Opinion - News Analysis   

“Celebrity MPs” in Parliament: do they matter?

The Hindu has done a singular service to its readers by reporting the findings of the National Social Watch Coalition on the “abysmally poor” performance of so-called “celebrities” in Parliament. The list of MPs covered in the report includes non-elected nominated Members, including myself, and some details about the number of questions asked, attendance, and participation in debates (April 12, 2009).

My purpose in writing this piece is not to defend or praise the contribution of so-called celebrities in Parliament, such as it is. It is to highlight some developments in the working of our parliamentary system, which raise a broader question about the role of individual MPs, whether elected or nominated, in influencing public policy, legislation, and accountability of ministers for actions taken (or not taken). Based on my personal experience, let me briefly make some observations about the shrinking role of individual MPs in Parliament, irrespective of their affiliation, professional qualifications and experience.

Thousands of written questions are no doubt asked by diligent members during each session of parliament. A handful of them are "starred" on which members can ask supplementary questions during question hour. There is usually sufficient time for only 4 or 5 such questions out of, say, 200 - 300 questions that may have been admitted. To ask a question is easy — all that MPs need is an efficient assistant, who can convert grievances of constituents into parliamentary questions. It is, however, more significant that ministerial replies are normally evasive. If there is any deficiency, say, in respect of employment guarantee or public distribution system, then the responsibility is invariably claimed to be that of States or another ministry or agency. Lots of statistics may be attached, but all of these are generally available in printed reports.

Attendance is certainly important. At the same time, it has to be recognised that except for some perfunctory discussion of important issues and approval of government bills, normally nothing much happens during sittings. I have been witness to approval of several important bills by parliament during noisy disruptions without voting or even minimum discussion. On some occasions, as many as four or five legislative bills were adopted with voice votes within a period of 10 minutes at the end of the day in the midst of disruption. No wonder that, except during question hours and disruptions (when members have to be present in response to whips), party benches, including ministerial benches, are virtually empty.

Nominated members in Rajya Sabha and independent members in both Houses suffer from a disadvantage in terms of numbers. The time allotted to different parties and nominated members is decided in terms of their number as a percentage of the total membership of the House. Nominated members who constitute 4 percent of the total members of Rajya Sabha are entitled to a maximum of only 4 percent of time allotted for debate on any subject. What is even more significant is that their turn comes after all major parties have spoken and the House is virtually empty.

There are four primary reasons for the shrinking role of parliament, particularly individual MPs, in recent years. First, the accountability of ministers to parliament has been considerably eroded. We now have coalitions in power with a large number of parties of different sizes. Leaders of different parties can continue in cabinet without any individual or collective responsibility to parliament or, for that matter, Prime Minister.

Second, in view of anti-defection law, individual members of a party are completely subservient to their party leaders. Interestingly, this law does not apply to small parties which join a government. Thus, there is a built-in incentive for any leader to set up a separate party with even 4 or 5 members. If he or she is the leader of a small party, that person would command a huge premium and would be sought after by dominant parties. Third, the rules of business in parliament can be ignored with impunity without any adverse consequences. Fourth, the overwhelming primacy is given to whatever government wants to be done by parliament, including passage of bills with or without discussion.

Can something be done to correct the diminishing role of parliament during an era of multi-party coalitions? In view of limitations of space, let me briefly mention some suggestions for political reforms. These have been dealt with at greater length elsewhere. (India’s Politics: A View from the Back bench, Penguin 2008). An immediate priority is to make anti-defection law applicable to all parties which join a government rather than only to members individually. Similarly, changes in business procedures of parliament are required to improve the speaking order and minimum time allotted to individual members who wish to participate in debates. Under no circumstances should a legislative bill be passed without discussion and actual voting. Another priority area for reform is the internal democratization of political parties.

Let me end with a quote from a note handed over to me by a Member of Parliament who was a distinguished member of a political party:

“You made an excellent speech and a lot of us totally agree with you. The Anti-Defection Amendment has curbed the consciences of MPs. We have to follow party whips even if we do not agree as in this case of the Offices of Profit Bill. Congratulations.”

I am, of course, grateful for the above generous remarks. However, it is equally disheartening to note that even if that member were a great “celebrity” and a recognised genius, she would not have been able to express her views.

It would benefit citizens, if in addition to counting questions and attendance of members in parliament, public-spirited organisations and media were to highlight the urgent need for political reforms to make the working of India’s democratic institutions less oligarchic and more people-oriented.

(The writer is a nominated member of the Rajya Sabha and former RBI Governor.)

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

Stories in this Section

Honouring the code in the breach
Big setback to Thailand
Bringing justice to torture enablers
A campaign where hate is integral
Why the rich cannot join our recession
Would you be prepared to slow down?
“Celebrity MPs” in Parliament: do they matter?
Corrections and clarifications
War of words
Kandahar issue
Poisoning minds
Condemnable

Copyright © 2009, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu