The present and preliminary estimates suggest an expenditure of Rs. 922 crore. No one could or would guarantee that the work can be completed in the specified time and without inflated costs. The common man has a query on the need to create new parliament house when Indian parliamentarians have been using the most beautiful construction. It is praised as the best building though the original designer had confessed that the source of inspiration was a Devi temple in Madhya Pradesh.

One thought that the Prime Minister would stay on course to implement his promise to the electorate in 2014 that he would improve the economic growth rate many fold to convert the Indian economy to be the super economic power. He could not in his first term due to various kinds of internal pressures and reluctance of the foreign capitalists to come to India for investments and plant their production mechanism in India as the labour services were cheaper in prices but not lacks in maintaining standards of produce. Perhaps the public opposition to his reform measures by the Sangh front shops may have deterred them from parking their capital in India.

Within two years the Prime Minister also, as it appears from his diversions now, had given up his efforts to improve the growth rate. On the contrary, he went in for the severe economic measure of demonetization. He listed three objectives for his rush, first to unearth black wealth, second to deal a blow to financing of terrorists in Kashmir and third was to eliminate the fake currency from circulation. Every politician knows by now that black money is adjusting in the white money for a share to the corrupt in the tax enforcement agencies. No one could explain how the change of currency note size and colour would deter the willing or forced flow of financing of terrorists.

The operation and method evolved for exchange of currency notes had not provided for instant detection of fake currency. Thus huge amount of fake currency got legitimate currency in exchange. The government and the Reserve Bank have maintained silence over it. The demonetization had further slowed down the rate of growth when the Prime Minister struck a second blow.

The lock down on all social, economic, cultural and religious activities was and is justified as the only way to minimize the public contacts among individuals. The social distancing was essential ingredient in controlling the spread of infection. The very claim that 97 per cent patients recovered that too even without any authority identifying the effective medicine, raises an element of doubt whether the lock down was needed at all.

The Prime Minister claimed while imposing his directive that saving life was the most important than maintaining temple of the worldly affairs. He had obviously overlooked that his measure would devastate life of millions depending on their daily earnings to feed their families with daily meals. His first step had forced almost all cottage and small scale industrial units to pull down their shutters rendering not only their employees and artisans jobless but they were also left with no means except surviving on their meager savings.

The imposed closure had drained the income sources of the government though it had also entailed additional expenditure to provide succor to affected poor. The finance minister announced within twenty four hours the charity expenditure of Rs. 1.80 lakh crore to supply for three months free adequate grain to everyone in lower sections. Her estimate was for three months but the Lock down continued for nine months. She also later announced relief and assistance measures for small and medium sectors for their revival. Later the Prime Minister offered a larger package of assistance to the tune of Rs. 21 lakh crore for revival of the economy.

While the government was still struggling to revive life and economic activities to ensure the restoration of normalcy, the Prime Minister was rushed to lay foundation for the new symbol of the party in rule. The old Parliament House has lived through many memorable events in Indian life. The independence was declared in the Central Hall in this building. The great written constitution of India was product of heated debates in the Constituent Assembly in the very building though the ruling party of today was yet to be formed.

There is no doubt a need for reforms but in functioning and not in the change of its place for debates. Since the parliament enacted the anti defection legislation, not only members of parliament but all legislators in states have lost their conscience. They are no more willing to unburden their inner voices in open debates for the fear of disqualification following them for breach of the party discipline. People expect them to speak out the reality. Consequently media coverage has been reduced from three full pages to few paragraphs.

In recent years, the burden on national treasury increased many fold in pay, allowances, pensions, free travels for members, their spouses and their personal assistants, free phone facilities and economic rented residences as well as free transport between their residence and the parliament house as well as free hotel accommodations while attending the parliamentary committees' meetings and periodic foreign visits connected with parliamentary committee meetings and so forth. Reforms are needed to save tax payers from additional burdens. That would be true service and restore faith of masses in the symbol of their aspirations and hopes that the parliament was earlier since independence. Merely change to new building cannot restore it. Improving their habit of attendance can be greater service instead of presence of not even half numbers of required quorum when the house takes up issues without interest for large numbers.

I can speak of the changes for having covered parliamentary proceedings for 54 years and being witness to deterioration. I had meetings with members in the past from the fourth Lok Sabha spending hours in the library to prepare themselves for the forthcoming debates. I have been witness to stormy debates that even Prime Ministers did not miss and sending hand written notes of their appreciation even to members of the opposition for their brilliant contributions. I have seen members and ministers together enjoying cup of tea after member criticizing severely the minister. Need today is to restore that bonhomie as politics is not arena of personal enmity but arena of airing the different thinking and ideological preferences.