I have been mesmerized by the potential for Prime Minister Modi to transform India given his massive electoral mandate two years ago. His pronouncements on a Clean India, Make in India, and most recently on Startup India are all key pillars of what I believe is necessary for India to create the jobs needed to meet the aspirations of millions of youngsters joining its workforce every year.

First, let me state what I like about the budget. It is a fiscally prudent budget that is socially inclusive. No increase in the fiscal deficit. Formalizing the Aadhar platform to make it a vehicle for subsidies and other programs. Minor tax benefits to the poor and middle class with a reasonable increase in taxes on the rich. Just what is required to give comfort to stakeholders that India is on a steady course.

All the grandees of the Indian economy like senior officials from state banks and promoters of large family businesses jumped in to endorse the budget. This is what they do for pretty much every budget, including the ones under the previous Congress government.

Unfortunately, a steady course will not be enough. We had a steady course under Prime Minister Manmohan Singh as well. The expectations on Modi are to go beyond the steady course and put India on a path to sustainable prosperity, or at least grow fast enough to pull the remaining 300 million out of poverty. Here’s where I feel the budget has failed to meet expectations.

Tweaking details at the edges: The budget is the best opportunity to communicate with all stakeholders on what the government’s plan is to implement PM Modi’s vision. Unfortunately, all budgets, including this one, quickly degenerates into a list of who is getting what. Here is an example of items that the Economic Times carried in its coverage:

“Traveling by hiring air-conditioned stage carriage will also become more expensive as it will now come under service tax with a rate of 5.6 per cent.

Hiring of agency to pack and move household items while shifting premises will also become expensive as it will now attract a service tax of 5.6 per cent as against 4.2 per cent earlier.”

Half measures that are short of stated intent: If the budget aims to drive progress in certain areas that the government is interested in, it is imperative that the stated vision is fully realized and implementable. A great example is the much discussed long term capital gains tax on equity in unlisted companies and startups. There was much discussion on why it is unfair to have a higher tax rate for private companies than public companies when the risk is higher in private companies. The government expressed through various media statements over the last few weeks that it would address that problem. When the budget came out it stated that whereas earlier you had to hold private equity for 3 years to get the long term capital gains rate, now it would be just 2 years. Obviously a step in the right direction but the usual “half measure”—it would have been a strong signal to follow through their earlier statements by making public and private company investments exactly equal. This is just one example of half measures that are strewn throughout the budget.

Confused measures that sometimes contradict stated intent: After two years of indicating that they would put the retrospective tax controversy surrounding Vodafone to rest, the issue is back in the front again. A spokesperson for the Finance Ministry stated that they would allow Vodafone to settle the case with a one-time payment of the original tax demand. However, the whole point of Vodafone’s defense is that the tax would not be due as per the old tax laws and is only due using retrospective taxation. I personally do not care whether Vodafone is right or wrong in its grievance, my only concern is the wrong signal it sends to investors on whether anything the government states is sacrosanct or always subject to change. Consistency, red-tape, and transparency continue to plague the investment and business climate in India.

My criticism does not mean that I think this is a weak budget. I think it is as good a budget as the last 5 budgets. A cautious move in the right direction, but doing too little to make a real difference.