AA Edit | If Parl Sits Longer, Will It Work?

The shorter duration of the Winter Session which will be held from December 1 to 19 has the Congress justifiably frowning at the BJP-led Union government. Its leaders allege that the BJP has developed “parliamentophobia”, fear of facing Parliament, yet it is time for the principal Opposition party as well as the INDIA bloc, too, to take a closer look at their own conduct during Parliament sessions.

It is a matter of worry that the number of days when Parliament meets to debate people’s issues and legislate have come down substantially over a period of time. Reports suggest that the Indian Parliament used to meet for about 120 days in the first two decades of its formation but that has come down to around 70 days in the last decade; the 17th Lok Sabha, for instance, convened for exactly 274 sittings, that roughly works out to only 68 days a year.

But it is not just the Opposition that is concerned about this development. The people, too, are unhappy about the new trend. They, however, are concerned about the quality of the sessions as well. The Winter Session of Parliament in 2014 was held between November 25 and December 20, a week more than this year’s scheduled meetings. However, the Parliament worked for only half of the session as the rest of the time was taken up by protests and disruptions. The Monsoon Session this year was no different; only 30-40 per cent of the allotted time was used for conducting the assigned business.

There must be a better understanding between the Treasury and the Opposition benches on the functioning of Parliament. While a government that has come to power on popular vote has every right to get its business done, it also has the duty to ensure that the Opposition is patiently heard. Then again, the Opposition has a right to protest if the government goes its own way unmindful of its opinions, but it, too, must understand that unending disruptions only help the government. Bills are passed in a cavalier fashion without discussion and it undermines the very idea of parliamentary democracy. There is little doubt that the quality of parliamentary debate needs to improve post-haste even while it is the responsibility of members on either side to be respectful of their constituents.