Live
- 28 youths given compationate appointments in Singareni
- First batch in TASK Centre from November 4: Collector
- Spectacular Drone Light Show thrills viewers
- Asst Prof Hari Krishna in MLC poll fray
- TTD JEO inspects children’s hospital works in Tirupati
- HM Amit Shah’s birthday: BJP activists organise food distribution
- Second edition of Japan Month at IITH wraps up successfully
- HYDRA lens on city lakes, takes up cleanup process
- City techie appointed as VC of Cong Data & Tech Dept
- Police launch new bikes to improve traffic management
Lagadapati had moved a Bill to rein in unruly MPs
Lagadapati Had Moved A Bill To Rein in Unruly MPs. In what has to be the irony of ironies, the expelled Congress MP, Lagadapati Rajgopal -- the man who shot to infamy after he unleashed a can of pepper spray in Lok Sabha -- once wanted stringent steps to curb unruly behaviour in Parliament.
The Disruption of Proceedings of Parliament (Disentitlement of Daily Allowance to Members and Termination of Membership) Bill, 2009, proposed that if a member or a group of them disrupt the House for the third time during the same session, the House may resolve to terminate the membership of such member or a group of members, as the case may be
In what has to be the irony of ironies, the expelled Congress MP, Lagadapati Rajgopal -- the man who shot to infamy after he unleashed a can of pepper spray in Lok Sabha -- once wanted stringent steps to curb unruly behaviour in Parliament. Rajgopal had successfully introduced a Private Member’s Bill in the Lok Sabha in 2009 to deal with disruptions by MPs and even suggested a mechanism to penalise them.
Rajagopal, a two-time Congress MP from Vijaywada, had on July 31, 2009, moved the Bill, and the motion for its introduction was adopted by the Lok Sabha. The Disruption of Proceedings of Parliament (Disentitlement of Daily Allowance to Members and Termination of Membership) Bill, 2009, proposed that if a member or a group of them disrupt the House for the third time during the same session, the House may resolve to terminate the membership of such member or a group of members, as the case may be. The membership of a member or a group of members referred to in the motion shall stand terminated from the day of adoption of the motion by the House, according to the Bill's statement of objects and reasons. The bill also proposed that if proceedings of the House are disrupted by any member or a group of members, as the case may be, leading to its adjournment for a substantial part on that day, no member shall be entitled to receive daily allowance for a day. "...it is being observed that the proceedings of both the Houses of Parliament are disrupted due to pandemonium and the Houses have to be adjourned for substantial part of the day without transacting any business.
This not only results in loss of precious time of Parliament and public money but also dents the image of Parliament," the Bill said.
It said that if the proceedings of either House are disrupted and Parliament is not permitted to function and transact the listed business on account of pandemonium, the legislative scrutiny over the Executive is diluted since debates on issues of public importance are withheld,
(Courtesy: FIRSTPOST)
