Never before in the history of Independent India the
functioning of the both Houses of Parliament were completely washed off for
whole session like the recently concluded monsoon session. Earlier, in 2010 the
entire winter session was similarly put on hold by the Opposition on 2G
spectrum issue. A seasoned legislator and Democrat he is DMK President
Kalaignar has expressed his unhappiness over the blocking of the entire monsoon
session of Parliament and said a debate on the alleged loss relating to mining
coal would have brought out the truth.
The monsoon session has been completely unproductive, with
the BJP stalling Parliament over the coal allocation issue. This is
irresponsible and also undermines democratic principles. In a democracy,
Parliament is the forum for the Opposition to debate government policies, not
television studios, as it has been over the last one month. Statistics tell the
story. Lok Sabha was scheduled to meet for 120 hours and Rajya Sabha for 100
hours to transact business. However, MPs spent just one day in both Houses,
with some spending several hours in television studios. The result: only four
out of 34 Bills got Parliament’s sanction. Key economic legislation such as the
Companies Bill and the Banking Laws Amendment Bill has been in a limbo, making
it one of the worst sessions after the winter session of 2010 when Parliament
was disrupted over the 2G spectrum allocation issue.
Parliamentary disruptions are not unknown in a democracy.
These are usually a means to register protest on a measure being proposed by
the government. In India, disturbances within the chambers of Parliament have
also occurred on the basis of issues that are not under debate in either House
but pertain to a matter that is said to be agitating the wider public.
But these are typically of limited duration. In the United
States, in particular, “filibustering” is resorted to in the Senate when a
speaker who has the floor goes on endlessly in order to prevent voting on a
bill.
But in the just-ended Monsoon Session of Parliament,
obstruction was raised to the level of ideology by the BJP, the main Opposition
party, whose members would come to Parliament but create such a din as to make
it impossible to carry on any business.
This not only rendered impossible any legislative measure —
initiated by the government — but also violated the rights and privileges of
MPs of all other parties to represent their constituency in Parliament, the
highest forum of democracy in India. It is this which makes the Monsoon
Session, which ended its fruitless existence of four weeks on Sep.7, unique in
the annals of our parliamentary life.
The tactics of the BJP had little to do with anything
happening inside Parliament. It was related directly, instead, to its long-term
political agenda to force general elections prematurely. As such, it is a fair
expectation that the tactics will be continued in the Winter Session as well.
In a pained observation, Lok Sabha Speaker Meira Kumar noted that “some forms
of dissent” had left her “disturbed”.
Only four bills out of the 34 on the table could be passed
(naturally without any debate). Prime Minister Manmohan Singh appropriately
called the Opposition-engineered prolonged disruption of four long weeks a
“negation of democracy”.
What has come to be known as “Coalgate” is important for the
entire country, not just the BJP. It deserved to be debated threadbare in both
Houses so that people across the board are made familiar with the finer points
of the policy of coal block allotments and its implementation. But in cynical
pursuit of its political agenda, the lead Opposition party blocked any
possibility of discussion, depriving the country of the opportunity of a fair
and square articulation from all sides of the political spectrum. This is to be
deeply regretted.
Suspension of legislative business appears to have become
strategy, with political parties led by the BJP dodging informed and incisive
debates on policy matters. This is simply unacceptable. Prime Minister Manmohan
Singh, who steered the Coal Ministry during the allocations questioned by CAG,
said he was open to a debate. The BJP-led NDA should have agreed to this. All
other parties were willing to let Parliament function. It would have signalled
that the main Opposition is serious about holding the government to account.
However, the BJP ducked, raising suspicions that it, too, had something to
conceal. After all, coal blocks were allocated through a screening process even
during the NDA regime and many mineral-rich states, involved in the
allocations, are governed by the NDA.
Incidentally Kapil Sibal released letters to show BJP, CPM
governments opposed coal auction; by the
time these states came on board, 68 coal blocks were already allocated. He
released letters written by BJP chief ministers and other non-Congress CMs,
opposing introduction of competitive bidding in allotting coal blocks. Sibal
released letters of then BJP chief minister Vasundhara Raje of Rajasthan,
Shivraj Singh Chouhan of Madhya Pradesh and chief secretaries of BJP-ruled
Chhattisgarh and then CPM ruled West Bengal to argue that the states had a say
in the allocation of coal mines, while the blame was being put on the Centre.
The BJP-led Chhattisgarh and Rajasthan governments
themselves were among the strong opponents to a transparent process of
competitive bidding, and pitched for continuing the policy of allocation of
coal blocks. The BJP governments were against putting in place an efficient and
transparent method that would have dealt firmly with any kind of corruption in
the allocation process.
The Coal Ministry had in February 2005 written to various
governments seeking their views on competitive bidding. It was sought to be
introduced to replace the existing system of allocation of coal blocks for
captive use on a nomination basis.
