Rahul Gandhi took advantage of PM’s absence and accused him of avoiding the debate and being “scared of fighting corruption”. “He does not have guts to face us.” NCP supremo Sharad Pawar too regretted absence of PM and said “the PM’s presence in the house is important…. MPs barely get to see him”.
One has rarely heard a debate as on the adjournment motion, marked more by so much personal attack and bitterness than substance. So provoked was Sonia Gandhi by a BJP’s remark (expunged by the Speaker) that she rushed to the well of the house. The remark was very derogatory to the entire Gandhi family. Look at another scene. External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj was stung by allegation made by Rahul Gandhi both inside and outside Parliament that her family had received money from Lalit Modi. She hit out at Gandhi family, saying “Rahulji you are very fond of a long vacation. Take another vocation and read the history of your family. When you come back, you must ask your mother ‘Mama, how much money did you get from Quattrocchi?’ You must ask her: why did Papa help Anderson (former Union Carbide Chairman Warren Anderson) flee’,”.
Look at some impromptu remarks made during the debate:
Rahul Gandhi: Yesterday, Sushmaji held my hand and said beta, why are you upset up me? What did I do? I said I respect you and looked you in the eye and said I am speaking the truth. You looked away.
Arun Jaitely: There are many honest people whose children have to work for a living. They (Gandhis) have mastered the art of living comfortably without working for a living……
Rahul Gandhi: Sushmaji is the first humanitarian in the world who does a humanitarian act secretly.
Arun Jaitley: Rahul Gandhi’s problem is that he is an expert without knowledge.
Veteran L K Advani was visibly overwhelmed as Sushma Swaraj presented a spirited defense to the Congress’s charges. Advani’s eyes welled up quite a few times during Swaraj’s 30-minute reply. Advani, seated next to Sushma, in the first row of the treasury benches, also patted her back when she wound up her speech and sat down.
Expectedly the whole monsoon session was washed out and ended on an acrimonious note. No business was transacted; nor a bill passed. Veteran Sharad Pawar recalls four or five years back an entire session was washed out when Manmohan Singh was the Prime Minister. Pawar was part of the government then. The Congress is doing today what the BJP did when it was in opposition. Whenever such situation arises leaders of both sides start a dialogue. In the past ruling parties have taken the initiative.
The practice of disrupting proceedings started when Rajiv Gandhi was the Prime Minister and had biggest-ever majority in Parliament. The opposition, though small, was very aggressive. The situation went on worsening session after session. Even the budget sessions were washed; budgets passed without discussion by voice vote. During the ten-year rule of the Congress the obnoxious practice of disruption touched the lowest ebb and at the root was the BJP. When the then Railway Minister Pawan Bansal was found involved in an alleged racket, the BJP, as the main opposition, disrupted Parliament day after day, demanding “first resignation and then debate”. It adopted the same approach when the former Law Minister Ashwani Kumar tried to influence the CBI in a case. Ultimately, both the ministers had to quit and faced the enquiry and Parliament was allowed to function. Now the situation has reversed.
Some way must be found to ensure smooth functioning of both the houses otherwise Parliament may lose its relevance and that would be end of democracy. (IPA Service)
India
PARLIAMENT SHAMED AS MEMBERS BICKER
MONSOON WASHOUT SETS BAD PRECEDENT
Harihar Swarup - 2015-08-15 14:37
Has anyone ever seen a debate on an adjournment motion without the Prime Minister? One wonders if there is a rule under which voting is not mandatory on an adjournment motion, amounting to censuring the government. It was witnessed when Lok Sabha took up for discussion an adjournment on the penultimate day of the current monsoon session. Prime Minister Narendra Modi was not seen at all as the debate progressed. The general practice over the years has been that the Prime Minister replies to the debate but, in this debate, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley deputized for him. If the PM, who is the leader of the house, shows such apathy to highest institution of the land, why blame a member who disrupts proceedings or for unbecoming behaviour.