<p>Terming one vote for one state policy in the GST council as a “fundamental flaw”, Tamil Nadu Finance Minister P T R Palanivel Thiagarajan on Saturday demanded that the voting value of states should be in proportion to their size, and population among other factors.</p>.<p>Briefing reporters at the Secretariat, Thiagarajan said the GST regime was not on “solid footing” and demanded its revamp, a day after he pitched for the same at the GST Council meeting chaired by Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman. He reiterated that the Union Government should clear all dues to state governments.</p>.<p>Without naming Goa Transport Minister Mauvin Godinho, who represented his state in the GST Council, Thiagarajan said the voice of the “tiny state” whose population is just half of Madurai district was heard “25 times” more than was needed.</p>.<p><strong><a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/national/west/palanivel-thiagarajan-has-insulted-goa-smaller-states-minister-demands-apology-991421.html" target="_blank">Read | Palanivel Thiagarajan has insulted Goa, smaller states: Minister demands apology</a></strong></p>.<p>“That state got more opportunity than many other big states. Should not our voices be heard?” the Finance Minister asked. He also said the issue of exempting Covid essentials from GST was referred to a Group of Ministers (GoM) despite many states piloting and supporting the proposal.</p>.<p>On the voting value, he said the policy of one vote for one state was wrong and it was imperative that it is changed. “Every state has one vote. How is it fair? Democracy is proportional representation. The number of seats in the state assembly and parliament seats for the state is based on their population. Then why should every state have just one vote. This is a fundamental flaw,” PTR said.</p>.<p>He added that the voting value should be based on the state's population or its manufacturing capability, consumption, or per capita income. He also batted for reforms in the GST structure maintaining that it was not on a “solid footing.”</p>
<p>Terming one vote for one state policy in the GST council as a “fundamental flaw”, Tamil Nadu Finance Minister P T R Palanivel Thiagarajan on Saturday demanded that the voting value of states should be in proportion to their size, and population among other factors.</p>.<p>Briefing reporters at the Secretariat, Thiagarajan said the GST regime was not on “solid footing” and demanded its revamp, a day after he pitched for the same at the GST Council meeting chaired by Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman. He reiterated that the Union Government should clear all dues to state governments.</p>.<p>Without naming Goa Transport Minister Mauvin Godinho, who represented his state in the GST Council, Thiagarajan said the voice of the “tiny state” whose population is just half of Madurai district was heard “25 times” more than was needed.</p>.<p><strong><a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/national/west/palanivel-thiagarajan-has-insulted-goa-smaller-states-minister-demands-apology-991421.html" target="_blank">Read | Palanivel Thiagarajan has insulted Goa, smaller states: Minister demands apology</a></strong></p>.<p>“That state got more opportunity than many other big states. Should not our voices be heard?” the Finance Minister asked. He also said the issue of exempting Covid essentials from GST was referred to a Group of Ministers (GoM) despite many states piloting and supporting the proposal.</p>.<p>On the voting value, he said the policy of one vote for one state was wrong and it was imperative that it is changed. “Every state has one vote. How is it fair? Democracy is proportional representation. The number of seats in the state assembly and parliament seats for the state is based on their population. Then why should every state have just one vote. This is a fundamental flaw,” PTR said.</p>.<p>He added that the voting value should be based on the state's population or its manufacturing capability, consumption, or per capita income. He also batted for reforms in the GST structure maintaining that it was not on a “solid footing.”</p>