Parliament’s met only 32 times so far this year

20th Oct. 2008 Times of India

Bhaskar Roy TNN

New Delhi: The telltale signs of parliament’s decline have been visible for a while—now they stare you in the face. Parliament has met for just 32 days this year, the lowest number in its history. This is shocking considering that in 1956, the Lok Sabha met for a record 151 days. As the years have passed, and issues have become more complicated, our legislators appear to be taking less and less interest in parliament.
Even if parliament sits for a couple of more weeks in the last two months of the year, 2008 will go down in history as the year that saw the shortest duration of business. This, at a time when issues have become both economically and politically graver, and the need for MPs to put their minds together and evolve a national consensus is being felt by all.
In the early years, parliament—as statistics show—functioned far more robustly. From 1952, the year the Lok Sabha was constituted, parliament met for more than 100 days every year. In 1953 and 1954, it met for 137 days each. The real decline began in 1999 when the Lok Sabha had only 51 sittings. And the trend has persisted.
Bypassing the legislature was a disease that afflicted the state assemblies first. Haryana, Goa and some of the north-eastern states were notorious for skirting the assembly. In presiding officers’ conferences, the issue has come up again and again. Now the virus seems to have struck parliament. This has happened despite a political consensus that parliament should meet for a minimum of 100 days in a year.Given the current trend, this won’t be achieved this year. Experts are also worried for other reasons. They believe that the alarm bell should be pressed for the largescale “infiltration’’ of criminal elements into parliament.
Constitutional expert Subhash Kashyap says that the decline of the Lok Sabhahas happened not just because of the fewer number of days it has met to transact business and legislate, but also because of the changing composition of the House. He points out that 125 MPs in the present Lok Sabha—that is almost one in five—have c riminal backgrounds. Times View: It appears to be quite clear now that parliament will at best function for around 50 days in calendar 2008. That is, by any yardstick, a shockingly low figure. The exchequer is estimated to spend about Rs 440 crore on parliament in the current financial year. That is taxpayer money being spent on the assumption that MPs will do their job, which is to legislate and debate the important issues of the day. If the government decides to skip or truncate sessions because it would rather not face parliament, it is effectively pouring this huge sum down the drain. That is simply not acceptable. The quality of many laws is poor, and many of them are obsolete. Parliament must take up these issues. A minimum of 130 days per year has been suggested in the past as a norm. It’s a norm that must be enforced.

Analysis:

This is something shocking for a democratic country like India. Parliament which is the supreme legislative body of a country is behaving in this particular fashion. This year the parliament had only 32 sittings which is around 3 times less than the regular sessions. After Independence, parliament usually met for more than 100 days or more every year. However the real decline started from 1999 onwards. Expert on parliamentary affairs belief that, this is not just because of less session but because the very composition of the parliament. Where one out of five has a criminal record and a different mindset. Lagging both accountability and responsibility towards the citizen. This is an example of using resources of public to serve self-interests rather than interests of the people.

Our MPs are taking less interest in parliament and its functioning. Years have passed, and issues have become more complicated, This Phenomenon was first seen in the some of the State assemblies of Haryana, Goa and some of the north-eastern states. The decline has also affected the laws which are passed which are obsolete and old fashioned. There is both wastage of huge amount of money and time. In presiding officers’ conferences, the issue has been raised again and again. However all went to vain. Now the time is to do something and to wipe out this virus which has struck out parliament. What is important here is to think about the policy alternatives which will make these representatives responsible and accountable. The policy alternative should be such that it would penalize these representatives. Moreover media should take up this issue and conduct a public discussion.