PREVIOUS HOUR

 

-TMV-MCM/2E/2.30

 

The House re-assembled after lunch at thirty minutes past

two of the clock, MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN, in the Chair.

 

-------

 

RE: DEMAND FOR A STATEMENT ON SERIAL

BOMB BLASTS IN UTTAR PRADESH

 

00 ׻ֵ : ָ, ָ Ϥ ׸ֻ Ù ......(־֮֬) ֕ ֮ ״֮֙ ֕ ״֮֙ Ӥ ߮ ׸ֻ Ù ......(־֮֬)

DR. V. MAITREYAN: Sir, serial bomb blasts took place in Uttar Pradesh. (Interruptions)....

׾ ֤ : ......(־֮֬)

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: I think the Government will collect the information... (Interruptions)....

ߴ֟ ִ þָ֕ : ָ Ϥ ߮ ָ־ ִ Ù ֙֋ , ֮֯ ׾֮֕ ָ -ָ֮, ֮։ ֲ֤ ָָ ָ ֵ֮ ֮ .....(־֮֬)

00 ׻ֵ : ӡ և.......(־֮֬)

SHRI V. NARAYANSAMY: The hon. Minister wants to say something. (Interruptions)...

ֳ֯ן : ו֮ ӡ וִָ , ......(־֮֬)

00 ׻ֵ : ׯ֔ ָ ֤֟ ֋ ꅠ Ӭ .....(־֮֬)

ߴ֟ ִ þָ֕ : ֕ ֵ ֤֟ ֹ ֻ ֮ .......(־֮֬)

00 ׻ֵ : ָ ߸ߵֻ Ù ָ ֮ .......(־֮֬)

ֳ֯ן : -, ֋......(־֮֬)

֤ߵ ֵ ӡֵֻ ֕ ӡ ( ֓) : ֳ֯ן , ֮֮ߵ ֤õ ָ Ϥ ִ ׾ñ ָ ֤ ִ֬ ..........(־֮֬) .......(־֮֬) ֮֮ߵ ֳ֯ן , ֮֮ߵ ֤õ ָ Ϥ ִ ׾ñ ֮ ֵ֤ ݵ֮֕ ӲӬ ӱִ֮ ֻ ֤ ֤ ֟ ֋ꅠ ֮֮ߵ ӡ ׾ֵ ָ֮ ֤

׾ ֤ : ָ, ӳ߸ ׾ֵ .......(־֮֬)

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: This is a very serious matter. The Government will definitely inform the House. (Interruptions)... ֋, This is a very serious matter. Everybody is concerned; the whole country is concerned. I am sure that the Government will come out with all the details and inform the House. (Interruptions)...

ӡֵֻ ֕ ӡ ( ֿ߯ ֵ־ֻ) : ֮֮ߵ ֤ ֻ ֮ ߮ ָ ִ ׾ñ -ָ֮, ֮։ ֲ֤ ߮ ׸ָ ֮ , ֮ ֣ , 韵 ָ֮ ֮ ֤ ֤ ֵ֟ ֋օ

(2F ָ )

 

 

 

TMV-VK-GS/2F/2.35

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Supplementary Demands for Grants (Railways) 2007-2008.

ӡ ( ֻ ֤) : ָ, , ֮֮ߵ ֤õ ׻ֵ ָ ֵ ֟ ֟ ...(־֮֬)....

ֳ֯ן : , ...(־֮֬)....

ֻ ֤ : ֳ֯ן , כӛ ֮ ׻֋ ֳ օ ָ ָ ֈ , ׸ִֵ ֈ , ֮ ׻֋ ֆ ָ ã֟ , ֕ ӡ߅ ...(־֮֬)....

ֳ֯ן : ֟ , ֟ ...(־֮֬)....

ֻ ֤ : - ׯֵָ , ֲָָ ׯֵָ , ױ ֯ ֻօ ...(־֮֬)....

00 ׻ֵ : 11.00 12.00 ֕ ׻֋ ...(־֮֬)....

ֳ֯ן : , ...(־֮֬)....

ֻ ֤ : ׻֋ , ...(־֮֬).... ֯ ָ ֟ ו֋ 12.00 ֕ ָ օ...(־֮֬).... ӌㆻ

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Supplementary Demands for Grants (Railways) 2007-2008.

 

SUPPLEMENATRY DEMANDS FOR GRANTS (RAILWAYS) 2007-2008

 

THE MINISTER OF RAILWAYS (SHRI LALU PRASAD): Sir, I lay on the Table a statement (in English and Hindi) showing the Supplementary Demands for Grants (Railways) for the year 2007-2008.

