|
|
|
|
|
|
Economic Highlights
Babudom Gets A Hike:WHAT ABOUT EXIT POLICY?, BY Poonam I Kaushish, 5 April 2008 |
|
|
POLITICAL DIARY
New Delhi, 5 April 2008
Babudom Gets A Hike
WHAT ABOUT EXIT
POLICY?
By Poonam I Kaushish
It is raining big bucks in New Delhi’s political Wonderland. A cursory
glance would have Alice
exclaim, “Who needs rabbits. Bureaucrats will do!” And over the last fortnight
we have been witness to a grand show. The farmer loan waiver razzmatazz has
made way for the Babu bonanza. Working
on a perfect give and take. Pay hike in return for vote.
How else should one react to the Sixth Pay Commission’s
report earmarking an over three-fold increase in the salaries and allowances
for Government employees across the board for both civilian and defence
personnel. All with retrospective affect beginning January 2006. No matter that
when implemented, this is expected to cause an additional annual encumbrance of
Rs 20,000 crore, Rs 12,500 crore this year alone. All in the aam aadmi’s khaata.
There is no gainsaying that there is a genuine case to
increase the salaries of Government employees, but shouldn’t it be linked to
better performance and productivity? The present hike doesn't seem to be have any
realistic link to performance. Is it justifiable? Honestly speaking, absolutely
not. Specially against the backdrop that the bureaucracy today works on Andrew
Jackson's famous dictum "let the victors have the spoils." Bluntly,
they have become a law onto themselves. Resulting in no accountability, no fear
of being fired, and hence it’s the biggest pay packet for non-productive work,
coupled with the arrogance that they are indispensable.
Most civil servants, according to popular belief, neither
take initiative nor have any commitment to the service of the people. They are
more than happy to be on the right side of their political masters. This helps,
at least some of them, to get promoted more rapidly than their performance and
seniority justify. Some even succeed in bagging political offices by obliging
the right politician through thick and thin. Top slots in the administration
are now filled in accordance with the whims and fancies of the political
master, contrary to the established norms in regard to appointments and tenure
in leading civil services.
Large-scale shuffles and reshuffles of the bureaucracy with
every change of the political master have become overtly common. Feelings are
gaining ground that political closeness and personal loyalty to powerful
political superiors is more rewarding than mere seniority or merit. Instead of
the right man for the right job being the criteria, there is invariably a wrong
man for the right job for wrong reasons! Bringing it to such a pass that caste,
corruption, political connections and administrative lacunae are the factors
that count when it comes to promotions. Consequently, most babus have little interest in taking any initiatives and are
willing to make self and boss-serving
compromises with the fundamentals of administration.
Remember, some time back the Prime Minister Manmohan Singh
abjectly confessed: “I am disgusted with the system”, when it was discovered
that even Cabinet decisions had remained where they were taken --- on paper.
Perhaps, the file-pushers had to apply their heads to arrive at an agreed
conclusion as to who should push the file. And on who’s orders? The Cabinet,
their Minister or the political mai baap?
That apart, corruption is synonymous with babudom. Be it when applying for a
telephone connection, ration card, driver’s license, passport et al. Nothing
moves till palms have been greased for an average Indian. If one doesn’t have
the paisa then one must be thick
skinned and have no self respect. Babudom
thrives on holding one to ransom and at the mercy of their whims and
fancies. From the TC in the railways, to the Traffic cop, there’s no
questioning them.
One recent study by the Center for Media Studies, New Delhi, on corruption
in urban services reveals that "nearly half of those who avail the
services of the most frequently-visited public departments of Government in the
country have had first hand experience of greasing palms at least once".
It is this pervasiveness that has forced many to charge that bureaucrats have
"created such a steel frame around them that even the might of the State
can't dismantle it".
Between 1996 and 2000, the CBI and the Central Vigilance
Commission investigated 13,265 individuals for corruption. And, between 1998
and 2001, the CBI registered 2,256 cases under the Prevention of Corruption
Act. Of these 41 were from administrative departments, four were from the
police and 23 from the revenue department.
Think. Although India has more than 19 million State
and federal Government employees, about 20,000-odd federal officers control the
collection and disbursement of over $71 billion of federal revenues every year.
Of these, 6,000 senior administrative officers and an equal number of revenue
officers dictate the flow of funds throughout the country.
Even if a handful of these officials were to allow 10
percent leakage in revenue, it would cost the Government $7 billion. And,
assuming corrupt officials get a cut of just 10 per cent, the Indian
bureaucracy gets over $700 million a year - the amount of money that the
Central Bureau of Investigation estimates is spent towards greasing the palms
of Indian bureaucrats. Asserted an “honest corrupt babu,” “If greedy Indian businessmen can evade taxes, influence
policies and make money through devious means, why should not the Government
officer who moves their files get a share of the booty?”
