By Albert Thyrniang
We have bid farewell to the old parliament house. The historic first session of the special Session was in new Sansad Bhavan on 19 September 2021. The 96 year-old building will now be an archaeological site. The house where Jawaharlal Nehru made the famous “midnight hour” speech and the Constitution adopted will serve as a nostalgic memory. Apart from being the seat of the imperial Legislative Council, the Constituent Assembly of India it will also be the Parliament of India between 26 January 1950 and 18 September 2023. Considered inadequate for the modern needs, the British circular architecture will give way to the triangular structure. Setting aside criticisms of whether a new parliament house was required the BJP pushed through this project whose construction commenced on 10 December 2020.
The Prime Minster personally took pride in seeing this three storey building that occupies 64,500 sqm, a reality. His name is recorded in history as the person who laid the foundation stone, inaugurated it and led the MPs to the grand structure. He will be in the annals of history. He may be remembered as the one who finally shook off the colonial past. He will not want anyone to forget that in his second term of office the special session of parliament was convened to commission the new lawmakers’ house.
On 18 September, the last session in the old building the prime minister gave his ‘farewell speech’. He sounded a statesman for once. He acknowledged the past prime minsters from Pandit Nehru to Manmohan Singh and their achievements. He even recalled the prime minister he dislikes the most, Nehru’s immortal ‘at stroke of midnight’ speech. He paid special tribute to BR Ambedkar. He complimented the 7,500 members of whom 600 were women. However, he could not resist condemning the Emergency and the ‘cash for votes’ scam.
On September 19 after the photo sessions we saw glimpses of members stepping into the building replete with national symbols. The prime minster walked barefoot. In the function to mark the occasion, the prime minster lost no time in suggesting to rename the old parliament building ‘Samvidhan Sadan’ (Constitution House). Subsequently he made his maiden address at the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha separately where he expressed pleasure at the quality of debates and reminded members that the New Parliament is a symbol of a new dawn.
All throughout, the prime minister was very keen in realising the ambition of a new parliament. But how competent is he as a parliamentarian. How deserving is he to go down in history as the ‘new parliament builder’? How worthy is he to carry the legacy of being the ‘architect’ of the new house that symbolises debates, discussions and deliberations. CPM member, John Brittas reveals that the Prime Minister was present in Parliament for 0.001 per cent of the total time. Derek O’Brien, TMC Rajya Sabha Member in a scathing attack said, ‘Give me back my Parliament’ before moving to the new site and reminded that the prime minister never answered a single question on the floor of parliament in the last seven years.
The prime minister wanted to avoid speaking on violence hit Manipur in the last session in August. It took a no-confidence motion against his government for him to speak for less than three minutes on a state engulfed by lawlessness for three months. He was absent all throughout the debate prior to his speech. Other critics have pointed out that he has not made the customary statement in Lok Sabha after a State visit abroad. He has never engaged in a conversation with a fellow member during debates in parliament. It was only during his first year in office that he took part in the proceedings. His speeches have been mainly to reply to the Motion of Thanks to the President’s Address. Therefore, many call him a disengaged parliamentarian who avoids questions, in and out of Parliament. Our prime minister is no comparison to for instance the British prime minister, who answers all the questions the opposition bombards him/her with.
The inauguration of the new parliament house on May 28 was a Sunday. It is a clear disregard for the tiny Christian community. The new building represents India’s myriad diversity. A so-called multi-religious prayer service was on display at the inaugural function. However, Hindu ritualism took prominence over all else. A Sengol, symbol of divine right was installed. Sadhus flown from Tamil Nadu blessed the prime minister and the new national property. Notably the day was the birth anniversary of V.D. Savarkar, the Hindutva founder.
The prime minster who inaugurated the new parliament building did not instil confidence in the minorities. Government functions on Sundays are now normal. Recently it was informed that the authorities at the centre insisted that the convocation for ITI graduates should be held on a Sunday. The sentiments of the Christian minority does not matter for this government. The pride of the majority is all that counts. Instead of conveying to the country that the parliament is answerable to the public – a symbol of its ‘infallibility’ was proclaimed instead. Then instead of portraying the parliament as a modern institution where reason and science dominates, the inauguration regresses to the days of superstitions. On the day of unveiling the icon of India’s democracy it was actually marked by saffron symbolism. Both the Sengol and priests are from Tamil Nadu. The BJP likes to think that it would gain politically in the Southern state. But the voters there are smart to see through the attempts and will continue to keep the saffron party at bay. The prime minster himself, and not the President, inaugurating the new facility also conveys that he is the most important person in the country.
What about the government that the prime minister presides over? Before shifting to the new building members recalled that in the last seven years the parliament was on occasions undermined. Important bills were pushed through by the brute majority of the ruling party. From 2014 till date only one of ten bills were sent to the parliamentary committee for scrutiny. Nine of ten bills had zero or incomplete pre legislative consultation. One of the legislations passed was anti-federalism. The Opposition was overlooked. Not one of the notices from the Opposition was accepted. Important decisions like Demonetisation were taken without deference to the House. Opposition leaders regret the decline of democracy in its very ‘temple’. Leave politicians aside, the public witnessed how bills were pushed through without sufficient debate. The farm bills in September 2020 are a prime example. No wonder it had to be repealed a year later. Sensitive bills like the CAB/CAA and the abolition of article 370 were given urgent importance. These legislations have no major significance. The intention was to antagonise a particular community. In the new building we may see similar bills like renaming of India into Bharat and the ‘One country one election’ to benefit the prime minister’s party.
The prime minister has accomplished in gifting the nation a new parliament house. But given his records is he the most qualified prime minister to do so? Is he a larger than life personality? It looks like the eagerness to make the mighty dream a reality is to compensate for something that is lacking in him.
What about here in our state? The majestic new parliament house with modern facilities built to withstand earthquakes has been completed in record time, less than three years. Here the dome of the under construction Assembly house collapsed. We don’t know the present status. For nearly 25 years we have had no State Assembly building. We could be celebrating the silver jubilee of the decimation of the State Assembly soon.
The present State Assembly has been ‘Christianised’. Prelates and pastors were brought in to bless the new government and members on the first day in office. As a state we have lost the moral ground of criticising Modi and the BJP for saffronising the parliament.
The present composition is marked by conflict of interests. The NPP, the senior party is supported by the UDP and BJP in the legislative Assembly. The Congress is the ‘main’ opposition but it is a partner of the NPP in KHADC. The stark reality is that three of the five MLAs of the Congress are also MDCs. The UDP rules with the NPP in the state but in the KHADC it is the major opposition. One of UDP’s ministers in the state is also an MDC. These individuals must be super humans to be able to do justice to their roles.
The role of the opposition is taken by the VPP and the TMC. So far, important issues in the state have been brought by the above parties who have neither the Leader of the Opposition nor the Chief Whip. Is the Opposition in the Assembly and in the Council a sham? Are we the voters being conned?