With a busy schedule ahead of him what with the forthcoming visits of French President Jacques Chirac and US President George Bush, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh will be making a crucial suo motu statement to clear the air over India’s stand on Iran’s nuclear programme in Parliament tomorrow. That is, provided the Opposition lets the House run on the second day of the Budget session.Adopting the view that it was necessary to take Parliament on board over India’s ‘‘technical position’’ on the Iran issue before the House begins to transact business, the Prime Minister has notified both the Lok and the Rajya Sabha of the statement. He also conveyed his decision to Rajya Sabha Chairman Bhairon Singh Shekhawat and Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee.While confirming that the PM was ‘‘likely to make a statement in the House tomorrow’’, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Priya Ranjan Dasmunshi was careful to add: ‘‘We are not opposed to further structured debate (on the Iran issue) later on , under any rule found admissible by the Rajya Sabha Chairman and the Lok Sabha Speaker.’’Both the Left and the BJP have put in notices for a debate focusing entirely on the Iran nuclear issue. That may now be diluted, since the Lok Sabha cannot take up any other debate before the Motion of Thanks on the President’s address is passed.However, the Rajya Sabha has no such problem. It can always seek clarification on the Prime Minister’s statement. In fact, Dasmunshi said as much: the Rajya Sabha can have a discussion on the subject on February 20, provided the House Chairman agrees. The Prime Minister can then give his reply to the House on February 24, after the Railway Budget is presented.For the Lok Sabha, the government’s recipe for the Iran debate is quite different. It feels that the political parties can air their views on the Iran issue through their members, while taking part in the Motion-of-Thanks.However, sources said, that the Prime Minister wanted the contentious Iran debate out of the way before the highprofile visits by the French and the US presidents. While Chirac will be here between February 19 and 21, the Bush visit is scheduled between March 1 and 3.Also, given the fact that the Railway Budget (on February 24), the Economic Survey (February 27) and the General Budget (February 28) will take up the intervening week, there will be no time for a full-fledged discussion on the Iran issue as the PM will be occupied with the visits of the two important heads of state.Defending Manmohan Singh’s ‘‘considered decision’’ to make a statement on the Iran issue, Dasmunshi said, ‘‘The Prime Minister has a right to put forward his government’s technical position’’ on Iran before transacting business for the Budget session.However, the political parties may have a different agenda. While the BJP is all set to disrupt the House— or at least its first half— over the UPA government’s decision to conduct a Muslim headcount in the army, the Left is readying to take up the government’s offer on a structured debate on Iran later.‘‘The Prime Minister is welcome to make a statement, but we want a focused debate on the issue,’’ said CPI-M MP Mohammad Salim. No-trust vote half-baked: Ajit SinghLUCKNOW: Rashtriya Lok Dal president and Samajwadi Party coalition partner in Uttar Pradesh, Chaudhary Ajit Singh, struck a discordant note today over the SP move to bring a no-confidence motion against the UPA government on the Iran issue in the Budget session of Parliament.Relations between the two coalition partners were showing signs of fatigue, and the RLD chief made his displeasure at not being taken into confidence on the no-trust move known, when he told reporters that the motion was meaningless as the Left had already indicated that it would not support it.‘‘The no-confidence motion was a half-baked measure,’’ Singh said. ‘‘Discussions should be held with the Left and other non-Congress and non-BJP parties in the UPA before finalising the proposal.’’The Lok Dal president attacked the central government for bowing to US pressure on Iran’s nuclear programme when he said that the present dispensation had allowed America to dictate terms on the issue. He also said that he was against Indian’s voting at the International Atomic Energy Agency in favour of sending Iran to the UN Security Council. —ENS