Tragically today corruption has become a low risk, high-profit
area. Wherein the bureaucracy is the third angle of the triangular neta-babu-business axis which has
perpetuated a vulturistic culture of the winner takes all. The modus operandi
has been perfected to the last, deliberate scarcity of goods and services, red
tapeism and delay, lack of transparency (no matter Right To Information Act),
the cushion of a babu is innocent till proven guilty and last but not
least the bhaichara and biradari which bind the corrupt
together.
What kind of a system of governance then lies ahead of us? A
clue can be found in a survey of probationers at the National Academy of
Administration. It states that only 32 per cent of the new recruits condemn
corruption in the civil services. Only five per cent believe in harsh measures
to reduce corruption. Another 45 per cent believe that they are above the law.
What next? Clearly, the Government must downsize. From the Secretary
down to the chaprasi. Non-performing
government officers would be forcibly retired at the end of 20 years service. Alternatively,
if need be, ruthlessly dump the deadwood and irrelevant baggage. Besides,
organizational competence and productivity should be commensurate with a pay
hike in salaries, perks and promotions as in the private sector. An exit policy
of hire and fire is paramount if we desire an accountable, trustworthy and
honest bureaucracy.
Most important, they should be made more accountable. The
private sector is less corrupt because it has more accountability. We need is a
law, which will provide for confiscation of all ill-gotten wealth without any delays
and hesitations. Once the message goes down the rank and file that all ill-gotten
wealth will be confiscated, then the burden of proof will be on the bureaucrat to
prove that he got it legitimately. Ditto with the politician and the
industrialist.
Will the bureaucracy have the courage to correct itself and
overcome red tape? One way is to internalize the zero tolerance principle and
the "sunset principle" as in the US. Under this method, justification
for any governmental activity is all the time under scrutiny so that no acts of
misdemeanour take place.
True, the country can boast of a Government of the people
and a Government by the people. The moot point is: Can India look forward to a
Government for the people? Will our steel frame continue to rot and rust and
revel in mediocrity?
The writing is on the wall. We are reaching a point of no
return. If the Indian bureaucracy does not change its sense of values, it will
become increasingly irrelevant. It may exist by the sheer force of Newton's
First Law of inertia but it will not be playing a role which would make it a
meaningful part of the governance. It is the responsibility of the bureaucracy
to see that the government functions for the people Will babudom rise to the occasion? Or will it be remembered as the conversion of human energy into solid
waste! ---- INFA
(Copyright India News & Feature
Alliance)
|
|
Rajya Sabha Hits New Low:SLEAZE & SURROGATE GALORE, by Poonam I Kaushish, 29 March 2008 |
|
|
POLITICAL DIARY
New Delhi, 29 March 2008
Rajya Sabha Hits
New Low
SLEAZE &
SURROGATE GALORE
By Poonam I Kaushish
Now days when you see someone holding his nose you don’t
know whether it’s pollution or politics. Either way the net result is the same.
Increasing political pollution. Replete with contaminated smog, toxic waste and
sleazy fumes. The latest in an ever-growing series of political skullduggery was
on full public display in the just-concluded Rajya Sabha biennial elections. A
gory account of money and more money. Epitomising as never before that polls
are all about sleaze and surrogate galore baby!
The ‘cash-and-carry’ Madhu Koda UPA Government in Jharkhand
last week set a new record in smutty politics when its MLAs cocked a snook at
the Anti-Defection Law and indulged in a three-way voting for candidates who
entered the fray as UPA nominees for the lone seat it could win. One UPA
nominee backed by Shibhu Soren’s JMM was Delhi-based Kishori Lal who got the
least number of votes (8), no matter that 11 MLAs had signed his nomination
papers. The second UPA candidate, RK Anand backed by the Congress and RJD won
17 votes. The third UPA candidate backed by a section of JMM MLAs and
independents was Ahmedabad-based Parimal Nathwani, Group President, Corporate Affairs
Reliance Industries who got 16 votes.
Who won? No guesses, it was the Reliance man Nathwani who got
five second preference votes from the Marandi group while his rivals got none. Never
mind that till two months ago he had never set foot in Jharkhand and no MLA
knew him. But paisa pakro vote becho politics
is not all. Another new dimension made
its political debut in the Rajya Sabha: surrogate MPs.
True, we are accustomed to high-profile industrial tycoons
like UB breweries and Kingfisher Airline’s Vijay Mallya, Bajaj Scooter’s Rahul
Bajaj, Videocon’s Venugopal Dhoot and BPL’s Chandreshekhar who might sneak in
their respective corporate agendas.
