Letters to the editor dated December 21, 2020

| Updated on December 21, 2020 Published on December 21, 2020

Cancellation of winter session

The Union government’s decision to skip the winter session of Parliament has attracted the charge of weakening democracy, and deservedly so. The Covid-19 pandemic is the reason adduced by the government to justify the cancellation of the winter session.

But it does not cut ice with the public. It cannot be said that MPs alone are under threat from Covid-19. The exemption to parliamentarians from doing their work sits ill with the return of most people to their workplaces. Like the rest of the population, elected representatives too can work following the safety protocol. If political rallies-cum-election campaigns and elections can occur in this pandemic time Parliament too can function.

Keeping the Parliament in limbo when pressing problems like the pandemic, vaccination drive, economic recession, price rise and farmers’ protests need deliberations and decisions will only go to prolong the uncertainties. Weighty matters are best dealt with by the Parliament. By shelving the winter session, the government has given the impression that it is not in favour of the issue of the farmers’ protests being raised in the Parliament.

Parliamentary majority that the ruling party or alliance enjoys is no licence for the government to not convene Parliament when it is most needed for the country to sail through these difficult times.

G David Milton

Maruthancode (TN)

Promoting NPS

With reference to the editorial ‘Promoting NPS’ (December 21), it has quite rightly suggested that ‘the time appears right for the pension regulator or NPS Trust to launch a public consultation process on the scheme’s features’.

They should be overhauled at one go, instead of being tweaked in a piecemeal fashion, confusing subscribers.’ This scheme should be broadened to include subscribers from the general public who earn their wages from organised set-ups though not on a permanent basis.

A separate section could be set up as part of the scheme with relevant conditions to govern its running. It would be an attractive and effective choice for the common man.

TR Anandan


The editorial has rightly argued that POP/POP-SP must not be made mandatory. Just like in mutual funds direct schemes, the investor need not have a POP/POP-SP. Since subscriptions are possible online directly, an intermediary is not necessary.

Given that the POP/POP-SP seem little interested in providing services, it is more an irritant for the investor rather than a benefit. Moreover one finds that the POP/POP-SP personnel at nearby branches, especially public sector banks know little about the scheme and are at a loss while responding to the investor.

The editorial provides the right prescription.

V Vijaykumar


Digital solutions and justice

With reference to the article, ‘Digital solutions to justice, the way forward’, even before pandemic our judiciary was struggling to clear the huge backlog of cases. The pandemic has only worsened the situation. It is heartening that courts have shown the way and adopted to the online mode of delivering justice. ‘Digital’ should mean digital in the true sense with no need for any physical document or personal visit and we still have a long way to go. The critical aspect of the digital experience is that people from rural or semi urban area should not get deprived of justice due to lack of technical knowledge or digital infrastructure.

Bal Govind


LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Send your letters by email to bleditor@thehindu.co.in or by post to ‘Letters to the Editor’, The Hindu Business Line, Kasturi Buildings, 859-860, Anna Salai, Chennai 600002.

Follow us on Telegram, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube and Linkedin. You can also download our Android App or IOS App.

Published on December 21, 2020
This article is closed for comments.
Please Email the Editor