SAD still greedy for power, Harsimrat’s statement aims to please PM: Jakhar

Sunil Jakhar

Punjab Pradesh Congress Committee President Sunil Jakhar said that after the “political drama” of Akali Dal leader Harsimrat Kaur Badal

Chandigarh: Punjab Pradesh Congress Committee President Sunil Jakhar said that after the “political drama” of Akali Dal leader Harsimrat Kaur Badal’s resignation from the Union Ministry, once again statements were being made to please the Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Commenting on a statement made by Harsimrat Kaur Badal to a TV channel after her resignation in which she said that she herself was not calling these laws anti-farmer but farmers were calling these laws anti-farmer, Jakhar said that all these facts were proof in itself that the SAD leaders were still being hedged with power. The support given by the Akali Dal to the Modi government was still showing its greed for power, he added.

Sunil Jakhar

Jakhar said that the Akali leaders had to face the wrath of the farmers for supporting the “black-laws” and now after resigning they have to face the wrath of PM Modi. Mrs Badal was making such statements to appease the Prime Minister so that the partnership of the Akali Dal in power remained, he said.

State congress chief said that Sukhbir Singh Badal was now calling these laws as anti-farmer whereas Harsimrat Kaur Badal did not consider these laws as anti-farmer and wanted to get the patronage of the Prime Minister. They are trying unsuccessfully to confuse both the farmers and the Modi government, Jakhar said.

Harsimrat Kaur Badal“By saying that she was not calling these laws as anti-farmer but farmers were feeling such, Mrs Badal was insulting the farmers. The farmers were not fools who were protesting against their “death-warrants” even though the Akali leader had resigned only for political gain and not for the benefit of the farmers, he added.

Jakhar said that Harsimrat Kaur Badal was a member of the Cabinet which passed the three ordinances to destroy farming structure. Before any bill is introduced in Parliament, Cabinet approval is sought; even then, she was a part of the Cabinet decision, but why did she not protest at that time?