Speaking at the end of the day to a group of journalists in a well- appointed conference room that bears his personal stamp of elegance and style, Mr Singh claimed he was not making a partisan speech while seeking the Parliament’s approval for a vote on account.

He would have liked to claim that fiscal 2003-04 will yield 8% growth, but the finance minister gets his statistics from another ministry and they are still looking at 7.5% to 8.0%. He is confident that it will be higher. Here again, he resists bravado and sticks to form.

Was he under pressure from his party to offer more sops? A smile, and then he adds, “in governance there is valid competition between competing objectives and claims. The finance minister must balance these at all times.”

Is he disappointed at the response of the stock market? The reply is standard Finmin officialese, “the stock market indices are never an index of judging any budget. I don’t know why and how the market responds to such things.”

Is it the case that investors in bank stocks are worried about his pro-active stance on bank lending? This should not be the case, feels the finance minister. There is a “great imbalance” in the availability and cost of credit for different segments of the economy. Triple A corporates are able to raise funds at such low rates as 4% and 5%, while farmers and small businesses are saddled with 14% and 15% rates of interest. Moreover, credit is not easily available.

“India is a country where agriculture is a way of life. 70% of the people, 25% of GDP depend on it and enough credit is not going its way.” Banks must devote a certain percentage of their lending to rural areas, to small enterprises. Hence his directive.

Has he, however, succumbed to pressure from government servants by accepting the recommendations of the Pay Commission on merging dearness allowance with basic pay, much like the lame-duck Gujral government did in its dying days?

“I admit there are fiscal consequences of what I have done for government servants. But they too contribute to the economy. Their real income must also be preserved. There is already a mismatch between what the private sector pays and what governments pay.”

Then one must also be concerned about pensioners and senior citizens, just as one is about farmers. But even with all these fiscal commitments, Mr Singh says he has reduced the fiscal deficit and the revenue deficit. “We have in place an effective expenditure management system that has enabled this.”

Mr Singh draws attention to the fact that he has increased allocations for social and physical infrastructure, increased the tax/GDP ratio and yet reduced the deficit. But he worries that the tax base is not widening as fast as he would like it. Collections under personal income tax have not gone up by as much as he would like. If his government returns to power it will address these issues.

You have done nothing for exporters, says a journalist. “I have already, and so has the commerce minister. But exporters must learn to walk without crutches,” he retorts.

Mr Singh also seeks credit for doing his bit for development financing. The IDBI will be the “lead institution” for development finance, linking IFCI, LIC, IDFC, SBI in a virtuous chain of financing for industry, just as NABARD would do this for agriculture and SIDBI for small enterprises.

How has he managed to increase plan outlays while keeping the deficit under check. By curbing non-plan expenditure, up only by 2% compared to a 11% increase in plan expenditure, and by reducing subsidies, defence expenditure and the interest payments.

So what will his regular budget bring forth? “I cannot presume I will do this job again, though I can say we will be back in government!” Looking relaxed at the end of a long day, Mr Singh takes his leave.