Editorial 1: The sorry state of India’s parliamentary proceedings

Context

The diminishing of Parliament is deeply damaging to India’s democracy.

 Introduction

The competitive disruptions of Parliament by both the Opposition and, more surprisingly, the Treasury benches, made the recently-concluded winter session of the legislature a travesty. There were more adjournments than discussions, hardly any work was done and the session was adjourned with the widespread sentiment that we had let down the people of India. A new nadir was plumbed when duelling demonstrations by Members of Parliament (MP) on the steps of the House led to accusations of assault and injury on both sides. For many of us who were brought up to regard Parliament as the temple of our democracy, its precincts as hallowed and its procedures and conventions as sacred, this seems a betrayal of everything the institution is supposed to represent as a cornerstone of our democracy.

Why have things come to such a sorry state?

• One obvious reason (as in everything to do with Parliament) is precedent.
• The recent demise of the distinguished director, Shyam Benegal, reminded me of the time when he and I both served, as private citizens in 2007, on a round table of eminent Indians invited by then-Speaker Somnath Chatterjee to advise him in the performance of his duties.
• Our group, which included N.R. Narayana Murthy of 70-hour work week fame, unanimously called for strict enforcement of the rules to ensure higher standards of decorum and debate, and were promptly disabused by the Speaker of our illusions.
• Disruptions, he said, occurred because an outnumbered Opposition saw them as part of their democratic rights; to thwart them by invoking the rule book would be condemned by all parties, including the ruling party, as undemocratic.
•  So suspending, let alone expelling, MPs was not an option he could easily exercise.

Part of convention’ now, decline of civility

Merits of Parliamentary Protest

• Whatever the merits of this method of parliamentary protest — and, personally, it is not something I have ever cared for — it has become part of the convention of Indian parliamentary practice.
• Speaker of the Lok Sabha Meira Kumar, whose decency and gentility were shamefully abused by a belligerent Bharatiya Janata Party, still averred that it would be wrong to expel unruly Opposition members without an all-party consensus on doing so.
  • Though Speakers of the Lok Sabha Sumitra Mahajan and Om Birla have proved more willing to suspend members:
• Mr. Birla essentially denuded the Lok Sabha of all opposition while steamrolling several Bills through the 2023 winter session.
  • They have usually preferred adjournment to expulsion.

 Acrimony Between Government and Opposition

• A second factor is, undoubtedly, the acrimony that now prevails between the government and the Opposition.
• Traditionally, a sense of civility has always reigned in Indian politics:
  • Atal Bihari Vajpayee loved telling the stories of Jawaharlal Nehru’s courtesy to him as a young firebrand Opposition leader.
  • Rajiv Gandhi contriving to get him medical attention in the United States.
  • P.V. Narasimha Rao sending him to Geneva as the head of the Indian delegation to a United Nationsmeeting on Kashmir.
• Today, such episodes are inconceivable. Each side sees itself as the embodiment of righteous virtue, and the other as irredeemable evil.
  • To the ruling party, the Opposition is “anti-national.”
  • The Opposition imagines themselves as outnumbered Pandavas facing the unfair might of the Kauravas in power.
• Democracy requires both sides to accept, as a presumption, the good faith of the other; that disagreements are about how to achieve the best interests of the nation.
• In Indian politics today, government and Opposition see each other as enemies, not mere adversaries.
• Common ground then becomes hard to find.

 The Breakdown of the Relationship of Trust

• It is sad that our national politics has witnessed such a breakdown in the relationship of trust that ought to exist between the government and the Opposition in any democracy.
• Both sides are equally guilty:
  • The present ruling party was just as bad when it was in Opposition.
  • The very BJP politicians who had argued for disruption, justifying obstructing Parliament for the higher principle of accountability, now condemn disruption.
• The Opposition, once victims of disruption, now adopts the same approach.
• The new golden rule of Indian politics has become: "Do unto them what they did unto you."

The representative in today’s Parliament

• Third, arguably, is the public’s own diminished expectations from parliamentarians.
• Gone are the days when skilled debaters and orators held sway on the floor of the legislature, winning public adulation (in those pre-television days) from admiring accounts of their speeches alone.
• A Ram Manohar Lohia, a Nath Pai, a George Fernandes, a Madhu Limaye, a Piloo Mody, or a Minoo Masani acquired political importance and stature, out of all proportion to the size of their parties, because of accounts of their verbal duels with a Nehru or an Indira Gandhi.
• Today there are no equivalents: while the occasional reasoned or impassioned speech enjoys a brief virality on YouTube or WhatsApp, these are few and far between, and the opportunities to deliver them are rarer still.
• Instead, there is a clear disconnect between electability and parliamentary performance.

 Elections and Parliamentary Performance

• People are elected or re-elected for reasons other than their ability to:
  • Skewer a Minister in Question Hour.
  • Tear a government proposal apart through reasoned argument.
• The quality and the character of political representation has a direct correlation to the quality and the character of floor debates as well.
• When MPs are corralled by their Whips into breaking all the rules they are sworn to uphold, to troop into the well of the House and disrupt the proceedings through shouting and sloganeering rather than effective preparation and forensic skill, they are being judged by their leaders on qualities other than effective parliamentarianism.
• The talent that should be exhibited on the floor of the House is now paraded in television studios instead.

 Public’s New Criteria for Judging Representatives

• The public in turn no longer judges their representatives by their performance in Parliament but by:
  • The constituent services they render.
  • The local political weight they command.
• Most of the names I mentioned earlier would not find it easy to be re-elected in today’s environment.

