Opinion - Interviews   

Democratic debate and discussion conspicuous by absence: Somnath

— Photo: Shanker Chakravarty

Somnath Chatterjee… “I never considered it my duty to save the government of the day.”

On Wednesday, June 4, Somnath Chatterjee completes four years as Speaker of the Lok Sabha. His tenure so far has been marked by many firsts. He was the first leader from a Communist party to occupy the chair in the House of the People. His term will also be remembered for several measures he initiated to improve transparency in the working of Parliament, including the telecast of Lok Sabha proceedings over Lok Sabha TV. The effort to strengthen the implementation of recommendations of the parliamentary standing committees by stipulating that the Minister concerned should make a statement on the matter in the House once every six months, was another first. Other initiatives included certain administrative reforms in the Lok Sabha Secretariat and the setting up of a Parliament Museum. He introduced lectures by experts in different fields to impart greater understanding on specific topics among MPs. In an exclusive interview on the eve of the fourth anniversary, Somnath Chatterjee looks back at the period he has spent in office, and looks to the future. Excerpts.

Four years ago, I was overwhelmed when veteran leader Harkishan Singh Surjeet told me about a suggestion from the UPA leadership that I should become the Speaker. I was even more humbled when I came to know all the parties had joined together and submitted 18 nominations for me. As I found out later, such a thing had never happened earlier. There have been uncontested elections to the Speaker’s position, but never had all parties joined together to file nominations for one candidate.

When I took over, I had pleaded with the members to conduct themselves in [such] a manner that they are not ridiculed. But I cannot say that I have got job satisfaction. I have no issue other than running Parliament. I have never considered it my duty to somehow or the other save the government of the day. I had made it clear to the treasury benches that it is not my job to make efforts to keep them in power. But, if you look at the track record over the past few years, it is clear that disturbance and unruly behaviour have become the order of the day. The element of democratic debate and discussion is conspicuous mainly by absence.

I have talked to members and the response of some has indeed surprised me. According to them, it pays to create disturbance. They say that a matter’s importance is when it is big enough to stop the functioning of Parliament. In other words, you come up with a studied presentation or a valuable intervention following strict parliamentary traditions, it is hardly noticed; but you create disturbance and you are all over the front pages and the television channels.

I think there has to be some introspection. Let me recount an experience from the last session. I had allowed the debate on price rise with the firm conviction that the people of the country would be interested in it. In fact, the people are entitled to know what the government is doing to tackle this issue. Food and Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar and Finance Minister P. Chidambaram responded to the debate, and in some detail. But the debate or its response hardly found any place in the media. I think it is time that the media gave some serious thought to this.

That is true. I have always been in the Opposition. In fact, in the very first or second session chaired by me, I even allowed an adjournment motion, which was something extraordinary.

The perception that my party has about Parliament is that it is an excellent forum to articulate people’s issues and problems. We utilised it not as a means to come to power. The party has kept to its fundamental job, of highlighting serious issues of the people through parliamentary democracy, with all its systems, methods, strengths and weaknesses. I was the leader of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) in Parliament for 19 years and all those years we followed this fundamental principle.

As I recounted when I was awarded the Best Parliamentarian award, my party never gave me a brief or a mandate to wreck the institution from within. Some observers have described me as a symbol of the CPI(M)’s contribution to Indian parliamentary democracy. Having said that, I should also add that I have not stepped into my party office [during the period I have been the Speaker] for any function other than laying wreaths on the bodies of a couple of senior comrades who passed away.

I have responded to queries on this in the past, too. My only point is that nobody should assume the role of infallibility. You respect each other and allow each institution to carry out its task. There is no institution in the country that can claim to represent all the virtues. Similarly, there is no institution that is a den of vices. All institutions, including the judiciary and the media, have benefited from the wisdom of the people, as was the case in 1977, after the Emergency. And this, the wisdom of the people, is one aspect of our society that sustains my belief in our democratic system and helps me remain an optimist.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

BJP’s new sense of purpose
A crucial referendum
Kashmir: the war for hearts and minds
Five questions on the Tibetan issue
It is premature to declare strategic defeat of Al-Qaeda
Corrections and clarifications
Fitting lesson
Unfortunate
IPL cricket
Democratic debate and discussion conspicuous by absence: Somnath

Copyright © 2008, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu