YSRCP protests against NDA govt's ‘betrayal' of people
1
2
Vijayawada: YSRCP leaders and cadres took to the streets across the state on Wednesday to participate in the 'betrayal day' protest, called by party supremo YS
Jagan Mohan Reddy
. The protests, which included rallies and dharnas, were held in all district headquarters, municipal towns, and mandal centers.
Party leaders alleged that the Chandrababu Naidu-led NDA govt failed to implement its poll promises and had betrayed the people's verdict.
YSRCP state coordinator Sajjala Ramakrishna Reddy said that the massive turnout for the protest programme clearly indicated the govt's failure. He claimed that people had voluntarily attended the dharnas despite police restrictions and had voiced their dissent. He pointed out that people had realized the difference between Naidu and Jagan Mohan Reddy, who had fulfilled 99% of his promises within a year.
He criticized the NDA government for stopping existing schemes and not rolling out promised ones, neglecting health, medical, and agriculture sectors, and pushing the poor into more debt.
He also slammed the govt for downsizing the number of beneficiaries while boasting about increasing pension amounts. He highlighted the poor quality of governance, citing the example of physically challenged and aged people standing in queue lines to get ration after the door delivery system was scrapped.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Giao dịch vàng CFDs với mức chênh lệch giá thấp nhất
IC Markets
Đăng ký
Undo
He further alleged that the NDA govt had secured debts of over Rs 1.51 lakh crore in just 11 months, which was much higher than the debt incurred during Jagan's regime.
Surprisingly, the NDA govt did not implement even a single welfare scheme, he said.
The YSRCP leader criticized the police for trying to restrict the protests and telling people how to conduct them. However, he said that people had vented their ire and participated in huge numbers despite these efforts. Sajjala emphasized that YSRCP, as a responsible opposition party, would always be with the people and would fight for justice until the ruling party fulfilled its promises. Former ministers, legislators, MPs, and district party presidents participated in the protest programme in their respective districts.
Former ministers, legislators, MPs and district party presidents participated in protest programme in their respective districts.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
17 minutes ago
- Hans India
NDA's first year in office presents a mixed bag in AP
The adage 'a mirror never lies' holds true, and the recent survey by People's Pulse Research Organisation clearly reflects that the coalition government in Andhra Pradesh has little to boast about after its first year in power. The promises made during elections remain largely unfulfilled, and public expectations remain unmet. The NDA coalition partners—Telugu Desam Party (TDP), Jana Sena, and BJP—find themselves in an unenviable position: the majority of the state's populace is waiting, burdened by problems yet hopeful for solutions. The prevailing public sentiment is not about revenge against opponents or factional gains, but a desire for welfare and development. Despite the central government's cooperation, economic progress is modest, at best. Caste equations are tilting towards reconfiguration. The TDP's internal discord has become a challenge to coalition unity, while Jana Sena's leadership struggles to maintain party survival. The BJP appears to lack a clear vision for growth in Andhra Pradesh. Meanwhile, the YSR Congress Party (YSRCP) has failed to renew hope among the people, who see no change in its leadership. This broadly sums up the political, economic, and social landscape after one year of governance in Andhra Pradesh. A closer look reveals that the government's claims of being 'good' are not shared by the people. The People's Pulse survey, conducted across districts from Ichchapuram to Kuppam and Machilipatnam to Madakasira, engaging diverse age groups and communities, brings to light the fact that public opinion is largely skeptical. There is a cautious wait-and-see attitude—some promises have been partially fulfilled, but people are uncertain if the rest will be honoured. Officials' performance is viewed as unsatisfactory, and the ruling coalition's 'Red Book' culture (a term denoting vendetta politics) is widely resented. National parties are weakening while regional forces are growing stronger. Coordination among coalition partners seems lacking. The opposition YSRCP, despite being in opposition, fails to offer a credible alternative, with public scrutiny focusing on its leadership style and party conduct. The media and political parties remain polarized, often disconnected from genuine public issues and aspirations. The electorate believes that the ruling coalition need not offer anything new to justify itself; it should at least fulfill the promises made during elections. While pensions have been increased and distributed properly, other cash-based election promises