Rewind

New Delhi, 28 June 2019

Parliament Requires Reforms

By Inder Jit

(Was released on 10 May, 1983)

Parliament continues to slide downhill. Its decline touched a new low during the budget session even as the outgoing Public Accounts Committee of the two Houses has boldly sought to strengthen Parliament and give it a new, welcome thrust. Parliament’s greatest strength and utility lies in its power over the Treasury. Not many among the younger generation seem to remember that the first big battle of democracy was fought in Britain on the question of the right of a king to impose taxes on his subjects at will. The people won at the end of the long and hard struggle and the world saw the birth of a fundamental canon of democracy: no taxation without representation. The principle is strictly enforced in all democracies. In fact, Britain and other democracies have over the past many years even taken new initiatives to strengthen Parliament’s control over the purse. In sharp and distressing contrast, Parliament’s control over the national budget in India is slipping step by step, year by year.

Incredibly enough, the demands of only eight ministries with an overall budget of Rs.13,000 crores were discussed and voted during the session. The demands of some 15 ministries and eight departments totalling Rs.10,000 crores, as all-time records, were guillotined in one fell stroke and voted without any discussion. This would be wholly wrong even if the debates guillotined (on account of lack of time) related, so to say, so ministries or departments of not great national importance. But matters have been made infinitely worse because the list of guillotined ministries and departments that deal in subjects which are part of the Prime Ministers’ much trumpeted 20 Point Programmes and are of basic concern to the people. These include the Ministries of Health and Family Welfare, Education and Culture, Information and Broadcasting, Housing and Communications as also the core sectors of the Plan like Steel and Mines, Fertilizers and Chemicals, Transport, Science and Technology, including Atomic Energy and Space.

Not only that. A probe into the records has yielded information which is at once astonishing and scandalous. Everyone wants at least three basic things in life: roti, kapra aur makaan (food, clothing and housing). Most thinking people regret that even after 35 years of freedom the country has no policy worth the name which encourages people to build houses. Even today the well known quip holds good that fools build houses and wise men live in them. Thousands of crores of rupees have been spent on housing and many more on various public works. Yet, readers will be astonished to know that the functioning of the Works and Housing Ministry, which includes the Delhi Development Authority, has been discussed only once in the past eleven years --- in 1978. Education and Health and Family Welfare, which appropriately enjoy top priority, have been discussed by Parliament only once in the past five years. The estimates of the Social Welfare Ministry have not been discussed during the last five years.

More, Nehru attached the highest importance to planning and planned development. He was also anxious to see India become a modern nation with a scientific outlook. Indeed, he went all out to encourage science and technology ---- as also the development of atomic energy for peaceful purposes. His initiative and vision have enabled India to become the third foremost country in scientific manpower. Yet, Parliament has had little say on these subjects. The Planning Ministry and through it the Planning Commission have been discussed only once in twelve years --- in 1979 during the Janata rule. The Department of Science and Technology has also been discussed only once in the past six years --- in 1979. Incidentally, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting was discussed last in 1981 --- once in five years.

Parliament has a right to apply the guillotine on the budgetary demands of ministries because of the constraints of time. Why? The Finance Bill has to be voted by April 30. Nevertheless, Nehru cut down resort to the guillotine to the minimum by securing the cooperation of all sections of the Lok Sabha as a dedicated Leader of the House. In 1960 and 1962, for instance, discussion in regard to the following five heads only were guillotined: Atomic Energy, Department of Parliamentary Affairs, Lok Saba, Rajya Sabha and the Vice President’s Secretariat. The number shot up three times to 15 in 1967 (a year after Mrs. Gandhi took over as Prime Minister), to 24 in 1975, 25 in 1980 and 26 in 1983. Nehru stood for a debate on the functioning of all ministries and departments. At one stage, he accepted a suggestion for a discussion on the “guillotined” ministries and departments on the basis of their annual reports presented to Parliament ---- after the Finance Bill was voted.