However for the first time these corporate czars have got political
parties to nominate their "delegated trusted lieutenants” for the Rajya
Sabha. While the JD (U) nominated N K Singh, chairperson of the Bihar Planning
Board and a fellow at the Reliance-backed Observer Research Foundation, Sharad
Pawar’s NCP backed YP Trivedi, an independent director on Mukesh Ambani’s RIL
board and the JMM Nathwani
Throwing light on the issue, asserted a senior CPM MP, "The
nomination of these three persons is an indication how business interests are now
operating in a new way in Parliament.” Plainly they have been hand-picked to
take care of the boss’s corporate interests. Added another MP, “During Nehru’s
time corporate houses would get individual MPs to get their work done and later
pay them for it.
What is happening now is that they directly get their
nominees in through parties to serve their interests, both overtly and covertly
in Parliament. One way is by getting themselves attached to Standing Committees
and Parliamentary Consultative Committees which serve their business interests.
This enables them to work directly with the Minister or the ministry thus they
are in an advantageous position to influence decisions. Not a few of the
'surrogate' MPs also succeed in dodging public scrutiny about their links with
business houses as they do not occupy corporate positions but are firmly
ensconced with such groups to promote their interests,” he added.
Worse, this trend of surrogate MPs in the Council of States
has become more pronounced because of the Office of Profit Bill. The Bill bars a
MP from occupying any Government position but does not restrict him from
holding a position in a corporate. Clearly, there is a need to plug this lacuna
and include the private sector as well in the Office of Profit Bill.
Needless to say, over the years the Rajya Sabha polls, like
elections to the Lok Sabha have become big business. The figures for ‘buying’
the required number of votes range from Rs.10 crores to as much as Rs.25
crores. The going rate per vote was said to be Rs. 10 lakh to Rs.20 lakh. Not a
few consider this as a good investment as once elected the MP has a sum of Rs 2
crore annually (Rs 12 crore for 6 years), to spend under the MP Local Area
Development Scheme (MPLADS). But unlike his Lok Sabha counterpart he can spend
it any way he wants as he has no particular constituency per se. Recall, the
controversy wherein BSP Chief Mayawati reportedly openly extolled her MP’s to
“donate” their MPLADS if they wanted her to nominate them to the Rajya Sabha.
Unfortunately, the Rajya Sabha is not what it was intended
to be. The quality of the members and the complexion of the House has undergone
a sea change --- for the worse. Personal loyalty to the leader, monetary
considerations and political connections have largely got precedence over
competence and experience. Often enough shouting has replaced serious debate.
True, every Party is entitled to choose its candidates for
the House, according to its long-term interests. But the powers-that-be in doing
so have not cared much for the basic character of the House and its purpose. Recall,
our Constitution-makers wanted the Rajya Sabha to consist of persons of greater
experience and eminence than those in the Lok Sabha. They therefore,
deliberately opted for three things. First, indirect elections from the State
legislatures. Second, a minimum age for membership at 30 years as against 25
for the Lok Sabha. Third, nomination by the President of 12 persons “having
special knowledge or practical experience in respect of literatures, science,
art and social service.”
The original concept was spelt out by Sir Gopalaswamy
Ayangar on July 28, 1947. The second chamber, he said, was intended to “give an
opportunity, perhaps, to seasoned people, who may not be in the thickest of
political fray, but who might be willing to participate in the debate with an
amount of learning and importance which we do not ordinarily associate with the
House of the People”. What Sir Gopalaswamy advocated was sought to be
implemented by Nehru and Maulana Azad, both in letter and in spirit.
Politicians defeated at the polls were firmly kept out and efforts made to
bring in “seasoned” persons.
Indirect election to the Rajya Sabha was intended to help
induct experienced and seasoned persons from different walks of life in the
House --- Stalwarts who would normally be disinclined to face the rough and
tumble of a poll battle.
Sadly, however, the House is today functioning more and more
as a parallel (and competing) political chamber to the Lok Sabha. To this day
it has not cared to discuss in detail and at length the Sarkaria Commission’s
report on Centre-State relations. In fact, the Rajya Sabha as the Council of
States should have by now held a special session to discuss the Report in all
its various aspects.
Tragically, today the Rajya Sabha has failed to evolve a
distinct role for itself as the Council of States. The States’ voice over the
years has got lost in the din of the power brokers who strut about like
peacocks in the Rajya Sabha kaleidoscope. A situation has clearly arisen over
the past five decades which was largely unforeseen. Even though records show
that a Communist MP, Sadhan Gupta, prophetically expressed the fear in the Lok
Sabha on April 2, 1954 that the Rajya Sabha would one day “stunt the voice of
the representatives of the people.”