 Disruption and contempt

• Free Fall of parliamentary Standards: Parliamentary standards have been in free fall for a generation.
  • No one is elected or defeated at the polls because of their performance in Parliament.
  • Most MPs have limited interest in legislation and prefer to disrupt the proceedings rather than debate the principles.
• BJP Government’s Approach: Meanwhile, the BJP government refuses to reach out to the Opposition and is content to ride roughshod over it to pass its Bills.
  • Its contempt for the legislature is barely concealed.
• Prime Minister's attendance: Unlike Jawaharlal Nehru, who attended Parliament daily, Prime Minister Narendra Modi barely deigns to grace the House with his presence.
• Government’s Treatment of Parliament: In the last few years, the government has been increasingly treating Parliament as:
  • A noticeboard for the announcement of its decisions.
  • A rubber stamp for legalising them.
  • This is instead of treating it as a consultative body in a deliberative democracy.

 Conclusion

The diminishing of Parliament in our political life is deeply damaging to our democracy. Sadly, its custodians are allowing it to be robbed of all value, to the point where the public will not miss it when it is gone.

Editorial 2: Tackling delimitation by reversing population control

Context

It is too simplistic a solution that is being put forth by some politicians in the southern States.

 Introduction

Recently, the Chief Ministers of Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu, N. Chandrababu Naidu and M.K. Stalin, respectively, were quite peeved about the question of the proposed delimitation exercise and the possibility, subsequently, of the loss of parliamentary seats. This is very likely as the two States, along with the other southern States, are ahead of the rest of India in terms of fertility transition — implying a reduced share of the population when compared with the northern region. What is galling to people in general, and not necessarily just the politicians in south India, is that success in “family planning” will surely reduce the number of seats of the less populated States in Parliament.

• “The state government [Andhra Pradesh] is thinking of enacting a law that would make only those with more than two children eligible to contest local body elections,” Mr. Naidu had said.
• Earlier, Andhra Pradesh had passed a piece of legislation barring people with more than two children from contesting local polls. Mr. Naidu said, “We have repealed that law, and we are now considering reversing it…. Government may provide more benefits to families with more children.”
• Mr. Stalin’s response was, “Today, as there is a scenario of decreasing Lok Sabha constituencies, it raises the question why should we restrict ourselves to having fewer children? Mr. Stalin added in jest, “Why not aim for 16 children?”

The example of China

Question of Fertility Decline and Reversal

• The question that arises in the light of the reactions and the responses of the Chief Ministers is: would it be possible to arrest fertility decline and, moreover, reverse it by attempting to increase it?
• It is evident that the attainment of low fertility in the course of fertility transition is hardly reversible by intervention.
• However, in the natural course of events, there might be a minor reversal as suggested by experience worldwide.
• Despite this understanding, there are attempts being made in some countries to reverse the fertility trend through incentivisation, but to no effect.

 China’s One-Child Policy

• China’s one-child policy was one of the desperate measures to realise population control.
• The consequences confronting the Chinese state on varied fronts include:
  • Problems in the marriage market.
  • A dependency burden.
  • Above all, extreme low fertility beyond the scope for reversal.

Regulatory Measures and Population Control

• Quick and forced regulatory measures to restrict reproduction have never paid dividends beyond restricting population counts.
• In fact, an emphasis on limiting population counts without caring for its composition that sustains the population may well be considered unplanned.
• China’s case is an example wherein the state is facing numerous crises over the familial transitions underway and the consequential burden of social security provisioning on the state.

 Imbalanced Population Composition

• An imbalanced population composition reached by intruding into the natural course of transition will pose problems that would only be remedied through promoting migration.
• Efforts at incentivising reproduction and adoption of a pro-natal population policy may not be an alternative as seen in countries such as Japan and South Korea.
• Hence, the response of the southern States to the emerging threat may well be considered premature and ineffective in the long run.

Varied population counts

• Fertility decline and regional differences: The course of fertility decline in India’s States does show signs of a convergence across space and characteristics, but a population momentum keeps the demographic divide wider between regions.
• Population counts and political representation: Given this circumstance, population counts between provinces may not be the appropriate criterion to have political representation that will defy the federal structure of our nation.
  • ‘One person one vote’ may well be ideal, but the difference in numbers of political representation in one region will be skewed beyond proportions.
  • Unless these counts are weighed with some characteristics in terms of appropriating political representation, it will be unfair to, for example, a region that ushered in development with population control.
• Recognition of the Demographic Divide: This brings in a recognition of the demographic divide apparent with education, coupled with the number of children being the criteria for shaping political outcomes.

 Impact on women

• Encouraging women to have more children may be easier said than done.
• In the current circumstances, a woman’s personal loss in engaging in reproduction is much greater than imagined given the state’s approach in facilitating the same.
• When the state celebrates the fertility decline and its dividend has benefited the larger cause, its implication in a woman’s life has been less than expected.
• Therefore, thinking about fertility reversal needs to be preceded by measures of guaranteeing the state’s social support for the additional children on the one hand and compensation for women’s engagement in reproduction on the other.

Conclusion

Reversing fertility could well be ideal in terms of maintaining a sustainable population but the regional population imbalance can perhaps be addressed through migration in immediate terms. What needs to be answered is the ensuing disadvantage of a lower population count and political representation that can only be resolved provided the count gets an equivalence in valuation in terms of capability characteristics. Therefore, the ultimate solution lies not in reversing fertility but in revising count-based political representation in the delimitation exercise.