NEW DELHI: Should the Indian Parliament introduce a Prime Minister’s Question Hour (PMQH) at least once a week during session time? This idea, while potentially triggering heated debate across political circles, has found strong support from Devender Singh, former Additional Secretary of the Lok Sabha, in his newly released book The Indian Parliament: Samvidhan Sadan to Sansad Bhawan.
Singh asserts that the PMQH should be institutionalised in Parliament to enhance accountability and revive legislative engagement. “The introduction of PM’s Question Hour would really be a break from the colonial past, and it would inaugurate a new era in the Indian Parliamentary annals,” he writes in the book.
In a conversation with this newspaper, Singh said Parliament can only fulfil its multifaceted responsibilities if it is equipped with a strong framework of accountability, convenes regularly, and engages in informed and well-structured discussions.
“But average sittings of Parliament have dwindled precipitously,” he remarked, emphasising the need to revisit the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business to ensure Parliament meets for at least 100 days a year.
Among the key reforms proposed by Singh is the weekly PMQH, aimed at ensuring greater executive accountability and rekindling the spirit of Parliamentary discourse.
“The introduction of PM’s Question Hour (PMQH) once a week will act as a safety valve, allow members to raise issues of urgent concern and allow the Prime Minister to explain government policies and counter criticism,” Singh said.
He further asserted, “India will emerge as a vibrant and robust democracy if the Prime Minister’s Questions Time is introduced,” and advocated for a renaming of "Private Members’ business", calling it a remnant of British colonial rule.
Singh also recommends empowering one-third of MPs to convene Parliament and introduce legislation. “The Rules of Procedure need amendment to provide for convening Parliament at the initiative of one-third MPs and also introduce and consider legislation when at least one-third of the MPs so demand. This will help reduce disruption of normal proceedings of the House like the running of Question Hour and also significantly curtail the tendency to move adjournment motions,” he writes.
According to Singh, the institution of a PMQH could effectively address concerns raised by the Opposition, reduce disruptions, and promote decorum in the House.
He argues that a well-utilised PMQH could "take the wind out of the sail of the Opposition, soothe the ruffled feathers, pacify irate tempers and pre-empt the tendency to frequently disrupt or rock proceedings."
The book also reflects on the growing public disillusionment with Parliament, attributing it to continuous disruptions, unnecessary grandstanding, and unethical conduct by some members.
“In order to have a more contemporary look and to emerge as a more effective forum of debate and accountability, the practice and procedures of Parliament need innovation,” Singh observes.
He advocates for the integration of cyber interfaces to boost citizen engagement with Parliamentary proceedings and calls for a reform in the format of debates to avoid repetitive and rambling speeches.
“Further, the format of debate also calls for drastic change to overcome repetitive and rambling speeches. As the highest forum of debate and discussions, Parliament must meet at least 100 days in a year and function robustly and act as a bulwark against arbitrary actions of the executive,” he concludes.