Achche Din - Onus on Modi Govt

Whether or not “achhe din” have come is being debated nationwide in a mood that ranges from hope and concern to cynicism. But for the Parliament, they seem to have arrived after a ten-year wait. Word from Parliament Research Service (PRS) is that the first session did considerable business, despite cacophony. Gone, by and large, were disturbed proceedings.

prevails – despite the anxiety that spills over to Parliament of an erratic monsoon and the still-rising prices of essential commodities. It is time to deliver on it promises. Otherwise, vociferous street protests may be back. The first Parliament session has seen ‘achche din.’ But denial of LoP may force Cong to ape BJP which had frequently disrupted sessions

We may want to probe statistics, but the larger point made is that the highest legislature of the world’s largest democracy has finally begun to function. Keep your fingers crossed, that it sustains, leaving a better record of the functioning of the 16th Lok Sabha.

The people who elected this parliament in – again, it needs to be recorded in the superlatives – the world’s largest democratic exercise – want their vote’s worth. They can hope to see parliament doing serious day-to-day business, and that legislations that affect the lives of 1.3 billion people are adequately debated and passed.

But let us not entertain huge hopes. For one, this Parliament comprises the very same “argumentative ones” to quote Nobel laureate Amartya Sen, as did the previous ones. The human material is the same that ran berserk in the past, but feels tamed and somewhat chastised into doing some worthwhile work.

Whether or not Prime Minister Narendra Modi accepts it, his government does enjoy a period of ‘honeymoon’ that all new regimes deserve. The overall atmosphere of hope still prevails – despite the anxiety that spills over to Parliament of an erratic monsoon and the still-rising prices of essential commodities.

The first is beyond Modi’s control, while the latter certainly is not. And he better deliver that to the people and keep his polls promise. The festival season has already begun. There is no time to lose, Modi. His government can and should deliver.

His government cannot complain of “coalition compulsions” that the governments of Manmohan Singh suffered from. To return to the “good work” done in Parliament, the main reason is the inter-changing of positions. Yesterday’s opposition protestors are in the government now, adorning the treasury benches. Some will want to contest this, out of self-righteousness. But the facts are clear.

Not allowing the House to function smoothly was the un-written policy of the NDA partners, particularly of the lead constituent, BJP, for nine long years. It started right away in 2004, after the shock defeat in the Lok Sabha polls.

See the statistics and find out how much time was devoted to legislations that were mostly stalled, and to debating the annual budgets. The ministry-wise discussion of the budget dwindled over the years, down to just one or two from out of the entire government. Billions were allotted in the budget and passed without much of a debate.

Begun long before, it got momentum with the plethora of scandals and scams – Adarsh Housing, Commonwealth Games, 2G spectrum allocation, coal and the like. Parliament performed at its worst. Consensus eluded practically every issue. Both, the government and the Opposition, were responsible.

Is the Lok Sabha now running smoothly because the opposition is depleted? Is it also because regional parties in power in the states have muted their criticism of the Union government because they must deal with it for funds, favours and project clearance?

The Rajya Sabha’s functioning has been seen as ‘problematic’. Is it because that it has a substantial opposition? Does that mean that a depleted opposition is essential for smooth running of the House? Then, it is a sad commentary on our democracy.

Last decade saw worsening of this trend that began earlier, in 1980s and 1990s. In sum, it has given parliament a bad name and worse, the lawmakers. The middle class turned cynical, even hostile to legislatures and lawmakers. This reflected in poor voters’ turnout, especially in the urban areas.

That has been arrested in the recent years, resulting in higher voters’ turnouts and even enthusiastic participation. There were many public outpourings on the streets in the last couple of years. This is a healthy sign. But it also carries with it a serious warning: that the people would again take to the streets to voice their grievances if the ruling dispensations, irrespective of their political hue, do not deliver.

What the media reports call “pandemonium” became frequent long back. It received momentum when several parties sprang up from out of major ones that could no longer mean everything to everybody in a vast, diverse polity. The political fragmentation began as parties became more demanding in legislatures but less democratic in the handling of their own members.

The issue of members’ performance in the House and the parties’ failure to accommodate each other’s standpoint in legislatures came up when the last time the salaries and allowances of MPs were enhanced. During a TV panel discussion, this writer angered the lawmakers present by proposing that only those who attend and participate should get the daily allowance and that there should be disincentive for disruption. “I work round the clock for my constituents, travelling and meeting them all the time,” an honourable MP averred. He was angry when reminded that he was certainly elected by his constituents, but that he was elected to Parliament. He refused to accept that the latter part was as more important, if not more, than serving the constituents.

If the first session of the new Lok Sabha has done well, there is no guarantee that it would remain so. The mood may soon change now that the defeated and depleted opposition has scored some impressive victories in the just-concluded round of assembly bye-elections.

One way to facilitate better performance in Parliament could be for the government to concede the Leader of the Opposition (LOP) post in the Lok Sabha. True, the Congress does not have the numbers. True, also, that the past precedents, practices and rules do not allow it.
The issue is now before the Supreme Court. Steering clear of any turf war with parliament, a bench headed by Chief Justice R M Lodha has asked the government, not the Speaker, to explain its stand within two weeks. The court has emphasised the importance of the post saying LOP “conveys the voice of representation different from government in the House.”

Granting that the Lok Sabha has not always had the LoP, the post is too crucial to be left unfilled. LoP is on the panel for appointment of many offices formed under the Constitution. The government had to put on hold the appointment of a new chief of Central Information Commission last Friday due to the absence of LoP in the selection committee, leaving the transparency watchdog headless for the first time since its inception in 2005.

Widespread perception is that Modi is not Manmohan Singh to extend courtesies even to opponents. What is the option before the Congress should it finally not get the LoP post? At the most it can follow the same technique that the BJP followed for nine years of blocking every move by forcing adjournments. The prospects of Parliament functioning purposefully are dim.