Where do we go from here? One way out could be to abolish
the chamber, as advocated by leading MPs at different times. Significantly, Dr.
Ambedkar himself went on record in 1949 to say that the Rajya Sabha was being
introduced “purely as an experimental measure” and there was provision for
“getting rid” of it. Morarji Desai, for his part, was one with Harold Laski’s
view that “a single chamber best answers the needs of modern states.” But such
an extreme step is not necessary yet.
The Rajya Sabha could still be made to play a more useful
role as the Council of States instead of a parallel, competing chamber.
Jayaprakash Narayan strongly favoured a partyless Council. The Rajya Sabha members
should be those who have put in at least one stint in the State Assembly or in
the Lok Sabha and no more than two terms should be given to anybody.
Interestingly, we have had persons happily enjoying three to four terms of six
yeas each in the Rajya Sabha without ever fighting an elections to either State
Assembly or the Lok Sabha.
It’s time the Elders set their House in order, or else the
coming months will decide whether the Rajya Sabha will make Indian politics
more messy and unworkable. --- INFA
(Copyright India News & Feature
Alliance)
|
|
CBI: In The Dock:AUTONOMY A BIG JOKE?, by Poonam I Kaushish,21 March 2008 |
|
|
POLITICAL DIARY
NEW DELHI, 21 March 2008
CBI: In The Dock
AUTONOMY A BIG
JOKE?
By Poonam I Kaushish
Is the law finally catching up with our polity? Or, is it
our netagan’s penchant to anoint
themselves as the law that is proving to be its nemesis? And, has the Central
Bureau of Investigation’s fatal attraction for political cover-ups and clean
chits made it into the Central Bureau of convenience, connivance and
corruption, with the devil taking the hindmost!
Call it coincidence or what you may, but last week the
much-derided system indeed did catch up with our political masters. In a
totally unexpected development, India’s
best known secret was unwrapped as never before. Namely, that even our netagan are fed up with the Central
Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and want its image makeover along with sweeping
changes.
Importantly, a Parliamentary Standing Committee report on
the “Working of the Central Bureau of Investigation,” has recommended that the
CBI be made into an ``enforcement agency” and be given an “independent and
autonomous’’ status to prevent political interference in its functioning. It
also mooted that it be granted power to investigate and prosecute through a
separate statute called the Central Bureau of Intelligence and Investigation
Act. And be given the same status as the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
in the US
to allow it to independently take up cases of high-tech crime..
Appreciating the image of the CBI in the country as a
premier investigating agency, the committee was, however, severely critical of its
internal composition. The report called the deputation of IPS officers to the
CBI an “avoidable luxury’’ and recommended an increase in direct recruitment.
Adding, “Officers without sufficient experience of service and knowledge” are
inducted on deputation for complicated jobs in CBI but were not the “decision
making class’’ within the agency. No matter their professional competence and
expertise in niche areas such as corruption cases, securities and finance
transactions, defence purchase related transactions, etc
Significantly, our Right Honourables confessed candidly that
granting sanction for prosecution was one of the “bottlenecks” in providing
autonomy to the CBI. Pertinently, it cited many instances where prosecution
sanction was denied bringing the CBI into “disrepute’’. And even where sanction
had been granted, invariably courts pulled up the agency for slip-shod handling
of the case (the Rs.5,000-crore bank scandal, sugar, UTI), lack of evidence and
unavailability of witnesses or just glossing over vital leads (infamous hawala case) et al. Surmising, that it
was time that the CBI make sure that the prosecution was foolproof, or else the
judiciary would step in.
Further, it recommended strengthening the CBI in terms of
resources and legal mandate. Pointing out the CBI’s failure to get conviction
in cases with international ramifications, it favoured that a separate
international crimes division be carved out to specifically deal with Interpol,
extradition and international crimes. It is another matter that it was the Congress-led
UPA Government in connivance with the CBI that ‘intentionally’ bungled and made
an international mess of its case in La
Affaire Quottrocchhi of the Bofors gun scam and got egg on its face. First
the Government advised the UK Government to “defreeze” the Italian businessman’s
accounts. And, when he was finally arrested in Argentina, the CBI failed to
extradite and the Argentinian
Court let him go scot free.
Besides, the Committee asserted that certain acts like
terrorism, human trafficking, smuggling and black marketing should be labeled
as federal crimes and should be taken up directly by the CBI. On terrorism, it
recommended the setting up of a separate anti-terrorism division in the CBI to
work solely with the aim of preventing terrorist activities. “The Central
government should be given adequate powers to take prompt and effective action
on the intelligence available to them in place of the current system where the
home ministry merely hands over intelligence inputs to the State Governments.”
