Reforms are a marathon, not a sprint in India. A simple majority in the Lok Sabha (Lower House of the Parliament) is not enough to push the Government's agenda on economic reforms. With BJP having fewer numbers, the Upper House (Rajya Sabha) has become an important battlefield for the Opposition to counter the incumbent Government's agenda.
The Tory Government has a majority in the House of Commons, but is in minority in the House of Lords. Both Prime Ministers Narendra Modi and David Cameron are sailing in the same boat. Their hands are tied, despite an unprecedented election victory to boast of in their respective countries.
The Upper Houses are stifling both Modi and Cameron's economic agenda.
Now, Cameron is secretly planning to bypass the Lords to push his legislative plans. He will use the recent bust-up with the Lords on tax credit reform as a chance to make the Lords ineffective. Tories propose to take off Lords' veto over delegated or secondary legislation, such as the measure implementing tax credit cuts. Once that power is taken away, the Conservative Government can make increasing use of delegated legislation to push contentious measures through the Upper House.
Tories have just 251 seats out of a total 822 in the House of Lords. Labour and Liberal Democrats combined have 324. (The rest are clergy).
Britain does not have a written Constitution. And so there are opportunities to change the principles of governance within the spirit of Magna Carta. Britain is a living democracy. It is not a set of rules as in a written Constitution. There have been many precedents for the Parliament to evolve to the present level.
Similarly, BJP has just 45 members in Rajya Sabha out of a total 243, while the Congress has 69 and adding numbers of other parties that tally of the non-BJP parties comes to 122.
Reforms are the need of the hour for India, especially when India's economy is in a better shape compared to May 2014 when the Modi Government came to power. The GDP is up, inflation is down, spending is up and rupee is stable. India needs greater success which can only come from well thought-out policies. When it comes to development, Modi is the answer. He has become the byword for development over the years. But he and his Government is shackled by the obdurate Rajya Sabha. Just because BJP had troubled the previous UPA Government on some genuine issues in Parliament, the Congress need not adopt the same policy and pay back in the same coin, just for the sake of it. The Opposition should look at the intention of the incumbent Government. In the logjam, objectivity should not be at stake. Otherwise, the country stands to lose. I can only say the Opposition should behave more responsibly, because two wrongs don't make a right.
By the way, Modi is not going the Cameron way to sort things out. He cannot. The powers of Upper House will remain intact. In fact, Modi has adopted a more accommodative and mature approach, perhaps swallowing his pride. He recently invited his predecessor Dr Manmohan Singh and Congress party President Sonia Gandhi at his official residence for a tea. Tea, of course, was an excuse, needless to say. Modi's whole idea was to reach out to them as the largest Opposition (44 in 543) in the Parliament in a bid to ensure smooth functioning of the House during the winter session. The discussion covered various issues pending before the Parliament, especially the Goods and Sales Tax Bill which has been stuck in the Upper House for quite some time. As I said earlier, the BJP-led NDA Government lacks numbers in the Rajya Sabha to ensure its passage.
Modi's intentions are clear. “Sabka Sath Sabka Vikas.” Ultimately, the whole idea of reforms is to transform the society, especially empowering the poor and giving a better life for people. Certainly, they are not for making good headlines in media.
Modi, too, could have bypassed the Upper House through ordinances, but then that joy is often temporary. He knows such ordinances would come to haunt him again in the next session of the House as the law requires passage of the related bills within six weeks of the start of the session. I think what Modi did was right. Reaching out to the Congress leadership was a smart move. Whether it will bear fruit or not, only time will tell, but it will certainly increase his stature in the public eye.
India should take a cue from the founding fathers of our Constitution. Drafting of India's Constitution was an Olympian task. The Constituent Assembly, which drafted it, met for the first time on December 9, 1946. The debates within the Assembly were reported in newspapers, and there were debates and critiques, in turn, within the press. Besides, views were invited from the general public as well as various minorities and linguistic groups. So important issues concerning justice and rights of various sections of society found a voice in the debates of the Constituent Assembly.
But despite the bumpy ride, they arrived at a consensus and drafted a world class Constitution – a written document full of vision and intricate in its detailing. The Constitution, which made India a sovereign, democratic republic, was adopted on November 26, 1949, and it came into effect on January 26, 1950, which is celebrated as Republic Day.
Indian Constitution is the world's longest and largest written Constitution. The advantage is – it is a mix of British, American, French and other Constitutions.