remain unfulfilled, causing public dissatisfaction. The recent rollout of the 'Talliki Vandana' scheme (replacing Amma Vodi) has generated some positive feedback on the ground. However, people want welfare and development to proceed in a coordinated manner. Unfulfilled promises such as the 'Super Six' employment guarantees, unemployment benefits, farmer welfare schemes, monthly financial aid of Rs 1500 for those aged 18-69 years, and free bus services remain a concern. Locals acknowledge improvements in peace and security, road repairs, and sand mining regulations. Progress on the capital city Amaravati and Polavaram projects has accelerated, which is a source of satisfaction. However, criticism persists that ministers, MPs, and MLAs have been involved in nepotism and family patronage from early on, a practice that was less pronounced during the YSRCP government's initial years. Employment promises remain unmet, and people demand the implementation of the 'Prajagalam' scheme. The government's delay in delivering on its commitments raises questions among the public. Neither the ruling coalition nor the opposition has conducted a thorough review of why they won or lost. The ruling coalition maintains a confident stance, asserting that it is delivering governance according to the people's wishes and dismissing the opposition as ineffective. Conversely, the YSRCP claims the coalition government has failed in all areas and that the electorate will realize this and return YSRCP to power in four years. Both sides remain entrenched in echo chambers, unwilling to acknowledge realities. Despite the current political scenario, indications from the public suggest that by 2029, the one-party dominance of 2024 will no longer prevail. The public perceives that while Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu remains the central figure, others in the government have not performed well. Ordinary citizens accept Pawan Kalyan, the Deputy Chief Minister, but there is no widespread support for the Chief Minister's son Nara Lokesh as a future leader. The people are not ready for Chandrababu's radical experiments or his futuristic visions such as the 2047 concept or P-4 ideology, which remain obscure and unconvincing. Although projects are progressing faster with central assistance, the response to Amaravati's development is mixed, with concerns about regional disparities and inequality. There is a growing perception that the interests of Uttarandhra and Rayalaseema regions are being neglected. Land pooling controversies in the capital region persist, with doubts among original farmers. There is a call to extend tenant farmers' leases and pensions for another decade. The Polavaram project has restarted, but the displaced persons' issues remain complex. While law and order are not as dire as alleged by the YSRCP, revenge attacks and factional conflicts in Palnadu and some Seema areas continue to trouble the people. Citizens question the ongoing 'Red Book' vendetta politics and factionalism, asking what has changed since the previous government's failure. The average public opinion is a plea for coordinated welfare and development as promised. The coalition's policies and actions are seen as exacerbating regional and caste divisions. Influential Reddys are drifting back towards YSRCP, while communities such as Kamma, Kapu, Kshatriya, Vaishya, BC, and Madiga largely support the coalition. Conversely, Reddys, Muslims, Christians, Dalits, and other groups are strengthening the YSRCP's base. This social realignment signals new political reconfigurations ahead. Despite suffering a severe electoral defeat—dropping from 151 to 11 seats—the YSRCP retains about 40 per cent vote share and remains a strong political force in the state. There is a general expectation that its chief Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy will modify his style and approach as an effective means to reconnect with the people and address their problems. Until such changes occur, the party's political fortunes are unlikely to improve. The public rejects the notion that the people will automatically re-elect YSRCP in the next elections. One major obstacle is the still-active 'coterie' around Jagan, which continues to act as a barrier between him, his party, and the public. The perception that 'Jagan is fighting for us' has yet to take root widely. Within the coalition, the TDP, expected to play the leading role, has been embroiled in internal strife since government formation. Possibly due to dependence on the central government, the TDP leadership appears to accept BJP's dominant role in the coalition. The public perceives that the BJP is negligible politically in the state. Jana Sena facesa similar predicament. In constituencies represented by Jana Sena, the TDP dominance is evident. The lack of close rapport between party chief Pawan Kalyan and his MLAs, and organisational weaknesses, have left the party in a precarious position. Only the young and loyal cadres seem responsive to Pawan's initiatives. The general public feels that Pawan Kalyan must uphold coalition principles, maintain Jana Sena's identity, and act decisively and straightforwardly as elections approach. Both the ruling coalition and opposition have achieved little in the past year; time has only passed without substantial progress. (The writer is a Political Analyst, People's Pulse Research Organisation)
