argued that bypassing the committee undermines the role of the legislature.
Also Read: BJP MLA says Maharashtra minister privately admitted not knowing TET exam papers printed in Agra
“Bringing this Finance Bill directly to the Parliament without giving the Subject Committee the opportunity to review it undermines the rights of the legislature. It reflects an approach that discourages debate rather than encouraging it.”
He questioned the substance of the bill, saying it proposes amendments to the Kerala GST Act, including a 120 per cent tax on certain categories, and addresses a policy that has been debated for nearly three years.
According to Balagopal, although the previous LDF government had studied similar proposals, it had consciously decided not to implement them, arguing that any change in excise policy should be discussed at the policy level first.
Satheesan rejected the objections, saying that all legal and procedural requirements were met.
He said the bill was considered based on the Business Advisory Committee report approved by the Parliament on June 24, 2026.
“When the Assembly considered and approved the BAC report, not a single change was made. Party leaders, including the Hon’ble member himself, were present in the BAC. The decision was taken by the BAC. There was no objection at that stage,” Satheesan said. he said.
Rejecting the Opposition’s claim that the bill should be referred to the Subject Committee, the CM asked whether the Finance Bill, introduced on February 24, when the Left was in power, was referred to the committee.
“If he wants to make political claims or bogus allegations, he is free to do so during the discussion of the bill. However, the objection he raises has no legal basis,” the CM said. he said.
After the Speaker rejected the procedural objection, Opposition leader Pinarayi Vijayan accused the government of introducing a major policy change without sufficient debate.
Vijayan said the Opposition initially accepted the proposal in the BAC meeting as it was informed that there would be no major changes in the bill.
“None of us were aware that such an important issue was being raised in this way,” he said. “Only after understanding its implications did we register our strong objection.”
Vijayan said the previous LDF government had only discussed promoting fruit wine made from locally produced agricultural produce to benefit farmers and small industries but never took a final decision.
“What is being done is completely different. Instead of supporting local producers, the government is giving freedom to big liquor companies to market their products by reducing taxes significantly,” said Vijayan. he said.
He claimed that the proposed tax cut exceeded 130 percent and questioned why the government insisted on implementing the measure despite objections from the opposition.
Calling the move “unacceptable”, Vijayan announced that the LDF would boycott the Assembly proceedings in protest against both the decision and the manner in which the Finance Bill was brought before the Assembly.
