Maharashtra's Deputy Chief Minister and Finance Minister, Ajit Pawar, has sought to clarify the controversy he ignited last month by stating he holds the keys to the state's coffers. On Sunday, he asserted that his comments were taken out of context and blown out of proportion.
Casual Remarks Spark Political Firestorm
Addressing a rally for the municipal council polls in Bhor, Pawar stated, "Those comments were casual. The state's money does not belong to any individual." He defended his record, claiming he has not discriminated against anyone and has wisely used the powers granted to him. This statement comes weeks after he told voters in Malegaon that while they ‘have votes', he ‘has funds', and he would ensure there was no shortage of funds if his party's candidates were elected. He had warned that if voters rejected NCP candidates, he would, in turn, ‘reject' them by withholding funds.
An Apology and a Clarification
Pawar also addressed the backlash from his comparison of Baramati's development to other areas. He admitted his mistake and tendered an apology for describing other leaders' areas as 'bhikar' (worthless). "I should have used words like ‘bhakas' (underdeveloped)," he conceded during his speech in Daund. Furthermore, he responded to critics who pointed out that the Chief Minister holds more power, stating that even with fewer rights, he has used his powers for the state's betterment and promoted development.
Election Focus and Allegations
The Deputy CM emphasized that his top priority is the upcoming polls, so much so that he skipped his nephew Yugendra's wedding on Sunday to conduct rallies. He urged voters to scrutinize candidates and avoid parties that field individuals with illegal businesses. Pawar also alleged that some opposition parties are using muscle power and threats during the election campaign. He declared that his party workers would file official complaints, leading to legal action.
Concluding his address, Pawar called for clean politics, stating that factors like blood relations, caste, and religion should not influence the polls. He advocated for open opposition, warning against backstabbing. He justified his alignment with the ruling government, claiming it enabled him to work for development, whereas staying with the opposition would have left him with no option but to protest.
