|
PARLIAMENT LOGJAM
Talking or shouting shops !Raj Narain These days, Speaker in the Lok Sabha and Chairman in the Rajya Sabha appear reluctant to invoke the grand old rule to discipline members, who, as if emulating Raj Narain, have turned the floor of Parliament into a zone of protests –– shouting and holding placards. In our parliamentary lexicon, both shouting and displaying placards are nonparliamentary acts. Malladi Rama Rao "Parliament is a talking shop,"
said socialist leader Raj
Narain, who became the
nemesis of Indira Gandhi,
and made her take recourse
to emergency for survival in
the mid-seventies.He was given to
display of tantrums on the floor of
the House. So much so, he rarely
walked out. Marshals used to scoop
him up and carry him out on their
shoulders. Raj Narain enjoyed every
bit of the attention he got in those
pre-television days.
L K Advani
Two questions arise. One, of course, is why the presiding officers
are unwilling to invoke the rule book.
Two, what purpose the shouting
from the well serves a member keen
on articulating a public concern?
There are no ready answers for both
questions. One thing is clear though.
Today, no political party is in a
position to take the high moral
ground. And presiding officers are
content delivering homilies before an
unreceptive audience.
Manmohan Singh
I witnessed L K Advani et al
refusing the call of other opposition
leaders to join them in the well
during the days Parliament was
rocked by the Bofors scam.The "party
with a difference" gave up this
"difference" during the UPA era and
led the charge against the
Manmohan Singh government from
the well of the House. Now it is the
Congress party's turn to pay back in
full measure.
Sumitra Mahajan
A prospective ally, YSR Congress
Party, (YSRCP),- a breakaway
Congress in Andhra Pradesh, was
locked in a contest to share the
honours with the TDP.
E.S.L. Narasimhan
In effect, a state-level oneupmanship oneupmanship
game virtually paralysed
the proceedings of Parliament. Both
gave notice of a "No Confidence
Motion". And claim to have mustered
enough support to get the motion
admitted. Under the Lok Sabha rules,
at least 50 members should stand up
in support of the motion, when it is
tabled. Speaker Sumitra Mahajan
could not take head count. Reason:
"My vision is obstructed by placards".
She has a point. The chair could have
got the well cleared by marshals. But
this was not done. Result: the House
had lost precious time
Swamy Goud being treated after
he was injured in the Assembly
Should a Grand Old Party (GOP)
under a youthful leader disrupt the
proceedings just to settle scores? Are
there no rules and conventions to put
the government on the mat as the
saying goes? Yes, it is futile to expect
the Opposition to invoke the rule
book to assert their rights when the
Parliamentary Affairs Ministry is
unwilling or unprepared to move a
motion to censure an unruly
member. To make Parliament function properly, the strategy adopted by Rabi Ray merits attention. To this old guard socialist goes the credit of making the Zero Hour a noise free hour. Before him, the zero hour was the monopoly of the front ranking Opposition leaders with most of them speaking simultaneously and it was generally over in a few minutes. The Parliamentary Standing Committee system, introduced during the PV Narasimha Rao regime, has made the government and its officers accountable to Parliament as never before.Well, general public is unaware of this real side; they only see the flip-side on the idiot box. And our TV anchors lament that the Lok Sabha has let down democracy if the budget is passed without debate as happened on the March 16, 2018. For them the fact that parliamentary committees closely scrutinize the budget is a non-news. Ignorance is a bliss for the know-alls! With Rabi Ray, the Zero Hour
became a prolonged affair,
sometimes of over two hours. It was
because he allowed back benchers to
raise issues of their concern, of
course, with advance notice to the
Chair. The well was rarely crowded
when he was in chair. Whoever came
into the well, was gently ticked off
and asked to speak from his seat. The
"aggrieved" members listened to
him, and, he, in turn, ensured that
they had their full say. The short point is that adjournment is not a solution to pull curtains down on the show in the well of the House. Members have come to make a point in whatever way possible. So why not compel them to speak ? It is absurd to talk about the principle of "Dies Non" – no work, no pay in respect of parliamentarians seen indulging in unruly scenes on the floor of the House or whenever parliament is adjourned without transacting any business. Law makers are not daily wage
earners or government employees,
notwithstanding their perks like
monthly salary and retirement
benefits. |