NEW DELHI: The fate of the no-confidence notices issued by the Telugu Desam Party (TDP) and YSR Congress appeared uncertain on Monday as Parliament continued to be gridlocked for the 11th straight day since the resumption of the second half of the Budget session.
Though Union Minister for Home Affairs Rajnath Singh said in the Lok Sabha that the government was ready for a debate on all matters, including the no-confidence notices, ruckus in the well of the House by AIADMK prompted Speaker Sumitra Mahajan to adjourn the House for the day.
The sense within the government was TDP and YSRC were seeking to turn the forum of Parliament into a tool to address their respective political compulsions. With key legislative business already done, the government appears ready to reconcile itself with a complete washout of the remaining part of the session.
“We’ve nothing to lose in the competitive politics in Andhra Pradesh.
The BJP has already been branded a villain in the state. If order prevails in the House and the no-trust motion is taken up, the BJP will explain how the Central government has been fulfilling the assurances specified in the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act,” said a Cabinet minister. The Centre can’t open a Pandora’s box by giving special category status to Andhra Pradesh, the minister asserted.
Union minister for state in the PMO Jitendra Singh found it difficult to figure out what the Opposition wanted to achieve by issuing no-confidence notices and creating ruckus in the House at the same time.
On the other hand, senior Congress leader Anand Sharma said: “The no-confidence motion is to expose the government. It demonstrates that the government has lost the enormous trust it had. It is also an opportunity for the Opposition to indict the government for its acts of omission and commission, betrayal of promises it made to the people and its politics of deception.”
However, the Opposition seemed divided in taking the no-trust move forward. Samajwadi Party national general secretary Ram Gopal Yadav said though they wanted discussion on the motion, “the government seems to have managed the AIADMK.” Incidentally, AIADMK members have been camping in the well of the House on the Cauvery issue.
Procedural problem
● Should the House be in order to take up the no-trust notice or is it enough for the notice to be in order?
● Constitutional experts are divided. While some say if the paperwork for the notice is in order, the Speaker can take it up amid ruckus in the House, others say the House has to be in order to transact any business
● If at least 50 members stand up in support of the motion, the Speaker can decide the date and time for the debate
● But when members are standing at their seats and in the well creating ruckus, it could be difficult to count the 50 members standing in support of the motion