Calling for an end to infinite debating, the Committee
emphasized that the time was ripe to implement these suggestions. However, this
is easier said than done. The moot point is: Who will cast the first stone and
translate words into action? Who will give the CBI its much-needed autonomy? Is
our polity ready to call a spade a spade and bell the big fat cat of
corruption?
Alas, as oft happens, this all-important report has been
lost in the mountain of diatribe and gabble churned out during the Budget
session of Parliament. Like the first report of the Parliamentary Standing
Committee of the Home Ministry in 1994 did. Forget some remorse, all continue
in legitimizing crime and corruption. Who has the time for introspection on
what and where things went wrong and correct the course? Such is the nasha of power that all conveniently
choose to merrily make political capital.
Worse, against the backdrop of there being as many an as
1,300 cases pending against MPs and MLAs in various courts. These include cases
being investigated by CBI against Railway Minister Lalu Yadav, who is being
tried in relation with the fodder scam, and those against current and former UP
chief ministers Mayawati and Mulayam Singh respectively in the disproportionate
assets cases. What to say of Maya bhenji’s
Taj corridor scam and the over hundreds of crores received as gifts from her
poor Dalit swayam sevaks, who go
hungry to pave their messiah’s path with gold. Not only that. Five ‘tainted’
ministers continue to adorn the Treasury Benches. Justified by our honest Prime
Minister as “the compulsions of coalition politics.”
Is the CBI more sinned against than sinning? Are politicians the main culprit? Is the pot calling the kettle black? The truth is mid-way. Both work in tandem in furthering their own
interest. Consequently, the system becomes self-perpetuating. Over the years,
the threatened political elite have given more and more powers to the CBI to
get their way and have their say. Therein,
sullying the agency’s reputation, replete with its “failure” to back up charges
with required evidence. Worse, the CBI
seems to have adopted a brazenly opportunistic policy of playing safe with
Governments of the day and its willingness and commitment to serve the national
cause by putting self before the country.
As the Committee has rightly pointed out, at the crux is the
issue: Who should control the CBI?
Needless to say, a Catch-22 question for our power-greedy polity to
honestly answer and for us to stupidly expect. Witness the sweet irony. When Vajpayee was the Leader of Opposition in
the Lok Sabha in the late 1990’s he had demanded an independent CBI and even
promised one if he came to power. But Vajpayee the Prime Minister not only
conveniently forgot his promise but continued to retain the CBI under his
charge, just as his predecessors had done. Beginning with Indira Gandhi, who
concentrated all instruments of effective power in her own hands.
Manmohan Singh too is happily following the tradition. Over
the past year he has talked ad nauseum
of weeding out corruption, but is mum on making the CBI an autonomous and
indeed, an independent agency. According to two former CBI directors, Joginder
Singh and Kartikaiyan there is no such thing as autonomy. This is a fallacy.
For two reasons -- the agency administratively comes directly under the Prime
Minister. Two, officers are dependent on their political bosses for their careers
---postings, transfers and seniority. If they perform well they are adequately
rewarded in various ways, including extensions and even berths in prestigious
and statutory bodies.
Of course, the CBI can be set right. However, this requires clear and firm
political will. The foremost corrective
(from which others will flow) is to ensure that the appointment of the CBI
Director is truly above board and is based on his genuine expertise, integrity,
competence and commitment. He should have no political affiliations, lest he is
dubbed as the Prime Minister’s hatchet man. His impeccable record of absolute
honesty would go a long way in establishing the utility and credibility of the
agency down the rank and file. This
would ensure an impartial, just and unbiased assessment of all important
cases. And, bring in the much-needed
accountability to inspire confidence among the disgusted public.
At the end of the day, are we going to mortgage our
conscience to corrupt and tainted leaders?
The powers-that-be must desist from playing further havoc. A question that needs to be urgently
answered is: Will the CBI be guided by the law of the land? Who will cast the
first stone? Kiska danda, kiski laathi aur kiski bhains? Enough is enough! ---- INFA
(Copyright India News and Feature Alliance)
|
|
Breach Of Privilege:IT’S ONE BIG TAMASHA, by Poonam I Kaushish,8 March 2008 |
|
|
POLITICAL DIARY
New Delhi, 8 March 2008
Breach Of Privilege
IT’S ONE BIG TAMASHA
By Poonam I Kaushish
Question: Who said the following: (a) “The House is becoming a place of tamasha. You are working overtime to finish democracy. It is a
farce.” (b) “Is not disruption of proceedings during the Question Hour a breach
of privilege of individual members who await answers to admitted starred
questions, and supplementary questions?”
