Reconvening House panels a tough task
In the past decade, Parliament met, on an average, for little over two months per year to transact legislative business and debate key issues. That obviously is too short a period for members of either House to come to grips, in any meaningful manner, with legislations and other matters of import.
What couldn’t be realised in open sessions of the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha was made possible through the department related standing committees (DRSCS) that were Parliament’s microcosm. Their in-camera proceedings provided members the requisite relief from public glare to rise above partisan political/party interests for reaching consensus or broad agreements, on the stickiest of issues. Democracy indeed worked better in these miniature groups.
In normal times, the parliamentary panels, especially the DRSCS, met through the year, deliberating on a host of issues, especially Bills and budgetary demands of various ministries and departments. The nationwide lockdown that began on
March 25 hit these panels the hardest, their “core contribution” power-braked by the absence of committee members, many of whom were confined to their home constituencies and states.
The March 25 countrywide closure Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced to contain the COVID19 pandemic was enforced two days after Parliament curtailed its Budget Session. After the initial view that cutting short the session could demoralise the people in general, and the doctors and paramedics in particular, such was the alarm triggered by the medical emergency that the all important Finance Bill, 2020 was passed without any debate in the Lok Sabha.
It was against this backdrop that RS chairman Venkaiah Naidu and LS Speaker Om Birla met on May 7, the 44th day of the lockdown to look for ways to put the committee-work back on rails. They followed up those confabulations with another meeting on May 18 — the 55th day of the shutdown marked by substantial easing of the initial restrictions.
In their first meeting, Naidu and Birla had asked secretaries general of the two Houses to explore the possibility of DRSC meetings through video-conferencing. The SGS have since reverted to the presiding officers, pointing out “serious” technical and security issues in e-linking members stationed in different states, a person familiar with the discussions told this writer. The other glitch is that Parliament’s general purposes committee might have to be co-opted as the matter falls in its jurisdiction. That committee too is of members from both Houses who will have to discuss the matter online.
The nearly two dozen DRSCS were institutionalised in 1993 to help parliamentarians understand the complexities of governance.
They generally have as members 21 LS MPS and 10 from the Upper House who meet under a designated chairperson.
They are the platforms to which officials are summoned for clarifications to enhance the members’ understanding of the subjects under discussion. It is that element in their work that brings up the security aspect on which there’s little scope to take chances.
At their last meeting on Monday, the presiding officers were nevertheless sanguine that DRSCS could resume work in the event of air travel opening on the conclusion of lockdown 4.0 on May 31 or anytime thereafter.
A plain reading of the Lok Sabha’s Rule 266 — which says the meetings have to be held in private — also puts the balance in favour of regular interactions as opposed to online discussions. If that regimen is possible, it’ll at once obviate the logistical and confidentiality pitfalls.
Aside from removing bottlenecks to make DRSCS functional, there’s the challenge of holding Parliament’s Monsoon session — generally scheduled in July — while ensuring social distancing in the LS-RS chambers where the seating arrangements are too cluttered to meet the POSTCOVID standards.
The Parliament was adjourned sine die on March 23. As per the Constitution’s Article 85(I), it has to meet before the expiry of six months. That leaves scope for delaying the Monsoon sitting — but issues relating to the seating plans will remain. The summoning of Parliament is in the Government’s domain. Yet, a veteran MP chose to think aloud. He suggested, on conditions of anonymity, that if the pandemic persists, the 245 member Rajya Sabha could meet in the larger Lok Sabha chamber and the latter could shift to the spacious Central Hall. Doable though they may seem, such improvisations to reopen our democracy’s highest temple require wider consultations and agreement.
AMRAPALI PROJECTS