True, Parliament has changed greatly since Nehru. A lot of the Lok Sabha’s time gets taken up by the daily rumpus or hangama that invariably erupts at the zero hour. Nonetheless, Parliament’s basic role and responsibility remains unchanged. Clearly, there is need for all concerned to find a solution. As the leader of the House, Mrs. Gandhi needs to spend more time in the Lok Saba (like her father) and reassure the Opposition that she does not regard herself to be “above Parliament”. (Her absence from the House during the debate on Punjab led to strong protests by the Opposition) Mrs. Gandhi is entitled to have “reservations” about Parliament’s functioning. But she owes it to the country to spell out the “reservations” and restore health to the system. The Opposition undoubtedly “upsets the schedule and creates problems” from the Government’s viewpoint. But the Opposition is often more sinned against than sinning. Queried an Opposition leader: “What do you expect us to do when questions are not answered, information brazenly denied and discussions blocked?”

Happily, no great human ingenuity is required for coming forward with a possible solution. An obvious way out is to get the Lok Sabha (as also the Rajya Sabha) to sit longer hours each day and to meet for a larger number of days in a year. The Lok Sabha met for only 92 days last year and is unlikely to do very much better in the current year. (Even Opposition MPs, I am told, opposed a suggestion for extending the Budge Session.) During Nehru’s time, the Lok Sabha never met for less than a hundred days in the course of a year when the time lost in hangamas was much, much less. The first Lok Sabha met for 103 days in its first year --- 1952. In the next two years it met for 137 days each. The number of days shot up to 151 days in 1956. In his last full year, 1963, the Lok Sabha met for 122 days --- a month longer than in 1982. Mrs. Gandhi started off well with 119 days in 1966, 120 days each in 1968, 1969 and 1973 and 119 days in 1973. But the number fell to its lowest of 63 in 1975.

This should improve matters. But only up to a point. The real answer, as I have said before, lies in the Committee system, as shown by the mother of Parliaments: Westminster. Happily, the idea is favoured by the Speaker, Mr. Balram Jakhar, as also by at least one former Speaker and leading MPs. The outgoing Public Accounts Committee, headed by Mr. Satish Aggarwal, BJP, has shown what a committee can do to enforce accountability over the Government. (The late Jyotirmoy Basu of the CPM, who is greatly missed, made the country sit up with his sensational investigative reports as Chairman of the Committee on Public Undertakings.) The PAC under Mr. Agarwal examined the functioning of the Planning Commission for the first time and helped the people to discover for the first time the colossal failure of planning in just one sphere --- irrigations. “We would not need to import food grains today,” he told me, “if only our planning was sound and schemes had been implemented. We could have saved Rs. 5,000 crores on food imports this year alone.”

The PAC, which has also rendered yeomen service by spotlighting many more skeletons in various ministerial cupboards, has appropriately recommended that the existing committee be split into two --- one for Revenue and the other for Expenditure. The recommendation, I gather has been considered by the Rules Committee which, in turn, has sought the views of the Finance Ministry. But this by itself is not enough. What we need in our Parliament today is the boldness and initiative shown by the Commons some six years ago. Chronically dissatisfied with its procedures and anxious to adopt them to changing demands made upon it, the commons set up a Select Committee on Procedure to make recommendations for the more effective performance of its functions. The Committee carried out a broad and significant review of the way the Commons worked and mainly recommended establishment of Select Committee to enable the Commons “to exercise effective control and stewardship over ministers and the expanding bureaucracy of the state for which they are answerable.”

Parliamentary control over the Government in Britain is today exercised through twelve Committees in additions to the Public Accounts Committee and the Committee on Parliamentary Commissioners (the ombudsman). What is more, Parliament’s activities in Britain are becoming progressively more ‘open’ through grass roots enquiries. Until 1965, no Select Committee had heard evidence in public for many years. Now the great majority of hearings are open to the public (except where strictly confidential evidence is being given). Advance notices are published in the Press. All this has lessons for India where more and more people are justifiably dissatisfied with Parliament, which today cannot even boast of great debates. The Lok Sabha’s powers have greatly eroded, constraining the Speaker to express himself against increase by the Government of diesel and kerosene prices through notification on the eve of the budget session. We must face bitter facts and mend matters before it is too late. The Commons continue to grow even today --- after an existence of almost 300 years. Must we stop growing at 30? ---INFA

(Copyright, India News And Feature Alliance)