(Ends)

׾ ֤ : ӡ , ֯ Ͽ ָ פ ֵ ...(־֮֬)....

ֻ ֤ : ...(־֮֬)....

ֳ֯ן : ָ

 

PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS (RESOLUTIONS)

 

RESOLUTION RE: CONSTITUTION OF A COMMITTEE FOR RECOMMENDING AMENDMENTS TO CONSTITUTION FOR ADDING A NEW CHAPTER ON GOVERNANCE OF COALITION GOVERNMENTS.

 

SHRI SHANTARAM LAXMAN NAIK (GOA): Sir, I beg to move the following Resolution:

"Having regard to the facts that--

an era of coalition governments at the national and States has crept in;

Indian political scenario is not likely to change substantially in this respect in near future;

there is no mechanism at present which can effectively find solutions to the problems which arise out of coalition form of Governments; and

there is a need to ensure that the nation does not suffer on account of delays, uncertainties under such dispensations;

this House resolves to constitute a Committee for the purpose of recommending amendments to the Constitution by way of adding a new chapter on the governance of coalition Governments providing for the powers, duties and responsibilities of coalition partners, and for providing a code of conduct in the matters where Constitutional provisions may not be practicable".

Sir, in this country, there are nearly 150 registered and unregistered political parties, in some form or the other. Registration of political parties has also become quite easy these days because recognition can come in later, but parties can be registered with submission of their constitution, application, etc. Even such political parties get a common symbol by default. There is a procedure provided for this. Therefore, the number of political parties is increasing day in, day out, I must say, to spoil the political atmosphere in this country. Although they have got every right to form associations and groups, ultimately it leads to spoiling the political atmosphere in the country. We have got diverse culture and people of various castes, communities and religions are residing in this country.

(THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (SHRI UDAY PRATAP SINGH) in the Chair)

A famous journalist has, therefore, said, "The real diversity of India often socially proclaimed is now becoming increasingly manifest politically. Coalition politics is the latest political manifestation of this impulse. Whatever, which is there in the country in general terms, has crept in into the political system of this country."

There have been various attempts to form coalition Governments in this country. Some have been successful and some have been successful partly, if you look into the short history of political functioning in this country. (Contd. by 2G)

RG/2.40/2G

SHRI SHANTARAM LAXMAN NAIK (contd.): The first attempt, as we all know, was made during 1977-80, when the Janata Party ruled for two-and-a-half years; it could not last more than two years for whatever may be the reasons. Then, Charan Singhji came as the next Prime Minister, and his Government lasted for about three weeks. In 1980, the Congress (I) got an absolute majority and we ruled substantially. Again, in 1984-89, we completed the five years' term. Then, in 1989 elections, again a coalition Government was formed as the National Front Government headed by Shri V.P. Singh. It lasted for 11 months. Then came Chandra Sekharji, whose Government lasted for four months. Then, in 1990-91, Narasimha Raoji's Government, again a coalition Government, was a successful Government, in spite of all odds in between. Subsequently, in 1996, Vajpayeeji's Government was installed, which lasted for 13 days. Then, the Government led by Shri Deve Gowda lasted for one year. Gujralji's Government lasted for seven months. Then, in 1996, the NDA Government led by Vajpayeeji was a successful Government, -- successful, not in the literal term --in the sense that it lasted for five years. Then, now the UPA Government is in power. The question is whether coalition Governments are beneficial for this country or not, that is a matter of opinion. But one must admit that coalition Governments are a compulsion...

SHRI V. NARAYANASAMY: What is your opinion?

SHRI SHANTARAM LAXMAN NAIK: I am saying, from time to time, what happened. I would say that eventually. Let me summarise at the end. Sir, if we look at the system in the Constitutional provisions, coalition Governments become a compulsion. No one can say that coalition Governments are good. If they are there by situation, by compulsion, then, we should see to it that they work out. As it is, let us not pray for coalition Governments. Nobody should pray for coalition Governments. But if it comes as a result of the voting pattern, we have to function under that. That is why I say, they have crept in, and they are going to last for some more time to come. Now, why I am saying that some Constitutional provisions are required is that in the present system, when an election takes place, a party or a group of parties, which has got a majority, go before the Rashtrapatiji. Then, there is a question that before going to Rashtrapatiji, if there is no majority for a single party, to obtain this letter of support, the exercise that political parties has to make is tremendous. A tremendous amount of blackmailing is involved in this process. One cannot deny that. Even after giving letters, signatures are denied. Then, there is a concept of parading in Raj Bhawans at the State level or in the Rashtrapati Bhawan at the Central level. That concept came. Then came the concept of Shri S.R. Bommai's decision. Now we do not know whether parading is proper or Bommai's formula is proper. So, there exists entire vagueness, uncertainty, even in the present system. Therefore, one thing I feel is that whether you provide for Constitutional provisions or not, every aspect of our functioning should be in line with these provisions. Like, in the event of elections, we have the Representation of People's Act. Everything is provided for in that, right from voting till the scrutiny and counting of votes. But, it states nothing about post-elections. No doubt, we have the Constitution of India.

