This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
INDIA


role of middlemen and black money. Shri T.K.S. Elangovan (DMK) proposed that the government should adopt the universal PDS system as in vogue in the state of Tamil Nadu for providing food grains to the people at a reasonable rate and initiate firm steps against the middlemen. Shri P. Karunakaran (CPI-M) attributed the price rise to the


Parliament was really concerned and stated that the government lacked political will to curb price rises. Dr Raghuvansh Prasad Singh (RJD) said the decrease in the prices of luxury items and increase in the prices of the essential goods showed that the policies of the government were anti-poor. He suggested for bringing in a law under which the prices of the foodgrains would not be allowed to be increased or decreased more than 20 per cent in a year. Dr K.S. Rao (INC) asked for banning future trading in food grains and allowing export of surplus rice to give a better price to the farmers.


Dr Raghuvansh Prasad Singh, MP


failure of the government, the international trade in food items and the speculative future trading in agricultural commodities. Shri Bhartruhari Mahtab (BJD) said inflation had eroded the purchasing power of money while the government was facing problem of mismanagement and lack of governance in controlling the runaway prices. He stressed that reform and de-regulation across the board were needed to solve the supply side crisis that was fuelling India’s inflation. Shri Anant Gangaram Geete (Shiv Sena) said millions of people, especially the poor were bearing the brunt of price rises and the government should give them relief.


Shri Dasgupta said inflation had pushed five per cent of people below the poverty line. Dissatisfied with the resolution to be adopted by the House that did not include the failure of the government, he said a message must go that the


Shri Manohar Tirkey (RSP) was worried as the people were losing faith in Parliament and government due to the ever increasing price rise. He wanted the government to take action against the middle men who were making profits at the cost of the producers and the consumers. Shri A. Sampath (CPI-M) demanded for banning the forward trading in food articles as it had led to hoarding and black marketing, while Shri M.B. Rajesh (CPI-M) blamed the future trading, lack of purchasing power, mindless hikes in the petroleum prices and the neglect of agriculture for continued price rises. Shri Gorakhnath Pandey (BSP) requested the government to get a proper survey of the genuine below poverty families so as to help them financially. Shri Prasanta Kumar Majumdar (RSP) asked the government to change its economic and fiscal policies to control inflation and price rise while Shri Ravindra Kumar Pandey (BJP) requested the government to take effective steps to save the country from a situation of economic emergency.


Replying to the debate on 4 August 2011, the Leader of the Lok Sabha and the Finance Minister, Shri Pranab Mukherjee attributed price rises to external factors. He said that the government was working to moderate food inflation without sacrificing growth. Giving details of various steps taken by the government to rein in on inflation, he dismissed the opposition's charge that inflation was due to high growth rates. Stating that food inflation was the result of the mismatch between supply and demand, he said the country needed to create more investment opportunities and generate more employment. He however said that the recent hike in the prices of diesel and cooking gas was marginal keeping in view the global crude oil prices on which the government had no control. Stating that the prices of food items had increased due to the substantial increase in the minimum support price of food grains, the Finance Minister assured that the government had enough food stocks to cater to the needs of the vulnerable sections.


Shri Yashwant Sinha who initiated the debate was disappointed that the Finance Ministers did not announce any measures to curb the rising prices. The House, after a discussion of over seven hours rejected the amendment moved by Shri Dasgupta and adopted the resolution expressing concern over the price rise and its burden on the common man. The resolution called upon the government to take immediate effective steps to check inflation for giving relief to the Indian people.


Demand for a strong Ombudsman


Another issue that dominated


the Monsoon Session was the demand made by the civil society groups led by the social activist, Shri Anna Hazare, for the enactment of a strong and effective Lokpal Bill. Following an agitation launched by Shri Hazare in April 2011, the government had constituted a Joint Drafting Committee (JDC) consisting of the


representatives of Shri Hazare and the union government to prepare a draft of the Lokpal Bill. Even after several meetings of the JDC, there remained many areas of differences. In the meanwhile, the government introduced the Lokpal Bill, 2011 in the Lok Sabha on 4 August 2011 providing for the establishment of the institution of Lokpal (Ombudsman) to inquire into allegations of corruption against certain public functionaries and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. The Bill was referred to the Departmentally Related Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law & Justice for examination and report. Not satisfied with the government’s Lokpal Bill, Shri Hazare declared to go on fast from 16 August if their version of the Bill called “Jan Lokpal Bill” was not passed by Parliament by 15 August.


When the Minister of State in the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions and Minister of State in the Prime Minister’s Office, Shri V. Narayanasamy, moved the motion for leave to introduce the Lokpal Bill on 4 August, the Leader of the Opposition in Lok Sabha, Smt. Sushma Swaraj (BJP) opposed the motion for introduction of the Bill. She wanted to know why the Prime Minister was being kept out of the purview of the Lokpal Bill. Shri Narayanasamy said the Bill


The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 341


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160