Answer: No guesses, it’s the Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath
Chatterjee and his counterpart in the Rajya Sabha Vice President and Chairman
Hamid Ansari. Both clearly exasperated over the conduct of our Right
Honourables in the two Houses of Parliament.
But unlike the past when these reprimands were dismissed out
of hand, this time round it has set our MPs to give serious thought, deliberate
and debate on the issue and come out with their recommendations on how to end
the fast deteriorating situation. More
so against the backdrop of Ansari taking
the unprecedented step of referring a complaint by a group of seven MPs belonging
to the UPA to the Committee of Privileges on Thursday last. Their grouse was
that they could not “speak and ask supplementaries” during Question Hour allegedly
because some Opposition MPs did not allow the House to function. Pertinently, he
raised the question whether those disrupting the House breach the privilege of
those MPs scheduled to ask questions during that period.
Under Rule 203 of the Rules and Procedure and Conduct of
Business in the Council of States, the Chairman has the power to “refer any
question of privilege to the Committee of Privileges for examination,
investigation and report.” Which then would have to examine, investigate and
then submit a report on the matter. It is another matter that the cornered MPs
apologized and all was forgiven.
However, Ansari’s well-intended extraordinary action may not
have any salutary immediate effect given that MPs have still to codify their
privileges. True, technically speaking, adjournment, disturbances, hungama, raising pandemonium and rushing
into the well of the House constitutes breach of privilege. However, the
question can be argued both ways. Some parliamentary experts assert that
nothing technically stops the Chair from taking disciplinary action, yet not
much happens in terms of handing out punishment. Primarily because the rules
are not enforced by the Presiding Officers.
Invariably, both the Lok Sabha Speaker and the Rajya Sabha
Chairman neither name nor ask an MP or MPs disrupting the proceedings to
withdraw from the House. And when the recalcitrant MP refuses to do so seldom
are Marshals summoned. The last time was on 22 July 1998 when the Rashtriya
Janata Party MP Anand Mohan disrupted the proceedings in the Lok Sabha, refusing
to heed the Speaker's call for silence and was then ordered to be evicted from
the House.
On the obverse not a few feel that the Chair should also not
lose sight of the fact that members act to highlight issues of great national
importance on their leaders' instructions or to raise matters dear to the aam aadmi in their constituency. Also,
if there is a large majority of members, which stood up and disrupted the House,
would it be a matter for the privileges committee? More important, isn’t preserving
the sanctity of Parliament as the highest democratic forum everyone’s responsibility?
However, Ansari is not being guided by any whims. Nor is he
cracking the whip during the time the Vice-President normally presides ever the
Rajya Sabha, in his dual role as Chairman. He is doing so simply because the
Question Hour is the crucial hyphen that links the Government to Parliament. It
provides for daily and continuing accountability of the Executive to the
Legislature. Wherein the Government through its Ministers is duty-bound to
answer questions.
Any member in either House can put a question to the Prime
Minister or any other Minister and demand an honest answer. Making question
time the most powerful weapon available to the MPs, and more especially the
Opposition, to keep the Government on a tight leash. It is based on the
fundamental right to information enshrined in the Constitution, via questions.
Mercifully, the rules of the House ensure that the
Government is well and truly in the dock and cannot, therefore, avoid questions
and conveniently escape. Perhaps, this Hour more than any other time of the
House serves as a barometer of Governmental efficiency and performance at the
macro level and that of a Minister at the micro level. When they are required
to answer queries relating to matters of public importance and if the
administrative responsibility reposed in them.
Sadly over the years, with confrontationalist politics and
politically motivated bashing becoming the raging cult, our Right Honourables
are showing less and less interest in what they should be doing ---- law
making. Bringing things to such a pass that the pursuit of power, pelf and
patronage is replacing all else.
The gradual decline in the number of sittings underscores it
all. The Rajya Sabha, which had an annual average of 90.5 sittings in 1952-61,
came down to 71.3 in 1992-2001 — a decline of 20 per cent. The comparative
figures for the Lok Sabha are 124.2 and 81.0 — a decline of 34 per cent. The State
Assemblies are worse off, with the average now being in the range of 3 to 20
sittings every year.
More. The annual average of the Bills passed by Parliament
has come down from 68 in 1952-61 to 49.9 in 1992-2001. Nearly 23 per cent of
MPs elected in 2004 had criminal cases registered against them and over half of
these are these that could lead to imprisonment for five years or more. The
situation is worse in the case of MLAs.
