Cry over suspension of Question Hour absurd

|
  • 0

Cry over suspension of Question Hour absurd

Sunday, 06 September 2020 | Swapan Dasgupta

There is a constitutional obligation for Parliament to meet every six months. Under the exceptional circumstances of the Covid-19 pandemic it would have been entirely in order for the Government to have convened a token one or two session of the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha, meet the constitutional obligation and let matters rest. It is a matter of some reassurance that after a great deal of logistical preparations necessary to maintain social distancing and keep MPs and Parliament staff safe, the Government has chosen to convene a Monsoon session from September 14 to October 1. Although the sitting hours of both Houses have been truncated for logistical reasons, both Houses will meet all 18 days, including weekends.

Parliament is essentially a political body and it is only natural that the Monsoon session will witness political confrontations between the Treasury and Opposition benches. These will be keenly awaited since there are important issues where discussions are imperatives. These include the Covid-19 situation in all its dimensions, the economic dislocation caused by the lockdowns and suspension of normal activity and, finally, the tensions with China along the Ladakh region of the Line of Actual Control. No doubt each of these issues will form the subject of general discussions or, if the Opposition so chooses, adjournment motions.

However, even before Parliament has actually met, a controversy has erupted over the suspension of the Question Hour that is traditionally an important part of the proceedings. The Question Hour that involves Ministers giving oral replies, the questioner proffering two supplementary questions and other MPs also joining in with their related queries is keenly awaited. For a start, it tests the mettle of the Minister, particularly his/her grasp over ministerial responsibilities. Secondly, it allows the questioner a chance to interrogate the Government with the full knowledge that there is a sanctity in replies to Parliament. Finally, replies to questions enables many lesser known facets of Government work or public life to be presented to the country. Question Hour is an indispensable feature of political accountability.

Does the suspension of Question Hour undermine the quality of democracy? At one level it does. However, before arriving at a judgment over the Monsoon session, certain facts need to be noted.

First, the questions selected for reply in Question Hour are not determined by the importance of the question or the parliamentary standing of the questioner. Each session Parliament receives thousands of questions addressed to different ministries. Some are of grave national importance; some are localised in nature; and still others are pretty purposeless and aimed at replenishing an MP’s parliamentary profile. All questions have to be answered but the ones selected for oral answers — the starred questions — are chosen by lottery. The rest, the unstarred questions, will get written replies without any scope for supplementary queries.

As is evident, the system is very fair to backbench MPs who are often denied opportunities for parliamentary intervention by their parties. However, the system is also dependent on the luck of the draw. Therefore, to believe, as some Opposition MPs have suggested, that the Government will escape scrutiny is only a half-truth.

Secondly, those who have witnessed Question Hour from the galleries or inside the House will have noticed that each Minister who is scheduled to answer questions relating to his/her department is accompanied by a large body of officials. They are there to supply the minister additional information or provide clarifications if necessary. The gallery for officials is invariably overflowing during Question Hour since there are many departments and ministries involved.

Is this system safe during a pandemic? At a time when the arrangements for the smooth functioning of Parliament in these extraordinary times involve keeping numbers down to a bare minimum, Question Hour will pose additional problems. It is interesting that at the fag end of the Budget session in March when the Covid-19 pandemic was at its very early stage, at least one Opposition party made a huge song and dance about persisting with the session at such a time. Today, this party — which opposes the holding of the Joint Entrance Examinations at this moment — is insistent that the suspension of Question Hour constitutes a murder of democracy. It is also interesting that nearly all State Assemblies which are hosting very short sessions, have dispensed with their Question Hour during the pandemic.

Equally, the suggestion that the suspension of Question Hour will stifle alternative voices is absurd. As long as Zero Hour and the system of Special Mentions exist, most MPs will have an opportunity to have their say.

At the end of the day, Parliament exists to pass laws. The extraordinary Monsoon session of Parliament has a long list of government business, including ratifying ordinances that have been enacted in the interregnum. This may be unglamorous stuff but law-making is the raison d’etre of Parliament. The rest is icing on the cake.

Sunday Edition

CAA PASSPORT TO FREEDOM

24 March 2024 | Kumar Chellappan | Agenda

CHENNAI EXPRESS IN GURUGRAM

24 March 2024 | Pawan Soni | Agenda

The Way of Bengal

24 March 2024 | Shobori Ganguli | Agenda

The Pizza Philosopher

24 March 2024 | Shobori Ganguli | Agenda

Astroturf | Lord Shiva calls for all-inclusiveness

24 March 2024 | Bharat Bhushan Padmadeo | Agenda

Interconnected narrative l Forest conservation l Agriculture l Food security

24 March 2024 | BKP Sinha/ Arvind K jha | Agenda