Tags:
Journalism of Courage
Opposition parties continued to force adjournments in Parliament on Thursday over demands for a discussion on price rise that concludes in a vote. A day earlier,Lok Sabha Speaker Meira Kumar had ruled against admission of an adjournment motion. So,now the clamour from some parties was for a discussion under Rule 184,which too carries a vote. The government instead appears to be inclined towards a discussion under Rule 193,for which notice has been given by an MP of the Trinamool Congress,which is part of the ruling UPA coalition this would not require a vote. On these technicalities,most of the first week of the monsoon session of Parliament has been washed away. And coming three months after voting on a cut motion in Lok Sabha revealed the complicated politics of parties outside of the UPA,NDA and Left Front,these adjournments draw attention to a rather recent fixation of the opposition with testing the governments numbers in the House. This self-serving insistence by the opposition on routine use of rare measures,in turn,asks tough questions about the governments floor management.
In the cut motion during the budget session,the UPAs smooth sailing was ensured once the BSP signalled that it would vote in support of the government. That immediately sorted out the SP,which charts out its political strategy in alliance with the RJD. Given Uttar Pradeshs politics,the SP could not afford to be isolated on the same voting position as the BJP. But three months is presumably a long time in politics. And the strident demands for a vote can be seen not so much as a way of testing the UPAs majority,as of sorting who stands where on the political spectrum. This time round,for instance,the Left would like to put the Trinamool in a spot by raising an emotive issue. Yet,it would be a long shot to predict that a discussion with a vote could find the government short of a majority. And the opposition parties must explain why stalling all business as a way of seeking political clarity is not a crude and cynical use of parliamentary instruments.