Shockingly, both the Houses lost over 130 hours of time
(cost of each minute being Rs 26,000) due to repeated uproar and pandemonium
which has cost the tax payer over Rs 20 crore last year. Up till now the 14th
Lok Sabha, has lost 21 per cent of the time due to adjournments.
Recall in 2001 an all-India conference on Discipline and
Decorum in Parliament and State Legislatures was convened by the then Lok Sabha
Speaker Balyogi. The 350-strong jamboree included the Rajya Sabha Chairman, the
Prime Minister, Leader of Opposition, Chief Ministers, Parliamentary Affairs
Ministers, Party leaders and Chief Whips who agreed to evolve a code of conduct
and make each other answerable.
Alas, all the suggestions mooted therein were still-born.
Only adding to the piling trivia heard before. Recall, a similar conference
held in 1992 too did not yield any result. Understandably, in today’s media is
the massage age where everything is factored. If governance is all about
‘feeling good’ then politics is all about ‘sounding good.’ Asserted an MP, “In
a country where ethics and politics are two ends of a spectrum, one fails to
comprehend how a Presiding Officer’s anguish or sending a matter to the
Privileges Committee can stem the growing ‘rot of moral decay’ in our polity.
“Bluntly, it means that Parliament in its collective wisdom
has tacitly decided to throw ethics to the dogs”, stated a senior old-timer.
“Can a code of conduct or rules, for instance, tame our politicians who
increasingly call the shots.” Parliament and the State Assemblies have been
vandalized as never before. Pandemonium, dharnas
and adjournments have become their hallmark: Reducing these buildings,
which house the aspirations of the people, to perspiration and one-upmanship.
Turning them into market places where leaders are bought and sold like prize
bulls with the winner taking it all.
In sum, even as one applauds the initiatives of the two
Presiding Officers, much still remains to be done. It is high time our Right
Honourables give serious thought to rectifying all the scandalous distortions
that have seeped in and urgently work for a change. Ansari and Chatterjee have shown
the way. Will our jan sevaks
cooperate with them to make Parliament truly India’s high temple of democracy? ---
INFA
(Copyright India News & Feature
Alliance)
.
|
|
Freebies Galore, Forget Money:PYAARE MUSALMAN, YOUR WISH, MY COMMAND,by Poonam I Kaushish,1 Mar 08 |
|
|
POLITICAL DIARY
New Delhi, 1 March 2008
Freebies Galore,
Forget Money
PYAARE MUSALMAN,
YOUR WISH, MY COMMAND
By Poonam I Kaushish
It was a perfect electoral cake. Rolled out by Finance
Minister Chidambaram to the strains of ‘Vote Congress.’ Iced with luscious
lip-smacking freebies galore for one and all. From the aam aadmi to the debt-ridden kisan
to the top tax payer. A feel-good budget that has bitten the ballot. To cream
the electorate at the hustings!
Indeed, his 2008-09 ‘please-one-and-all’ budget has much to
crow about. It has injected a much-needed dose to the suicide-prone farmers
wherein debts worth Rs 60,000 crore have been promised to be waived off, it offers
substantial tax relief to the middle class, welfare lollipops for workers in
the unorganized sector, increased subsidies for houses under the Indira Awaz Yojana, special measures for
Scs/STs, new deal for senior citizens and women et al.
However, the budget has a dangerous sub-text which has been
lost in the euphoria of the goodies. The slew of schemes for the minorities is
a pointer that minorityism has replaced cronyism as the tour de force of the budget. Take a 360 degree turn anywhere and
minority appeasement hits you in the face. All in the garb of improving their
quality of life (sic) which translates into “please give me your vote.” Never
mind that it holds out dangerous portends for India’s unity and national
security.
How else should one react to the Finance Minister’s latest
bonanza for the minorities. Starting with the piece de resistance, a multi-sectoral development plan for 90
minority districts at a cost of Rs.3,780 crore, Rs 80-crore earmarked for a pre-matric
scholarships and over Rs 45 crore for modernizing madrassa education. The corpus for the Maulana Azad Education
Foundation has been hiked by Rs.60 crore and 544 new bank branches (256 this
year and 288 next year) will be opened in the minority districts to facilitate
bank credit for them and Rs.75 crore more for the National Minorities
Development and Finance Corporation..
Statistically speaking none can deny that a large section of
the Muslims need a better quality of life. Data collated by various commissions
bring out the fact that socio-economic indicators for Muslims were below those
for OBCs in many cases. About 59 per cent were illiterate, only 10 per cent
went to school and a mere eight per cent opted for higher education. Worse,
even as they were vastly under-represented in official jobs, they were grossly
over-represented in India's
prison population. None can also deny that the Government has a special
responsibility to provide job opportunities, education and upliftment of the
minorities and the backward classes.
