I was hearing to a small part of a debate in Rajya Sabha over special status to Andhra Pradesh. The person speaking was Venkayya Nayudu and the person on the opposite side was Jairam Ramesh. In the meanwhile, there was a scroller at the bottom over something said by Ghulam Nabi Azad pertaining to this discussion. Now, let’s look at each of the three. Naidu, though he is from Andhra Pradesh, he is a Rajya Sabha MP from Rajasthan. Before, he was from Karnataka. Same goes for Jairam Ramesh - from Karnataka, currently MP from Karnataka, last time from Andhra. Ghulam Nabi Azad is slightly different - he was defeated from Udhampur, but is a Rajya Sabha MP. Let’s add Arun Jaitley to the list as well - Defeated from Amritsar, made a Rajya Sabha MP and Central Cabinet Minister.
All of them may be eminent and extremely capable. The question is this - two of them lost the elections and two chickened out from contesting. What right have they got to be ministers? Are there no people in the 543 elected who can perform the role of a minister? How correct is it to rub losers on our heads? The point is simple. If you lost Lok Sabha, you are not eligible for Rajya Sabha for the complete term of Lok Sabha. If you haven’t contested, you don’t have the right to be a Minister. And there should be no hopping between states for Rajya Sabha - once you are an MP from a state, you cannot shift to a different one. Also, there should be a limit to the number of times a politician can become a Rajya Sabha MP.
Next, let’s move towards the Parliamentary debate. The bill didn’t pass. It can also mean that Jairam Ramesh, as an MP from Andhra Pradesh is not capable enough to get the bill passed. Since he is elected by the Legislative Assembly of Andhra Pradesh, can the Assembly of Andhra Pradesh excercise it’s right to recall him from Rajya Sabha and replace him with someone else? Else, are we saying, once elected, we don’t have any option but to tolerate him till the end of his term, even if he is nominated? May be, the same thing can be extended to any nominated position - the right to recall a non-performer. It will surely open a can of worms where opposition nominateds can be forced to march back just because they are of a different party and what not, but this can be a start to make the composition more rational and responsible.
All of them may be eminent and extremely capable. The question is this - two of them lost the elections and two chickened out from contesting. What right have they got to be ministers? Are there no people in the 543 elected who can perform the role of a minister? How correct is it to rub losers on our heads? The point is simple. If you lost Lok Sabha, you are not eligible for Rajya Sabha for the complete term of Lok Sabha. If you haven’t contested, you don’t have the right to be a Minister. And there should be no hopping between states for Rajya Sabha - once you are an MP from a state, you cannot shift to a different one. Also, there should be a limit to the number of times a politician can become a Rajya Sabha MP.
Next, let’s move towards the Parliamentary debate. The bill didn’t pass. It can also mean that Jairam Ramesh, as an MP from Andhra Pradesh is not capable enough to get the bill passed. Since he is elected by the Legislative Assembly of Andhra Pradesh, can the Assembly of Andhra Pradesh excercise it’s right to recall him from Rajya Sabha and replace him with someone else? Else, are we saying, once elected, we don’t have any option but to tolerate him till the end of his term, even if he is nominated? May be, the same thing can be extended to any nominated position - the right to recall a non-performer. It will surely open a can of worms where opposition nominateds can be forced to march back just because they are of a different party and what not, but this can be a start to make the composition more rational and responsible.
No comments:
Post a Comment