(Continued by 2H)

2h/2.45/ks-lp

SHRI SHANTARAM LAXMAN NAIK (CONTD.): But most of the things in the Constitution are still vague. Therefore, the question arises of parading the people, of Bommai's case, of what the principles involved are, of who has got the majority, of what the discretion of the President of India is, and so on. Even after sixty years of our Independence, everything is vague. This vagueness should be removed. I am not saying that you can write down everything in black and white. But everything that is possible should be put in black and white so that the human discretion is reduced to the minimum. If the human discretion is reduced to the minimum, there will be no scope left for bias, there will be no scope left for partisan attitude. Therefore, these things are required, and required more, in the case of coalition Governments.

Then, in a coalition, one of the important documents, in a way next in importance to the Constitution of India, is the Common Minimum Programme. After a coalition Government comes into power, it takes months together for the preparation of its Common Minimum Programme. A lot of exercise is involved. CPM says their manifesto is this; CPI says their manifesto is this; the other parties say, "You include five items of mine, two of his, three of them" and so on. Ultimately, the programme is chalked out. But if you read each paragraph of the Common Minimum Programme, of whichever coalition, it leaves wide scope for interpretation. Secondly, the most interesting part is that even after agreeing on the Common Minimum Programme, the political parties keep on talking about their own parties' programmes and irritate the Government. Once a Common Minimum Programme has been agreed upon, there is no sense in bringing up your own party's programme again and again, saying that it is still there; it is kept in the cold storage, as it used to happen in the case of Jammu and Kashmir; BJP used to do it. Well, it is either way; I am not blaming anybody. But it used to mention it in some cases. Therefore, as far as the Common Manifesto is concerned, again there must be some certainty and some legality involved as to how far... (Interruptions) օ

Secondly, in a coalition Government another aspect is this. We know that the bureaucracy anywhere in the world is a very strong force. (Interruptions) I am only pointing it out. I am not justifying it. But when it is a coalition Government, nobody listens to us. Now, let me tell you one thing. You count the number of letters you have written to the Ministries and the sort of answers you get. Some committee should be constituted and the MPs should be asked to hand over all the letters and an independent body should scrutinise whether the works which have been denied by the Ministries could have been done with a proper application of mind. It should be some third body. I am confident that, at least, in fifty per cent of the cases, if not more, you will find that the answers which are given in the negative by the Ministries are the works which could have easily been done. Therefore, this happens more in the case of coalition Governments. ֟ , ך֮ ֯ ֮ ֛ ֮ ֕ ꅠ Therefore, something is required to be done in this matter also.

Then, why I am saying, again and again, that for coalition some regulation is required is because the Cabinet has got a joint responsibility. How far in coalition Governments it is being observed, I do not know. At least, at the national level, it is being observed substantially. But at the State level such things are not observed at all.

(Contd. by 2j/kgg)

kgg-akg/2j/2.50

SHRI SHANTARAM LAXMAN NAIK (contd.): Immediately after coming from a Cabinet meeting, the Minister or the State-level Minister says anything against anybody, even against a Chief Minister although he has very much agreed on the proposal passed in the Cabinet. As far as coalition partners are concerned, I would like that some type of joint responsibility in the Cabinet should be incorporated for the functioning of the coalition Government. Unless this is done, the coalition Governments will collapse earlier than they are expected to collapse. Ultimately, if coalition Governments are formed, we would like them to continue, because there is no choice; but, in such a governance, they have to create a situation where coalition Governments function.

