Anil Anand
There was never any doubt that the BJP-led NDA will have Lok Sabha Speaker of its choice. This is despite a split verdict with BJP remaining as the single largest party though with a considerably depleted strength in the 18th Lok Sabha. Perhaps, its reliance on two important allies in Telugu Desam Party (TDP) chief N Chandrababu Naidu and Janata Dal (u) supremo Nitish Kumar for survival in the months to come, and a more rejuvenated opposition, had led many to believe that Prime Minister Narendra Modi in his third innings will be more circumspect and less on centralized theme of operations.
The Speaker’s election was the first acid test for Mr Modi and his team to usher the ruling dispensation into a new era. An era where consensus and consultations will be the buzz word. It needs two to tango. And consensus building is certainly not a solo act but the onus for it certainly lies on the major partner or the ruling dispensation. In this case the BJP-led NDA. But that did not happen.
A literal meaning of the word consensus means “feel together”, among others. Given the history of sequestered polity in the last decade, mostly the creation of new found BJP identity of Modi-Amit Shah brand of politics, creating a feeling of “feeling together” seemed utterly difficult if not impossible. After all the opposition had been pushed to a peripheral role during the 10-year Modi rule. Unfortunately, the stamp of this brand was also visible in the working of the two Houses of Parliament.
Nevertheless, it was expected that Mr Modi will use the opportunity of Speaker’s election to show some spirit of accommodation in regard to the opposition, if not the NDA allies. How about accommodating the Congress-led opposition’s demand for Deputy Speaker’s post? As per the past precedent the demand was justified. But then it has to be viewed in the backdrop of another precedent set up by the Modi dispensation- keeping the post vacant in the last Lok Sabha. It was unprecedented but, perhaps, has become a precedent in its own.
It will be interesting to see if during Modi-03 and with Mr Om Birla in the Speaker’s chair for a second successive term, if this new precedent will be followed. And the vacancy in the Deputy Speaker’s chair will continue to exist.
Having rejected the opposition’s claim to Deputy Speaker’s post, or at least entering into a dialogue on the issue, Modi left no one in doubt that he will be his usual self in the ‘third avtar’ as well. The manner in which the CBI sprung into action to register a corruption case against the already jailed Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal before he could knock at the Supreme Court doors for bail in an earlier case, further strengthened the belief that the ruling leader’s approach towards his political opponents is not going to change.
Although it is bit too early to arrive at a final conclusion but ominous signs are a pointer towards the shape of things to take place in near future. With Birla, who by many yardsticks had a controversial first innings, in the chair again, a rejuvenated Congress (read opposition) with an energized Rahul Gandhi as the designated Leader of Opposition (LoP), and not even an indication from the treasury benches of an accommodative approach, the 18th Lok Sabha seems headed towards a state of confrontation. Unless, there is a dramatic change in the ruling alliance bosses’ approach under pressure of BJP’s failure to muster even a simple majority (magical figure of 272) on its own.
So, the buzz sword will remain to be ‘consensus’ till the ruling BJP and the Congress-led opposition “feel together” at least on issues of national importance. And to ensure smooth functioning of Parliament.
Why did BJP-led NDA and Congress-led opposition failed to reach a consensus on the issue of Speaker’s election and the string attached to it in the form of Deputy Speaker’s post?
The underlying factor behind this failure has been the deep-seated distrust between the two sides. Obviously, the onus lies on the ruling alliance and its leader as during the last decade the Team Modi did not give any leeway to the opposition. The consultative process, both inside the Parliament and outside (on important policy matters and issues of governance) had been given a go-by by those in power.
The tardy handling of the Speaker’s election issue has not brought any laurels to either Mr Modi or his dispensation. He certainly has the solace of having entirely his own way even on this issue notwithstanding the depleted strength of BJP in Lok Sabha or may be feeling elevated on not having considered the opposition demand for Deputy Speaker’s post.
This could be an issue of personal satisfaction or ego-massage for Mr Modi. It in no way reflects a mature and positive approach in view of the changed mathematics in Lok Sabha with a stronger opposition baying for blood.Or, for upholding the greater democratic values. Strangely, the ruling party, as part of the evolving consensus approach, wanted the opposition parties to sign nomination papers of Mr Birla just before the noon deadline on the last day of filing nomination papers but without committing to the Deputy Speaker issue.
The approach of the ruling dispensation in this regard had left much to be desired and showed their leaders’ inclinations. Rather than being courteous they were much curt. “Sign the nomination papers, and the issue of Deputy Speakership will be looked into later,” was the cut and dry approach of Team Modi.
This approach of the ruling BJP and Modi-03 government has to be analyzed in the backdrop of Prime Minister Mr Modi observations made two days back when the new Lok Sabha session started. In his customary statement before the media he had, interestingly, advocated the need for consensus while making decisions for the welfare of the country, saying it is of “utmost importance”. The remarks were seen in the light of the fact that the BJP had itself fallen short of simple majority mark for the first time in the last decade.
This scenario and, in particular, the Prime Minister’s observation has to be seen in the light of actual position of parties in the 18th Lok Sabha which reflects the vulnerability of the ruling alliance. The BJP-led NDA has 293 members with BJP having 240 which is 32 short of simple majority. The opposition I.N.D.I.A bloc has 234 members with Congress accounting for 99 and the support of a few independents already declared in the grand-old party’s favour.
The Prime Minister had further raised the hopes of adopting a new approach in view of this scenario in Lok Sabha when he said, “In the last 10 years, we have always tried to implement a tradition because we believe that a majority is required to run the Government but to run the country a consensus is of utmost importance. So, it will be our constant efforts to serve ‘Maa Bharati’ and fulfill the aspirations and ambitions of the 140-crore people, with everyone’s consent and by taking everyone together.”
This claim was quite in contrast to the approach adopted by him during this period. Nevertheless, it generated some hope about a new beginning at least to tide over the electoral deficiencies in quest of smooth running of the Government. But in the ultimate analysis, after the Speaker election episode, there seemed a clear mismatch between what Mr Modi observed and the actual approach adopted on ground.
This approach had a lopsided bent as it was focused entirely on opposition without sparing a thought for the members of the treasury benches. After all, the treasury benches through a majoritarian approach had not glorified themselves during the last decade. Obviously, they were following the policy set by their leaders.
Mr Modi called on the opposition members to maintain the dignity of democracy by not disrupting the Parliament proceedings. In this connection, the ruling benches also had their fair share, an unprecedented act.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
