)
It was an unusual sight in the Rajya Sabha on Thursday last, when Opposition members were on their feet, objecting to the government introducing the Payment and Settlement Systems (Amendment) Bill, 2014.
The Opposition accused the Bharatiya Janata Party-led government of violating parliamentary procedure and bringing in a bill that had not been listed or discussed in the Business Advisory Committee (BAC). In the Lok Sabha, the Opposition complained how with its overwhelming numbers the government had been steamrolling all objections and clearing bills without adequate discussion. Three bills have been passed in this winter session alone where the usual practice of the standing committee scrutinising a bill was dispensed with.
The Opposition has squarely accused the government of using its “brute majority” in the Lok Sabha to ride roughshod over established parliamentary practices which contribute to effective functioning of a multi-party parliamentary system. It has also accused the government of muzzling its voice; several MPs alleged their microphones were switched off at key moments during parliamentary proceedings.
Deputy Leader of the Congress in the Rajya Sabha Anand Sharma charged the government on Thursday with starting a "new practice". Bill after bill and business after business is being brought without discussion in the BAC. "This is for the third time it is being done in this session," he said while opposing, along with the Left parties, the introduction of the Payment and Settlement Systems Bill.
Till date, the government has had the contentious coal bill, the apprentices bill and the payment systems bill passed in the Lok Sabha without sending it to the standing committee. Communist Party of India (Marxist) MP Tapan Sen, insisting on the importance of the standing committee, said, “It has been a practice to send all substantial bills to a standing committee, a forum where all parties are represented and scrutinise the bill, making for better and robust legislation.”
While the Opposition says parliamentary practices have evolved over time and provide room for healthy debate, the government refutes the charge, maintaining it is not bound by law to send all bills to a standing committee.
In the Lok Sabha, the Congress-led Opposition has been questioning the government’s efforts to push in important bills through the supplementary lists of business, citing six occasions in this session alone.
Matters reached a head on November 25 when the government introduced the Delhi Police Special Powers Establishment Amendment Act as part of the supplementary agenda. It needed to pass the bill soon to appoint the new chief of the Central Bureau of Investigation.
Congress leader in the House Mallikarjun Kharge objected to the bill being introduced “in a hurry” as part of the supplementary agenda. Parliamentary Affairs Minister Venkaiah Naidu eventually agreed to the suggestion by Kharge that the bill be discussed and passed the next day.
On December 3, MPs objected to the government taking up the School for Planning and Architecture Bill for discussion. The CPM’s KC Venugopal and Trinamool Congress’ Saugata Roy said not giving prior notice meant MPs were unable to prepare themselves to participate in the discussion.
Kharge demanded to know what the use of the BAC was if the government would introduce bills through supplementary lists of business. He told Speaker Sumitra Mahajan and Naidu the Opposition was often told it had not given notice when it wanted to raise an issue. Naidu, however, defended the government by a veiled attack on the Opposition for disrupting Rajya Sabha proceedings. He said the bill was being introduced to ensure optimum utilisation of available time.
A couple of hours later, the Opposition was again up in arms when Law Minister DV Sadananda Gowda moved a bill aimed at repealing redundant laws, an item that was not listed for business.
The Opposition accused the Bharatiya Janata Party-led government of violating parliamentary procedure and bringing in a bill that had not been listed or discussed in the Business Advisory Committee (BAC). In the Lok Sabha, the Opposition complained how with its overwhelming numbers the government had been steamrolling all objections and clearing bills without adequate discussion. Three bills have been passed in this winter session alone where the usual practice of the standing committee scrutinising a bill was dispensed with.
The Opposition has squarely accused the government of using its “brute majority” in the Lok Sabha to ride roughshod over established parliamentary practices which contribute to effective functioning of a multi-party parliamentary system. It has also accused the government of muzzling its voice; several MPs alleged their microphones were switched off at key moments during parliamentary proceedings.
Deputy Leader of the Congress in the Rajya Sabha Anand Sharma charged the government on Thursday with starting a "new practice". Bill after bill and business after business is being brought without discussion in the BAC. "This is for the third time it is being done in this session," he said while opposing, along with the Left parties, the introduction of the Payment and Settlement Systems Bill.
Till date, the government has had the contentious coal bill, the apprentices bill and the payment systems bill passed in the Lok Sabha without sending it to the standing committee. Communist Party of India (Marxist) MP Tapan Sen, insisting on the importance of the standing committee, said, “It has been a practice to send all substantial bills to a standing committee, a forum where all parties are represented and scrutinise the bill, making for better and robust legislation.”
While the Opposition says parliamentary practices have evolved over time and provide room for healthy debate, the government refutes the charge, maintaining it is not bound by law to send all bills to a standing committee.
In the Lok Sabha, the Congress-led Opposition has been questioning the government’s efforts to push in important bills through the supplementary lists of business, citing six occasions in this session alone.
Matters reached a head on November 25 when the government introduced the Delhi Police Special Powers Establishment Amendment Act as part of the supplementary agenda. It needed to pass the bill soon to appoint the new chief of the Central Bureau of Investigation.
Congress leader in the House Mallikarjun Kharge objected to the bill being introduced “in a hurry” as part of the supplementary agenda. Parliamentary Affairs Minister Venkaiah Naidu eventually agreed to the suggestion by Kharge that the bill be discussed and passed the next day.
On December 3, MPs objected to the government taking up the School for Planning and Architecture Bill for discussion. The CPM’s KC Venugopal and Trinamool Congress’ Saugata Roy said not giving prior notice meant MPs were unable to prepare themselves to participate in the discussion.
Kharge demanded to know what the use of the BAC was if the government would introduce bills through supplementary lists of business. He told Speaker Sumitra Mahajan and Naidu the Opposition was often told it had not given notice when it wanted to raise an issue. Naidu, however, defended the government by a veiled attack on the Opposition for disrupting Rajya Sabha proceedings. He said the bill was being introduced to ensure optimum utilisation of available time.
A couple of hours later, the Opposition was again up in arms when Law Minister DV Sadananda Gowda moved a bill aimed at repealing redundant laws, an item that was not listed for business.
| BILLS PASSED IN THE LOK SABHA WITHOUT REFERRING IT TO STANDING COMMITTEE |
Instances of government introducing Bills through supplementary list of business
|