Time of India
20 minutes ago
- Time of India
US-Iran tensions: Tehran vows 'proportionate response'; key ways it can retaliate
Iran has promised a 'proportionate response' to what it calls the United States' 'criminal aggression' after President Donald Trump confirmed that American forces had 'obliterated' three of Iran's nuclear facilities. While Trump hailed the strike as a military success, warning there were 'many targets left,' Iran has vowed that its response will come; the only question is when and how. Iran's foreign ministry said the country would 'defend its territory, sovereignty, security and people by all force and means.' The Iranian military is now reportedly in charge of planning a retaliatory strike, according to Iran's UN envoy Amir Saeid Iravani, who told the Security Council that Washington had 'decided to destroy diplomacy.' 'We will take all measures necessary,' Iravani said, adding that Iran's response would be shaped by 'timing, nature and scale' determined solely by its military. Limited strikes or wider confrontation? Iran's dilemma lies in balancing a credible retaliation without triggering a full-scale regional war. It has experience with calibrated responses: following the 2020 US killing of General Qassem Soleimani, Tehran launched missiles at US bases in Iraq after warning them in advance. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch CFD với công nghệ và tốc độ tốt hơn IC Markets Đăng ký Undo No lives were lost, but the message was clear. This time, however, experts suggest Iran may avoid advance notice. According to the BBC, Tehran retains roughly half of its original 3,000 missiles and has already drawn up a list of some 20 US bases in the region, including key sites like At-Tanf, Ain al-Asad, and Erbil in Iraq and Syria. Proxies could also be activated to carry out these attacks, mirroring past strategies. Sanam Vakil of Chatham House told The New York Times that Iran could strike 'largely evacuated' US bases or re-activate regional partners like the Houthis in Yemen. Such a cautious, asymmetric campaign would allow Iran to maintain its image without escalating into direct confrontation. The Strait of Hormuz and cyber warfare Another option is economic warfare. Tehran could attempt to choke the Strait of Hormuz — the strategic waterway through which nearly a third of global oil flows. The BBC reported that Iran might deploy sea mines or fast-attack boats to block shipping lanes, potentially causing a spike in global oil prices. Cyberattacks also remain a key tool in Iran's arsenal. Alongside China, Russia and North Korea, Iran has cultivated advanced cyber capabilities. Attacks on US infrastructure or commercial entities could inflict damage without triggering immediate military retaliation. 'Iran knew this was coming and will have prepared a chain of responses,' said Ellie Geranmayeh of the European Council on Foreign Relations, warning that attacks 'will be swift and multilayered.' Retaliation could be delayed — or abandoned There are voices within Iran's leadership arguing for restraint. A delayed response striking back when US forces are no longer on high alert could allow Tehran to save face without risking immediate retribution. Symbolic attacks on diplomatic missions or targeted assassinations of US-linked figures abroad are also being considered. However, such a strategy carries its own risks. Doing nothing may spare Iran further losses but risks weakening its domestic credibility. As conservative Tehran analyst Reza Salehi noted: 'If we do not react, the US will not leave us alone.' Some experts argue that the regime may ultimately choose to recalibrate rather than retaliate. This includes restarting diplomacy, potentially via neutral mediators in Muscat or Rome. Yet such a path would demand significant concessions, especially around its nuclear enrichment programme something the regime has historically resisted. The nuclear question looms large According to NYT reporting, Iran's long-term takeaway from the strikes may be the need for a nuclear deterrent. Vali Nasr, an Iran scholar at Johns Hopkins University, said the strikes may push Iran to abandon cooperation with the IAEA and move towards nuclear armament. 'This is the great irony,' Geranmayeh told NYT. 'Although Trump has sought to eliminate the nuclear threat from Iran, he has now made it far more likely that Iran becomes a nuclear state.' Ayatollah Khamenei could authorise withdrawal from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and expel international inspectors, effectively ending global oversight of Iran's programme. While the International Atomic Energy Agency reported no radiation leakage after the US strikes — implying enriched uranium was likely moved, concerns remain that Iran's stockpile is now hidden and unmonitored. 