I would like to touch Goa because Shri Pany wanted me to speak on it. In smaller States, the situation is the worst because there are constituencies with just 25,000 votes. BJP and Congress are the major political parties. If somebody has gone to Dubai for five years, he makes tonnes of money, he returns and feels like contesting. If he contests, if he spends a crore of rupees, whether he wins or not, he can easily take 2,000 votes and he will decide the fate of BJP or Congress depending on who he is. Therefore, winning a seat will not depend on the good work done by the Congress or the BJP, but it would depend on the man who is waiting to come and contest and snatch votes. This has happened in smaller States. Today, our Government is headed by Congress. We depend on 2 MLAs of one political party. The two other MLAs are waiting to come. They too are ready to come. Out of these two MLAs, we have given one MLA the PWD portfolio. He would not agree to anything less than that. Suppose we discard this man, the other two are also willing to come. But again, one of them would like to have the PWD portfolio only. Only PWD. If PWD is given, then these two are coming. The NCP is supporting us and giving us problem. They are saying now that PWD portfolio should not be given to these people, they should go to them. Where do we stand? Therefore, the discretion of the Chief Minister under the Constitution of India to decide to whom the portfolio should go, who should be the Minister is all reduced to nonsense under this system. Therefore, there is a large number of disadvantages in this functioning.

What has happened in Karnataka, we all know. What are these MoUs? We know, only on commercial terms, when two commercial giants meet or between a Government and some commercial organisation. But MoU between two political parties for the purpose of functioning of a Government, all agreements on stamp paper, we did not know! Wherefrom these come, what is its legal value, we do not know. Therefore, this new type of politics which has come to Karnataka has compelled us to think further to find solutions for this coalition Government. Initially the JD(S), for the purpose of forming a Government joined hands with the BJP. Now, they want back the label of secularism, because in elections, that alliance will not serve its purpose. So, they have severed their relationship with the BJP. But, now they want back the stamp of secularism. So, they are now saying that they are ready to form Government with our help.

ֵָ : ֯ ֮ ֣ ?

ִָ֮ ֵ : ָ ߛ . I am giving you a factual situation. I am not a person who can decide things. But this is the type of politics which is going on.

In this process, the regional parties play a big role, whether good or bad. Earlier, people used to vote for regional parties only with respect to regional politics. But when it came to national politics, they used to choose national parties. (contd. by kls/2k)

KLS/2K-2.55

SHRI SHANTARAM LAXMAN NAIK (CONTD): This was earlier a good trend which was going on but nowadays people vote for regional parties even for Parliament and that has clearly created a situation which has really brought in an era of coalition to stay. It is the votes of the voters which go to the regional parties even for national politics. The situation has become like this. I cannot say that is bad because everyone has got a right but voters have to think, people have to think and they have to choose in a broader manner. No one can deny that right, no one can deny the right of the regional parties to come to national politics. But they should behave with a national outlook. This much right I have got to say. The regional parties if they want to come to national politics have to show their bona fides by having a national approach. As far as our partner, CPM, is concerned, I would like to say with certain...(Interruptions)... I am saying honestly. In fact, I give them an example, "You see at the Central level, we have got CPM, they also differ, they also create problems." This is what I tell my Goa people. But I say they do not fight for portfolios. They fight on ideology. I give their example. ...(Interruptions)... I have not yet finished. ...(Interruptions)... So, I will make this difference and I appreciate the role of the CPM. But I would like to tell them again that they are also going too far, maybe, this was earlier, and they are contradicting. Therefore, even a person like me who would like to appreciate their role, it becomes difficult for him to appreciate when their role in West Bengal is different, role in Kerala is different and their role here is different. Therefore, ...(Interruptions)...

PROF. P.J. KURIEN: Actually, the CPM is taking advantage of the Government without taking any responsibility and he is appreciating that. ...(Interruptions)... Therefore, I am requesting the CPM to join the Government. ...(Interruptions)... That is my request.

SHRI SHANTARAM LAXMAN NAIK: He is right, he is very much right but it is so. ...(Interruptions)... Sushmaji yesterday called the CPM leadership 'aparipakav', immature, I would not agree with that. Leadership is not like this. They are quite wise, they are quite mature but these days they have become a little arrogant, if you ask me. ...(Interruptions)... Calling them immature will not be proper but they have become arrogant. I would request them most humbly that this arrogance may be reduced a bit. It would not help the country much. Secondly their views are not consistent. A coalition partner must have consistent views. If I read in a newspaper that CPM has said this today, I am confident that next day, it will be different. Why are they in confrontation? It is because consistently there has been inconsistency in their approach. I am even confident that if I read anything on an issue, especially the nuclear deal the next day I will always find that the version is different. Therefore, it is good to expect from a party like CPM that they should stick to whatever they think is right or wrong. They also must admit that they are choosing the ladder or democracy to come to power, but inherently they must admit Communism has nothing to do with democracy. ...(Interruptions)...Therefore, sometimes they must admit these things ...(Interruptions)... As far as statutory provision or law or amendment on which I am speaking is concerned, I would say that why it is required; it is functioning, conventions are there, practices are there and it will go on. Fine. (Contd by 2L/sss)

 PREVIOUS HOUR
MAIN
NEXT HOUR