Thanks to unelectable people

Shortcut to India Parliament

We all accept crooks in the subject of ‘politics’ but not in ‘science’

V. Raghunathan asks some basic questions as a citizen of India but the relevant is very high both in terms of time and the future democracy is concerned. 

• “The abysmal attendance record of some of our celebrity parliamentarians—as measured by mere signing of the register and not by participation in the parliamentary proceedings—has been much in the news recently. Clearly, no attendance requirement applies to our representatives. Why? 
  
• Criminal background and behaviour, which may be unacceptable in students or employees in any decent school or organization, are perfectly acceptable for our parliamentarians. Why? 
  
• Our education minister does not have to be an educationist or the minister for urban planning an architect. Nor is it essential for a parliamentarian to be a degree holder in political science or have a record of public service. Why? 
  
• One would imagine that neither running of industries nor running of the state is a part-time job. How, then, do we expect industrialists such as Rahul Bajaj and Vijay Mallya to juggle their industrial empires with statecraft? Or a senior leader such as Sharad Pawar to juggle statecraft with cricket? Or a Govinda (incidentally, he did not attend a single parliamentary session in 2007) or a Jaya Prada to juggle their Bollywood careers with parliamentary sessions? But we have put them there as members of Parliament. Why? 
  
• While a 56-year-old colonel is too old to run his regiment, an octogenarian parliamentarian is not too old to run the country. Why? 
  
• Corporate governance is important, but not so country governance. Why?”
  

Elections: Little debate on national issues

The Founder of Shetkari Sanghatana and Member of Parliament, Rajya Sabha Mr.Sharad Joshi says: 

• “There is every likelihood that the post-2009 government will last no more than 24 months and that fresh elections will need to be called, at the latest, sometime in 2011.
  
• The Third Front would, of course, like the country to go back to the old days of socialist protectionism. In fact, they are convinced that if India has come off rather lightly from the present crisis it is because of the reservations they made when they were a part of the UPA.
  
• The Congress Party would be embarrassed to talk of ‘return to socialism’ and, at the same time, present Dr Manmohan Singh as their prime ministerial candidate. The party is resorting to gimmickry by shrouding socialist philosophy in its ‘aam aadmi’ philosophy.
  
• This populist thought has its origin in Nobel Laureate Dr Amartya Sen’s exhortations. In the hands of the politicians it can be summarised as: Enticing voters by waving promises of ‘free lunches’ and perks of all kinds at the cost of the state exchequer and using a highly leaky state pipeline to carry the goodies.”
  

Long live millions of poor!

A IAS turned economist turned RBI Governor turned nominated Member of Parliament in Indian Raja Sabha (upper house)  Mr Bimal Jalan wrote a piece recently in The Hindu in which he express his concerns on the function of Indian Parliament. 

Some excerpts: 

• “The time allotted to different parties and nominated members is decided in terms of their number as a percentage of the total membership of the House. Nominated members who constitute 4 percent of the total members of Rajya Sabha are entitled to a maximum of only 4 percent of time allotted for debate on any subject. What is even more significant is that their turn comes after all major parties have spoken and the House is virtually empty.
  
• First, the accountability of ministers to parliament has been considerably eroded. We now have coalitions in power with a large number of parties of different sizes. Leaders of different parties can continue in cabinet without any individual or collective responsibility to parliament or, for that matter, Prime Minister. 
  
• Second, in view of anti-defection law, individual members of a party are completely subservient to their party leaders. Interestingly, this law does not apply to small parties which join a government. Thus, there is a built-in incentive for any leader to set up a separate party with even 4 or 5 members. If he or she is the leader of a small party, that person would command a huge premium and would be sought after by dominant parties. Third, the rules of business in parliament can be ignored with impunity without any adverse consequences. Fourth, the overwhelming primacy is given to whatever government wants to be done by parliament, including passage of bills with or without discussion. 
  
•  An immediate priority is to make anti-defection law applicable to all parties which join a government rather than only to members individually. Similarly, changes in business procedures of parliament are required to improve the speaking order and minimum time allotted to individual members who wish to participate in debates. Under no circumstances should a legislative bill be passed without discussion and actual voting. Another priority area for reform is the internal democratization of political parties. 
  
• Let me end with a quote from a note handed over to me by a Member of Parliament who was a distinguished member of a political party: 
  
• “You made an excellent speech and a lot of us totally agree with you. The Anti-Defection Amendment has curbed the consciences of MPs. We have to follow party whips even if we do not agree as in this case of the Offices of Profit Bill. Congratulations.” 
  
• I am, of course, grateful for the above generous remarks. However, it is equally disheartening to note that even if that member were a great “celebrity” and a recognised genius, she would not have been able to express her views. 
  
• It would benefit citizens, if in addition to counting questions and attendance of members in parliament, public-spirited organisations and media were to highlight the urgent need for political reforms to make the working of India’s democratic institutions less oligarchic and more people-oriented.” 
  

We had peoples President, now we have peoples car but we do not know where is our people’s parliament?