'Hardliners in the Iranian regime may ultimately win the day' Experts believe Iran now faces two critical choices. Jonathan Panikoff of the Atlantic Council explained: 'Iran can choose to strike US bases in a limited fashion… or it could go all in and trigger a regional war.' Refraining from retaliation may limit further military damage but risks weakening the regime's image. 'If we do not react, the US will not leave us alone,' said conservative Tehran analyst Reza Salehi. A calculated response—such as targeting symbolic US sites—could appease hardliners without escalating to full-scale war. However, given Trump's threats and the severity of the strikes, restraint seems unlikely. 'Hardliners in the Iranian regime may ultimately win the day,' Panikoff noted, adding that asymmetric attacks or overseas terror operations remain a possibility. Iran's past actions, like the Khobar Towers bombing and rocket attacks on US forces in Iraq, show both its capability and intent to retaliate. Its allies, including Yemen's Houthis, have already threatened US naval forces. Regional fallout and US response With over 40,000 American troops stationed across the region, in Bahrain, Qatar, Iraq and elsewhere, Washington is reinforcing its positions. Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth has confirmed the deployment of additional assets, and non-essential diplomatic staff have been evacuated. Trump, while portraying the US operation as restrained, has made it clear that more force will follow if Iran escalates. 'There will either be peace or there will be tragedy for Iran,' he warned. Still, many in Tehran believe the real tragedy is already unfolding. Iran's UN envoy accused Israel of manipulating US policy, saying Netanyahu had succeeded in dragging the United States into 'yet another costly and baseless war.'
Time of India
21 minutes ago
- Time of India
UK's Farage promises non-doms protection from tax on overseas assets
Nigel Farage 's Reform UK party is offering non-doms full exemption from tax on their overseas assets for a fee of £250,000 ($335,000) every 10 years with the revenue redistributed to lower income workers, drawing a new battle line with Britain's traditional parties. Farage's proposal pits him against both the Conservatives, which last year abolished non-dom status for those who live in Britain but have their permanent home abroad, and the Labour government, which went one step further after winning the election last July by imposing inheritance tax on their global wealth. Thousands of people in Britain have left in protest at Labour's inheritance tax measure, including some of the country's wealthiest individuals. Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves is now exploring changes to bring them back. Inheritance tax is charged at 40% in the UK, one of the highest rates in the developed world. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like If You Eat Ginger Everyday for 1 Month This is What Happens Tips and Tricks Undo Farage would reinstate the old non-dom regime that protected them from tax on their overseas income, including inheritance tax, to reverse the exodus of the rich and business elite. Under Reform's so-called 'Britannia Card,' non-doms would have to pay the £250,000 fee. The Times first reported the story. (Join our ETNRI WhatsApp channel for all the latest updates) Proceeds from the levy would be transferred directly into the bank accounts of the lowest-earning 10% of workers. Reform estimated about 2.5 million people on a full-time salary of less than £23,000 would get £600 each if 6,000 non-doms paid for the Britannia Card. Live Events You Might Also Like: UK may rethink non-dom inheritance tax as wealthy foreigners exit Reform has become a credible threat to Britain's traditional two party system. It is leading in the polls and Farage is developing a more coherent policy agenda than with his former UKIP and Brexit parties, when he led largely single issue campaigns against the European Union. Critics warn that his plans for big tax cuts on working people paid for by slashing the size of the state could prove undeliverable. Reform's £250,000 'landing fee' is a little cheaper than the former non-dom regime under which there was an annual fixed charge of £30,000 if an individual lived in the UK for seven of the last nine tax years, rising to £60,000 if it was 12 of the last 14 tax years. Restoring the non-dom status would also cost Reform the £33.8 billion of income that the Office for Budget Responsibility estimated the Conservative and Labour changes will generate over this parliament. Companies House data compiled by Bloomberg found evidence of an exodus of more than 4,400 directors of UK businesses since last July. In April alone, when the tax hikes kicked in, departures were up about 75% from 12 months earlier. You Might Also Like: UK replaces passport stickers with eVisas for some: What you need to know if you're planning your travel UK's tougher immigration stance may undermine efforts to meet net zero by 2050