Let us look back how the Constituent Assembly was formed. India gained Independence on 15th August, 1947. For Winston Churchill, an independent India was unthinkable. For him, India was the jewel in the crown. Although the victory of Allied forces in World War II was brave and admirable, it had exhausted and drained the resources of the British Government. Remember, Indian armed forces had a significant contribution in that victory, with some 4.2 million personnel fighting for the Allies. This was in the mind of Britain. So it was impossible for Britain to keep India as its colony. India had to be given independence.
Prime Minister Clement Attlee was more open to India's struggle for Independence and decided to make India free. Viceroy Lord Wavell could not reconcile to the opposing views of Mahatma Gandhi and Mohammed Ali Jinnah. Both Gandhi and Jinnah were Gujaratis from Kathiawad. Gandhi was born in Porbander, 17 miles away from Paneli where Jinnah was born. Both were lawyers and worked closely in Congress till almost 1930, created two countries on totally opposite principles. The creation of Pakistan based on religion was an anathema to Gandhi, who at one stage was willing to offer Jinnah prime ministership of independent India. However, Pandit Nehru and Sardar Patel opposed this suggestion.
Lord Mountbatten was sent to India in 1947. His primary remit was to give India Independence, because the earlier proposal of Home Rule was rejected. Somewhere in Feb-March 1947, Lord Mountbatten recommended the India office and the British Government that Partition was the only option and the Indian Independence Act was passed in March 1947. In less than six months, India became free. The deliberations of Constituent Assembly were overwhelmed by pain and bloodshed of Partition, that butchery of millions during Partition, once recorded as the largest migration. Over and above, the Indian Government laying down ground rules for a democratic form of Government with umpteen problems and the worst was the assassination of Gandhi within a few months of India's Independence. India became free on August 15, 1947, and Gandhiji was assassinated on January 30, 1948.
When the Constitution was formulated finally, there were discussions, and I have read enough about hope and desire, that along the passage, amendment and alterations would keep the spirit of Constitution. That's why amendement procedure was enshrined so carefully in the Indian Constitution.
Unfortunately, what was supposed to be a strategy for self evolvement as well as self correction, could not happen. Our great experts of Constitution did not realise the binding force of caste and the contradiction of the Indian society. In a way every independent person would accept that the present situation of the Indian Constitution must revisit the provisions of Reservation – Quota, Article 370, Centre-State relationship and other several issues to unleash the power of the 1.25 billion Indians who are eager to compete with the best in the world.
India has every reason to be proud of its Constitution and the people who brought it to life. The present-day Indian Parliament should take a leaf out of this chapter of Indian history and conduct itself in a more mature manner. The participants of the Constituent Assembly often disagreed vehemently on the very basic principles, yet they worked together towards accommodation and consensus and never came in the way of the future of India.
But the present situation in Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha makes one wonder whether in the forseeable future, sanity will prevail or not. Up until last Friday (4th December), the Congress and other Opposition parties were lambasting Modi Government for lack of give and take with Pakistan and were demanding overtures to enter into a dialogue with Islamabad. When on Sunday night the news was leaked about National Security Adviser-level meeting between India and Pakistan (See Comments – Page 3), Anand Sharma, a senior Congress parliamentarian, demanded on Monday that the House should have been informed about the background of this development and Prime Minister must explain about the 'secret' India-Pak NSA meeting in Bangkok. Strange as it may sound, in the modern world, such dialogue are conducted in a sensible manner, away from the public gaze. Similarly, the Congress leadership was playing ball with the Modi Government on Goods and Sales Tax Bill.
On Tuesday (8th December), the Delhi High Court asked Congress President Sonia Gandhi and her son Rahul Gandhi to appear personally before it on December 19 in the 'National Herald' cheating and misappropriation case. What was the reaction? The Congress Parliamentary Board decided to oppose it tooth and nail within and outside the Parliament.
How can you conduct the affairs of the state when Parliamentarians cannot discuss calmly and cooly the issues facing the country?
Let me give you one more example. V K Singh, the former Army General and now a minister in the Modi Government, made a statement not to the liking of Congress. The leader of the Congress in the Lok Sabha vowed to disrupt the House until V K Singh resigns. Proper rules are needed to contain such series of sad developments and the only instrument available, in the final analysis, is the Constitution of India.
Cameron is a fortunate person. He can take necessary steps and make suitable changes in Parliament. In that respect, Modi is not lucky enough and that is sad.
CB
