Govt’s ham-handedness gives Oppn a stick

While Chatterjee abstained himself from the Lok Sabha citing reasons of “propriety” since he too had been named for holding an office of profit, Shekhawat candidly told the Rajya Sabha: “Earlier, the House was to be adjourned to meet on May 10. But I have received a request from the Government to adjourn the House sine die.”

The Government’s overnight decision—without consulting the Opposition or its own allies or even the presiding officers of Parliament—only underlined the ham-handed handling of the whole issue, triggered by needless haste and unnecessary panic, government sources privately admit.

Although Union Ministers Kapil Sibal and P R Dasmunsi insisted that Sonia Gandhi’s chairmanship of the National Advisory Council among other posts did not constitute an “office of profit” under the Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1959, the unseemly manner in which the Government went about its business today has only helped the Opposition to focus exclusively on the “Sonia angle.”

That angle has found many takers in other parties too in view of the Congress’s silence when Samajwadi Party MP Jaya Bachchan was disqualified under provisions of the Act—following an application moved by a Congress member in Uttar Pradesh—very recently.

What makes the handling of the issue particularly clumsy is that the Government could easily have chosen much less contentious ways to achieve the same end.

For one, the Government’s political managers could have called an all-party meeting to evolve a consensus on the issue since all political parties are distinctly uncomfortable with the nebulous definition of “office of profit.” Dasmunsi, in fact, claimed that leaders from across the political spectrum had privately expressed apprehensions about the clause to him and wanted the Government to define an office of profit.

If that indeed was the case, the Government could have stepped in much earlier and taken steps to change the law immediately after the Jaya Bachchan case came into public view. However, petty partisan considerations appeared to have clouded the Congress managers’ long-term vision, till the “office of profit” came to haunt them directly.

Alternatively, to save itself the embarrassment it faced today, the Government could have decided to do away with a post-recess session altogether, as the government sources claim there was “hardly any pressing business left for the second half.”

The first phase of the Budget session was originally scheduled to end on March 17 and then meet again between April 3 and 23 after a three-week recess. The Finance Bill and other key legislation are usually passed in the after the recess.

But due to the Election Commission’s decision to have a highly staggered election schedule in the five states going to polls this summer, all political parties agreed to reschedule the session. It was decided to extend the first half till March 22 and meet again for less than two weeks from May 10-23.

However, since there is a time limit for the passage of the Finance Bill once the Budget is presented to the House, the Government decided to get it passed in the first half itself. Besides the Budget, 16 other bills were passed this session and “there was not much business left”.

In that case, the Government could have formally done away with the “second half” of the Budget Session in consultation with the Opposition.

In that case, Parliament would have been adjourned sine die by matter of course. But by doing so at the last minute, the Congress has only invited charges of impropriety and partisanship yet again, even non-UPA leaders contend.

Apart from the constituents of the NDA, Samajwadi Party and Telugu Desam who have taken the lead in attacking the Congress, even UPA allies—JD(S), CPI and CPI(M) among others—publicly disapproved of the Government’s “ordinance route” today.

Govt says business over, facts otherwise

Govt claims 16 Bills plus Budget passed, not much business left. But look what’s hit the roadblock:

• Bills on Small & Medium Enterprises Development, Banking Reforms, Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority discussed by House panels. Recommendations were to come after recess

• Also stuck: Older Persons (Maintenance, Care & Protection) Bill, 2005 and Communal Violence (Prevention, Control and Rehabilitation of Victims) Bill, 2005.