The doublespeak on disruptions in Parliament
Political opinion in this country seems to be fluctuating like the erratic monsoons. In 2013, ‘not allowing Parliament to function was also a form of democracy, like any other form’ for the BJP while it was in opposition.
By
| 23 Aug, 2015, 06:31AM IST
Political
opinion in this country seems to be fluctuating like the erratic
monsoons. In 2013, ‘not allowing Parliament to function was also a form
of democracy, like any other form’ for the BJP while it was in
opposition. In fact obstruction was justified as bringing greater
benefits to the country and the opposition agreeing for a debate on
issues in Parliament was then viewed as giving the government an escape
route. Hardly a year later, disruption of Parliament for the same BJP
now in government, has become frustrating and the opposition not willing
to allow debate being construed as ‘a weak opposition which is running
away from discussion’. What is even more distressing is what seems to be
a politician-corporate nexus that is attempting to bully the opposition
into silence and submission to the government. It is a pity that
political opinion makers are behaving more like ‘weather cocks’ and
political news has become more of gossip, marketing and speculation.
With
symptoms of a fascist mind set being increasingly manifested in
governance there is an attempt to discourage criticism and protest by
ridiculing it as either obstructionist or anti-national and sometimes
even anti-Hindu. Almost suddenly, the disruption of Parliament is being
demonised as an economic loss to the public with provocative arguments
such as per minute loss being Rs 29,000 which would amount to a loss of
Rs 35 crore for 18 days and so on.
Disruption
of Parliament is now seen as depriving the poor and marginalised of
economic opportunities. Since when have politicians and corporates
become so conscious about the welfare of the poor and marginalised in
this country? This also brings us to the question as to whether the loss
from disruption of Parliament is the only loss suffered from
disruptions by the tax payer of this nation.
While
those with vested political and economic interests may shed crocodile
tears over losses due to the wash out of the Parliamentary session,
there are far greater economic losses suffered from various forms of
disruption caused due to skewed development policies, administrative
negligence and corporate greed. The government should talk about the
huge financial losses incurred from frequent power outages, water
shortage, unending traffic jams, pot-holed roads, disrupted air and rail
services, breakdown in communication systems, the costs of medical
treatment of illnesses arising from pollution and vector-borne diseases,
environmental degradation, suicides of farmers due to crop failures,
communal riots, displacement of people to make way for infrastructure
and industrial development, sub-standard construction work, huge loan
waivers and tax holidays to industry, non-recovery of dues by the State
from industry, tax evasions and one could go on endlessly with the list.
Would these financial losses not far surpass the losses from disruption
of Parliament? And why should these huge losses to the nation also not
figure in political debates before demonising and isolating the
opposition for causing loss by obstructing Parliament?
With
what looks like an aggressive, abusive and arrogant government in
contrast to a weak and shaky opposition in terms of numbers, the
citizens cannot afford to fall prey to a ‘penny wise and pound foolish’
mentality if democracy is to survive. For those who understand the
struggles of being in the opposition in government, more so when faced
with a dictatorial regime, disruption or obstruction of business is
often the only recourse if the interests of the voiceless masses are to
be heard. Mere hindrance to economic policies seen in isolation from
larger equally important social policies cannot become justifiable
grounds for condemning the opposition. So also, if Congress has no moral
right to pull up the government on corruption, then the BJP too has no
right to criticise the Congress for disruption of Parliament.
In
what looks more like a premeditated and selective attack by the
government and its ideological parivar against certain opposition
leaders in this country, the nation needs to be extremely cautious about
what could be a well-designed plan of the fascist-corporate forces for
an ‘opposition mukth Bharat’. With a weak opposition in Parliament it
becomes the responsibility of civil society to fill in the gap and
defend the opposition parties till such time as may be required. While
citizens vote for a stable government, they also have a duty to ensure
that a stable and vibrant opposition is in place for a healthy
democracy. If this sense does not prevail, then the signs of the rise of
a Supreme Dictator appear to be written large on the political horizon
of this country.
http://www.heraldgoa.in/Review/Voice-Of-Opinion/The-doublespeak-on-disruptions-in-Parliament/92698.html
No comments:
Post a Comment