Who is to blame for wasting Assembly time?

Change in locale fails to usher in constructive mindset as acrimonious exchanges at the drop of a hat were witnessed during the brief session

If anyone thought that the shifting of the Andhra Pradesh Assembly from a quaint heritage Nizam-era building in Hyderabad to an ultra modern vaastu-compliant complex on the banks of the Krishna in new Amaravati would usher in a constructive mindset , he or she is widely off the mark.

The starkly shortened budget session of 14 working days had the familiar images of the old town hall building day in and day out — acrimonious exchanges at the drop of a hat — quite often bordering on political and personal lines, and surely not over a poorly drafted bill or an inadequate budgetary allocation to a key sector. Not much of question hour, virtually no short notice discussion and no debates under Rule 344 on matters of urgent public importance.

Increasing intolerance

Another typical image: Placard-wielding slogan shouting Opposition members rushing to the podium of the Speaker more frequently than holding their ground to question the government. Who is to be blamed? Is it indicative of increasing intolerance of the government having a streamrolling majority or the impatience of a truncated Opposition?

A streak of intolerance was indeed on display with Chief Minister N. Chandrababu Naidu and Legislative Affairs Minister Yanamala Ramakrishnudu, more than once, talking of taming the Opposition by “drawing a red line crossing of which would lead to automatic suspension”.

The tone and tenor is quite threatening for those who have faith in democracy. Discipline does not come from red lines, but the ability and patience to hear out the Opposition’s counter point that could bring about qualitative improvement in governance and correct flaws in policies. Then, what would one make of the threat of extending the suspension of a woman MLA by another year, or of a Minister addressing the Leader of the Opposition in first person?

The Opposition has often charged the Chair with not giving enough time which is reflected in the way Leader of the Opposition Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy desperately sought 20 minutes to explain his point in the AgriGold issue and never got it. It is another matter that he led a walk-out without announcing the same. On the other hand, the Government says the Opposition wastes valuable time of the House by frequently storming into the well of the House. Who is right?

Look at the data put out by Speaker Kodela Sivaprasada Rao at the end of the budget session: Telugu Desam (102 members) got 42 hours while the 66-member (on paper as 20 of them have crossed over to the TDP) Opposition YSRCP, 12 hours. Similarly the Leader of the House took 8 hours and 19 minutes and the Leader of the Opposition, three hours 46 minutes, a shade better than the government’s friendly party, BJP which took three hours and 13 minutes. No need for any interpretation, the duration speaks for itself. On its part, the Opposition should realise that the best way to pin down the government is not by climbing on to the podium and stalling the proceedings, but allow the debate to take place. A government is exposed through persistent questioning. The best example was the debate on the alleged leakage of the tenth class question paper. The mighty government was almost on the defence trying to defend a corporate institution forcing the Chief Minister to intervene. That’s because Mr. Jagan could raise some inconvenient questions. It is a different matter that the debate soon got degenerated into a sort of back-to-school programme with none other than Mr. Naidu and Mr. Jagan furiously challenging each other’s academic report cards, not much of relevance to the people.

When it comes to sticking to time tested rules and conventions, there have been quite a few violations. Committees were appointed arbitrarily while a wrong precedent was set by allowing presentation of a video of an event that happened outside the precincts of the Assembly.

Is there a way out? Yes though it is loaded with ifs and buts — if the Government and the Opposition play their respective roles assigned to them in a democracy scrupulously avoiding the temptation to cross swords. The former should be transparent and responsive and the latter should keep holding it accountable on every count.