The Winter Session of Parliament opens today, signifying introduction of several bills for passage, including one that would allow private sector participation in nuclear energy pursuits and another that aims to promote autonomy for universities and other higher education institutions. Given the comfortable majority for the ruling NDA in Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha, the government may have its way in respect of all the 14 bills. At the outset, however, the opposition has raised its protest over what it termed as attempts by the Modi government to “derail” parliament. Their principal concern was over the curtailment of the session’s duration to 19 days; meaning discussions can take place for only 15 days, or less, as holidays and other constraints emerge. This would be the “shortest-ever” winter session of Parliament.
While the duration of the sessions is being reduced, as was evident in previous sittings too, a problem with parliamentary functioning in recent years is of a sharp decline in the quantity and quality of discussions. The political process itself has seen a qualitative degradation in recent decades, with the number of eminent personalities having a wealth of ideas progressively reducing. As a result, the discussions are marked more by disruptions and mutual recriminations, while the subjects that deserve threadbare analysis are sidestepped. Bills are passed in a hurry without lively discussions. That two-thirds of the LS members are ‘graduates’ means little. Even the upper house, where eminent non-political personalities can be brought in through nomination and via assembly route, now has fewer numbers of the elite breed. All these undercut the quality of discussions. While the Congress party had over the years shown a Nehruvian penchant to accommodate the best brains in the nation-building process, the saffronisation of the polity worked in reverse mode. A narrow mindset is all too pronounced. The quality of those at the top percolates down to the lowest level in any establishment. Democracy should not degenerate to a level where the cream of the society has no voice in the affairs of the nation. Loudmouths in Parliament need not necessarily grasp the intricacies of vexed issues. There today are lesser numbers of parliamentarians who can effectively communicate to the outside world. This speaks poorly of Indian society.
When the duration of parliament sessions is curtailed, it’s natural for the opposition to sense danger. Notably, the opposition ranks themselves have lesser numbers of outstanding parliamentarians. The voice of the Left that once boasted of stalwarts in its ranks is reduced to a whimper. All these reflect in the level of debates. The government easily gets away with its act. In order for democracy to survive odds and remain as the best governance mechanism, the political process must undergo tectonic shifts. In national interest, the best brains from various sectors must be drawn in. Passage of legislation in assemblies and parliament must be serious business. The shouting brigade, or resort to verbal jugglery, is no guarantee to upholding the reputation of a dignified house. In the minimum, issues must be discussed threadbare before bills are passed.
