Editorial. Unparliamentary methods

Parliament is trapped in an interminable logjam with neither the government nor Opposition displaying any inclination to find a resolution. For the second successive week, no routine business has been transacted in any of the Houses. Besides the Rajya Sabha Chairman Jagdeep Dhankar holding a short meeting with the Opposition leaders, there has been no attempt to resolve the impasse.

The practice of the Parliamentary Affairs Minister inviting floor leaders to discuss how the House would run, and sessions of the Business Advisory Committee deciding agendas lies more or less suspended. Instead, there is a stalemate with the Opposition demanding that there should be a Joint Parliamentary Committee on the Adani Hindenburg issue, and the ruling BJP insisting that Rahul Gandhi apologise for his remarks in the UK that Indian democracy is in peril, before the House can run.

Both sides should realise what is at stake here. Discussions on crucial issues have been held up — such as demand for grants for the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir for 2023-24; pending Budget discussions with five departments including Railways, Agriculture, Road and Transport, Health and Women and Child Welfare selected for discussion on demands for grants; Appropriation Bill; Finance Bill, along with 26 other bills. Time is running out as before the March 31 deadline, the Appropriation Bill and the Finance Bill have to be passed. If there is no resolution to the impasse, the guillotine would be applied on March 28 and all demands for grants would be passed without discussion. The losers here are the people. MPs often use their rich field experience to nudge policy and government finances towards better scrutiny. When cut motions and amendments are debated during Budget discussions, the collective wisdom of Parliament is applied in the true sense to scrutinise government finances. In the present Lok Sabha, where the government has an unassailable majority, it is critical that this oversight mechanism is applied exhaustively. The insistence by senior ministers that Rahul Gandhi apologise on the floor of the House is cutting into the time needed for such debate and oversight. Likewise, the Opposition should be aware that disruption is not such a clever strategy, given how the numbers stack up in both Houses. It could do better than be outraged by the somewhat unusual spectacle of ruling party MPs disrupting the House.

In that light, the more astute strategy would have been to use Parliamentary methods — cut motions, amendments during the Budget discussions — to hold the government to account. The government, on its part, can reach out to the Opposition, hold floor leaders meetings and back channel parleys to ensure that Parliament functions. Such overtures have been made in the past with reasonable success. Parliamentary oversight will lend legitimacy to the legislative process and enhance the quality of outcomes.

COMMENT NOW