No doubt, the Grand Dame of Indian politics perceives its
Finance Minister’s lollipops as it’s cash card to regain its long-lost glory. But
the crucial question is: Does poverty have any religion? What has religion got
to do with the Government’s strategy for inclusive growth? Does ‘inclusiveness
of Muslims’ mean at the cost of other groups? Is it in the interest of
maintaining the social fabric of the nation? Will it help the cause of taking
the Indian people together on the path of development?"
More. How does it better the lot of the mass of Muslims, if a few persons get jobs? When does
minorityism supercede equality assured by our Constitution? Are quotas based on
religion and community, the answer for maintaining India’s social fabric? And more
important, it’s crucial harmony? Is the Muslim identity distinct from that of
the Indian?
Given the level of dishonesty, populism and irresponsibility
which increasingly governs our political system, these exclusive measures
announced are an invitation to disaster. Clearly, the move is fraught with
dangerous implications for the unity of the country. Tragically, so blinded are
our politicians in their quest for power that none can see the Frankenstein
they recklessly continue to create. By giving legitimacy to a communal quota,
religious bigotry at its most ferocious could end up in carving once more a
blood-stained path across our
country. Clearly, this could sow the poisonous seeds for a new communal
movement and separate electorates inspired by the two-nation theory that
tragically led to India’s
partition.
Importantly, if reservation based on castes is bad, budgeting
on communal basis is horrendous. Ominous reasoning is being appendaged. It
would bring the Muslims into the mainstream. Ensure harmony between the
majority and the minority communities. It would prevent Muslims from being
exploited any more as vote-banks by the so-called secular parties.
Recall, Nehru increasingly bent over-backwards to woo the
Muslim vote, which constituted 12 to 15 per cent of the total Congress vote,
the largest single block it received in the first few general elections. Thus,
Muslim appeasement was no longer viewed as luxury but as a matter of life and
death. To be manipulated and held hostage as was done by the British colonial
masters to block freedom.
Once economically pampered, the next demand would be that
the Muslims alone should decide who would represent them. Bluntly, leading to a
most dangerous and blood-thirsty monster of separate Muslim electorate.
Clearly, this could sow the seeds for a new communal movement inspired by the
disastrous two-nation theory that led to India’s
partition and the creation of Pakistan,
thanks to the diabolical communal award by the British Raj which provided for the Hindus to vote for the Hindus and the Muslims
for the Muslims.
So caught up are all in their blandishments for the
increasing Muslim vote-bank (36.76 per
cent growth during 1991-2001) to suit their petty parochial ends that they fail
to see the Frankenstein they could mindlessly unleashed --- a Frankenstein that
encourages the Muslim leadership to go communal and dictate its national
agenda. Already a seven-Party Muslim Front has been formed to fight the
electoral sweepstakes on its own.
Importantly, there is no place for double standards or the
Orwellian concept of ‘more equal than others’ in a democracy. What is sauce for
the goose is sauce for the gander. The Fundamental Rights provide for equal
opportunities for all irrespective of caste, creed or sex. Let’s not fudge or
forget this. India of 2008
is not the India
of pre-1947.
Clearly, the Government has to end this evil of separatism. Separate
budget for minorities is no answer for fulfilling the peoples’ aspirations. It
will not only further divide our people on creed-caste lines but is also
short-sighted and antithetical to any hope of narrowing India's burgeoning
divide between the haves and have-nots. The Government has no right to limit
opportunities for the deserving or to shrink the public space for autonomy and
free association.
In the ultimate, our petty power-at all-cost polity has to
think beyond vote-bank politics and look at the perilous implications of these
decisions. What exactly is the message the Government proposes to send across
the country by its budgeting policy? Does it want to be the first to sow the
seeds of another partition? It is willy-nilly encouraging the Muslim leadership
to go communal and resurrect the Muslim League. Which could in turn result in
reservation for Muslims in Parliament and State Assemblies and even separate
electorate a la the British Raj?
If not stopped here and now, these actions could threaten a
blood-stained path across our
country. Let us not ignore the grim lessons
of history. Or, we shall end up condemning ourselves and the country to
repeating history. Where a nation can be plunged into communal anarchy once
again. How long will we allow this vote-bank politics to continue recklessly and play havoc with India’s unity and integrity? The
buck stops at the Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s door. ----INFA
(Copyright India News & Feature Alliance)
|
|
| | << Start < Previous 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 Next > End >>
| Results 5455 - 5463 of 5806 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|