Editorial: Parliament needs more decency, not spectacle
The opposition should be asked to answer what the country has benefited from the no-confidence motion against Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla.
Parliament needs more decency, not spectacle Editorial: The entire opposition, including the Congress, should be asked to answer what the country has benefited from the no-confidence motion against Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla. The motion was debated in the House for more than 13 hours. During the entire debate, the opposition and the ruling parties repeated the same allegations and charges that had been being leveled by representatives of different parties in the noisy atmosphere of the media, especially TV channels, for a month. Less arguments, more harsh language was heard. It is not a bad thing for leaders to have the desire to grab headlines. But to grab headlines, one needs to do homework. It was unfortunate that, barring All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen leader Asaduddin Owaisi, not a single speaker made any significant remarks that would enhance the parliamentary record. Instead of allowing the debate to focus on criticising Speaker Om Birla's conduct, the ruling party diverted it to the parliamentary conduct of Opposition leader Rahul Gandhi. Therefore, Priyanka Gandhi and other Congress speakers had to focus less on criticising Birla and more on defending Rahul's parliamentary record. The no-confidence motion was bound to fail due to the clear majority of the ruling party; no one was under any illusion about that. But by not voting on it, the opposition did not enhance its prestige, but only created the impression of being a sloppy player. This same behavior was also seen during Om Birla's return to the Speaker's chair on Thursday. Such a strategy cannot be considered as elevating the stature of the opposition in the eyes of the countrymen.
This is not the first time that the opposition has targeted the Speaker of the Lok Sabha or the Presiding Officer of any other House for no-confidence motion. Before Om Birla, no-confidence motions were moved against three Speakers in the Lok Sabha - G.V. Mavalankar, Sardar Hukam Singh and Chaudhary Balram Jakhar in 1954, 1966 and 1987 respectively. All three failed. After them, no such trouble arose in the House for almost four decades. The current opposition parties claim that Om Birla's alleged 'direct bias' forced them to bring the no-confidence motion. They have now used this weapon. After its failure, the stance of these parties should not remain confrontational. The same should be done to the ruling party as well. It should also show a generous approach instead of being belligerent.
Birla, citing his parliamentary record, has promised to erase the bitterness and provide an opportunity for all parties to say their views in a dignified manner. While this promise needs to be implemented with sincerity, on the other hand, it is also the duty of the opposition parties to take their responsibility of holding the government accountable more seriously and also pay close attention to the observance of parliamentary rules. The daily functioning of Parliament costs an average of Rs 6 to 9 crore. This expenditure should prove to be reasonable. Issues that prove government negligence or incompetence (such as shortage of cooking gas cylinders and profiteering) keep emerging every day. Bringing these effectively to the attention of the countrymen through the parliamentary platform can prove to be a better way to influence the voters. Parliament needs manners, not spectacle.