The Hindu Business Line : Expulsion of MPs

The recent dismissal of 11 MPs involved in the cash-for-question scam has indeed placed the nation in a very awkward and embarrassing situation. It is very sad indeed that our MPs would stoop to such levels.

So, the Speaker's decision to suspend the tainted MPs is correct.

In my opinion, MPs should lead by example in evincing sound principle and incorrupt dealings.

V. Venkitasubramanian, Kochi, e-mail: vvsmani2002@yahoo.co.in

In a politician's world accepting bribes under duress is a way of life. In fact, these days, the term `charismatic leader' extends to qualities such as nepotism, accepting bribes and being corrupt.

T. V. Jayaprakash, Research Officer (Retd) CADA of Kerala, Thrissur

Email: tv.jayaprakash@rediffmail.com

It is gratifying that the Lok Sabha took the bold step of showing those MPs the door who were involved in the cash-for-question scam. Their crime is as serious as the recent terrorist attack on Parliament. These tainted MPs must be barred for life from holding any public office.

Sham Sunder Gupta, e-mail: shamsunders@sify.com

It is a matter of concern despite all the high talk of eliminating/weeding out corruption in public life, nothing concrete has been done. And the cash-for-question scam is proof of this. We have still few towering public personalities such as our President, Mr A. P. J. Abdul Kalam, and Prime Minister, Dr Manmohan Singh, from whom the public expect a firm stand on the basic issue of corruption.

S. Krithivasan, SBI, e-mail: s.krithivasan@sbi.co.in

The quick action taken against the 11 MPs involved in the cash-for-question scam by expelling them has raised many questions. What was the force behind the commendable fast action? Were the sting operations justified? Is the punishment too harsh? Will Parliament act in such a manner in the case of big guns? If the affected MPs go to the court will they admit the cases and, if so, what will be the impact?

A. Jacob Sahayam, Thiruvananthapuram, e-mail: jacob_sahayam@yahoo.co.in

The decision taken by the Speaker of the House to expel 11 MPs involved in the scam is welcome. It will serve as a deterrent to any such corrupt practices. However, the reasons and issues behind the screen should be looked into.

S. Murali, chartered accountant

Coimbatore

e-mail: bmrcas@touchtelindia.net

The Government's action on cash-for-question sends a clear signal that there will be little tolerance for corruption at any level. This stand has to be backed up by a comprehensive strategy to wipe out corruption.

Abhishek Thakur, Marketing Manager, Kotak Life Insurance, e-mail: abhitur@yahoo.com

It is a shame to see how MPs misused the powers vested in them for the development of society, by accepting cash to raise issues in Parliament. Their expulsion will serve as a warning to other MPs.

S. Sivasankaran, Sr Manager (Retd), Canara Bank, Salem

The precedent set by the Speaker, Mr Somnath Chatterjee, in removing all those MPs involved in the cash-for-question scam will deter any representative of the public from amassing wealth by unlawful means under the guise of their MP status.

N. Vijayaraghavan , Chennai

It is raining sting operations as more and more `stung' MPs are caught on camera taking bribes. `Operation Duryodhana' organised by Cobra Post, has revised a debate on what should be the ambit of law when the people's representatives indulge in such unethical conduct.

Lok Sabha's Bansal Committee and Rajya Sabha's Karan Singh Committee recommended expulsion in view of the un-tenability of their continuance as MPs. The Rajya Sabha committee also recommended regulation of under-cover operations.

A more severe punishment such as debarring these tainted MPs from contesting elections should have been considered and imposed. This is only the tip of the iceberg.

Tainted MPs still continue to survive in Parliament and no action can be taken for want of proof. Efforts of NGOs and the media, therefore, go waste. Performance for the public good should be the watchword for the higher-ups in the government, Parliament and judiciary. Sting operation is not just an instrument for the media but also a tool for weeding out the corrupt.

T. S. Sundareswaran, Consultant, New Delhi

Responses to Sticklish Issues dated December 19: Though, there are serious differences among member-nations on many trade-related issues and on formation of different groups such as developed and developing and least developed countries at WTO forums, one should not forget the spirit behind setting up of this organisation.

Noted economist John Maynard Keynes saw the ITO (International Trade Organisation), along with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) as pillars for world peace and prosperity. It was thought of as an organisation which can free trade. The idea was to equalise and stabilise the prices of traded items and indirectly encourage competition, focus on core competence, and increase productivity.

Now, it is being considered a platform for the developed countries to protect their "selfish ends". Farm subsidies are a case in point. It is a known fact that farmers constitute only two per cent of the European Union's population and contribute four-five per cent to the GDP in Europe's big economies; America spends nearly $4 billion on subsidy on a mere 25,000 cotton farmers. Further, every rice farmer in Japan gets seven times the global price of the crop as government subsidy.

Yet, these economies are adamant on not changing their stance on developing/least developed countries. These economies should learn from China which is offering 30 of the world's poorest countries tariff-free trade for some products beginning 2006.

In final assessment, the WTO is relevant because of the functions that it performs — forum for trade negotiations, handling trade disputes, monitoring national trade policies, administration of WTO trade agreements, and so on. A few instances of contradiction should not mean that the WTO is irrelevant.

Moreover, it is a rule-based, member-driven organisation and all decisions are made by the member-governments, and the rules are the outcome of negotiations among members.

Anil Kumar Angrish, Senior Teaching and Research Associate, NIPER, Mohali, anil_angrish@yahoo.co.in

Responses to Sticklish Issues dated December 5:

The networking of rivers is a good solution to avoid flooding, to distribute surplus water during monsoons and also to save water if `networking' involves smaller storage systems and other rainwater harvesting measures. The networking may be planned State-wise or within a contiguous area with a vision to ultimately integrate water resources at a national level.

Networking is a massive exercise that can generate employment and facilitate economic growth.

Thus, the President's call for networking of rivers is welcome and the Centre and State Government should give priority to the issue.

P.Vijayaasenan, Joint General Secretary, IOB Officers Assn, Chennai, ioboa@cppdnotes.iobnet.co.in

More Stories on : Economic Offences | Sticklish Issues

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
Cartoon

Double-entry for debenture deals

It's risky to leave the risk unmanaged

Perish the procedures that don't deliver

One script for a dozen languages

Can I take back what I gift in fear of death?

Expulsion of MPs

Business-a-Verse

One more year of poverty begins for the ignored Indians

Cartoon Corner