In his argument against the competitive bidding process and
response to the then Secretary (Coal) P.C. Parakh, Chhattisgarh Chief Secretary
A.K. Vijayavargiya stated: “There is a substantial gap between the requirement
and the domestic availability of mined coal in the country. Coal is used
directly in sponge iron kiln/blast furnace, as also for captive power
generation by the iron/steel industry. The projections are that the gap between
the domestic demand and the supply will continue. Under such a scenario, the
proposed bidding process involving production sharing by successful bidders
with Coal India would result in substantial increase in the cost of essential input
(coal) to such iron/steel units who do not have access to captive coal blocks
allotted on nomination basis.”
The Chhattisgarh government expressed fear that the
suggested policy change was likely to shift the new steel/iron units from
poorer inland States to comparatively rich coastal States. The proposal, would,
therefore, be detrimental to the development/growth of iron/steel industry in
inland States like Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Madhya Pradesh. “The proposed
change aims at moving towards a free market scenario. An essential policy
ingredient for the success of the free market mechanism is creating a
level-playing field among various players. However, no mechanism has been
proposed to create a level-playing field among the existing iron/steel units having
access to already allotted captive coal blocks and those who will have to
source coal through the bidding process. The proposed change, therefore, is
expected to make pipeline/new projects unviable, resulting into slowing down of
the growth of domestic iron/steel industry for reasons of non-competitiveness
in sourcing the essential input — coal,” it said.
The then Rajasthan Chief Minister, Vasundhara Raje, in her
letter to the Prime Minister on April 11, 2005, said that although there were
no known coal deposits in Rajasthan, the proposed change for allotment of
lignite under the competitive bidding process would not be appropriate and
would be against the spirit of the Sarkaria Commission recommendations.
Ms. Raje argued that the proposed change would take away the
State’s prerogative in selection of the lessee. For, under the proposed system
the lessee would be chosen by the Centre through competitive bidding.
“The State government is evolving a policy to allot lignite
leases only to such parties which would be willing to establish lignite-based
power plants within the State for meeting power shortage of Rajasthan. The
proposed process could result in lignite being mined by the successful bidder
for use at locations outside the State. It is therefore requested that the
existing practice of allocating lignite mines be continued.”
BJP's argument that its chief ministers had finally agreed
to the auction policy is also not correct. By the time they came on board, 68
coal blocks were already allocated under the existing policy. The state
governments were persuaded only after the Centre said that the money from
auction of coal blocks would accrue to state governments.
The letter of West Bengal chief secretary said: “The present
system of allocation of coal block on the basis of recommendation of screening
committee takes care of both the subjective and objective aspects of the
projects for which coal block for captive mining is applied for… In the present
system, views of state governments are considered during allocation of coal
blocks to industries. There is no such provision in the proposed system of
allocation of coal block.” The Left Front held the same views as BJP
governments in other states.
Sibal singled out Arun Jaitley for his statement that there were
occasions when obstructions in Parliament bring greater benefit to the country.
Sibal said the statement was an affront to people and “one of the most
denigrating to parliamentary democracy made in the last 60 years,” which struck
at the very root of democracy. Sibal charged that the obstructions BJP caused
in Parliament in this session was on the “basis of lies.” “Let the nation come
first and the lust for power later,” he told Jaitley adding that ten years
back, when Congress was in the Opposition, the BJP leader had remarked that it
was totally unacceptable that “disturbances should become substitutes for
discussions.” Sibal, at the same time, said that the process of law will take
its own course if in any individual specific allotment, anybody had willfully
misinformed. He said 26 licenses have already been cancelled even before the
CAG report came or BJP launched
protests on the issue.
The Centre had no role to play in the execution of coal
block leases, he said. Rejecting the BJP’s demand for Prime Minister Dr.
Manmohan Singh’s resignation, Sibal said Dr. Singh could not make any coal
block allotment. Driving home his point, Sibal quoted from the April 11, 2005
letter written by the former Rajasthan Chief Minister Vasundhara Raje of the
BJP that said, “Under Section 5 (1) of the MMDR Act, 1957, the lease itself is
granted by the State Government … and the proposed change would take away the
State’s prerogative in selection of the lessee.” On allocation of a coal block
to Jindal Steel and Power Limited, he said the recommendation was made by
Orissa Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik. Sibal said that since 1993 as many as 212
coal blocks had been allocated and the Central Bureau of Investigation was
probing irregularities in the allotment of five or six of them. “Does it mean
the allotment of all 212 blocks should be cancelled?” Sibal questioned the
calculation of financial loss, incurred in coal blocks allocation, in the
report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General. He said the allocation was made
only for power, steel and cement industries and was meant only for captive
consumption. Electricity generated by the power plants was supplied to the
State electricity boards and the tariff was controlled and regulated by the
regulatory commissions. “Profit, if any, is on account of the power tariff, and
not on coal.
Any repeat of such tactics is likely to create among the
people not just wholesale disdain for all politicians and their politics, but
also for the art of politics and the country’s democratic institutions. The
contagion can then spread to state Assemblies and to representative forums
lower down.
No comments:
Post a Comment