Seasonal disturbances

Is it an oxymoron to describe an everyday occurrence as a singular event? Not always. On Tuesday, April 23, even as the opposition drew fresh breath to howl its lungs out for Narendra Modi’s head, the lights went out in Parliament. They stayed that way for almost 10 minutes. In most Indian households, this wouldn’t have led to a raised eyebrow. (It might have led to a brief mutter of thanks to the powers above that the brown-out ended so quickly.) In the Houses of Parliament it caused bewilderment and anger. What does it say about us?

That we, the people of India, have become so inured to rotten service that we do not even seethe in impotent rage? Yes. That Parliament has become utterly withdrawn from the realities of life for the ordinary citizens it claims to represent? Yes.

Electricity, food, a dependable supply of water — I don’t even mention that it needs to be potable — affordable housing, jobs. These are the true concerns of the average Indian. I know several housing colonies in Delhi and Mumbai where neighbours greet each other of a morning with, ‘‘Paani aa gayaa kya?’’ I am yet to hear of any place where the first question of a day is, ‘‘Will Parliament discuss Gujarat under Rule 184?’’

Yes, the post-Godhra riots concern the thinking citizen. But the brouhaha in Parliament is both unnecessary and useless. Does it matter which way the vote goes? Is a single mind going to be changed by the various addresses? Will there be a proper debate instead of a series of set speeches?

So, why then did the Opposition — chiefly the Congress — disrupt Parliament for days on end? If their concern is the poor, as every politician declaims given half a chance, should they not make at least a pretence of discussing bread and butter issues? Especially in what is said to be the Budget Session of Parliament?

The history of the past half a decade tells us that it is futile looking for answers from the Congress. The party has made a habit of disrupting Parliament’s proceedings in the Budget Session for no rhyme and damned little reason. Take a look at the party’s behaviour since 1997.

Five years ago, Sitaram Kesri drove up to Rashtrapati Bhavan on Easter morning to inform the president that his party was withdrawing support from the Deve Gowda ministry. ‘‘Why are you doing this?’’ asked a stunned Shankar Dayal Sharma. There was never any answer. The United Front ministry was soon back, sans Deve Gowda alone; the true casualty was Chidambaram’s “Dream Budget”.

In 1999, almost two years to the day, Sonia Gandhi met Jayalalithaa at Subramanian Swamy’s famous tea party, and encouraged her to withdraw from the Vajpayee ministry. It was the second Budget Session to be disrupted — and with just as little reason as the first, given that the Congress was in no position to give India an alternative government.

In 2001, another Budget Session went awry as the Tehelka Tapes took over the Congress’s lungs and, consequently, Parliament’s time and attention. Scrutinising the budgetary demands of the various ministries — supposedly Parliament’s primary duty — was again victim to the political cause celebre of the day.

Sonia Gandhi says the fight over Rule 184 was important because Narendra Modi has ‘‘destabilised’’ the nation. And so we are reminded again that this is a woman who is as unfamiliar with the subtleties of the English language as with those of Hindi. In Guwahati, she accused the prime minister of losing his ‘‘maansik santulan’’ — later clarifying that she meant to say that he had ‘‘lost his cool’’.

Narendra Modi is a polarising figure. Some abuse him as a Hitler, others hail him as the ‘‘Chhote Sardar’’. But there is a world of difference between causing divisions in opinion and being destabilising. It was the Congress, not Modi, which disrupted Parliament and is allowing ministerial demands to get away unscrutinised. And, for that matter, permitting the situation in Gujarat to go by without debate.

While the fight over Rule 184, a non-issue if we are to be really honest, went on, what was happening in Gujarat? I will not bore you with the details of everything that took place after the murders at Godhra. Let us see what happened in Ahmedabad on a single day, April 21. The Gomtipur, Shahpur and Kagdapith police stations reported 18 deaths; 74 persons were injured. The police used 300 tear-gas shells and fired 467 rounds. What happened?

A policeman was stabbed to death by a Muslim mob in Gomtipur, and a Hindu died after an explosion in Babunagar. Gomtipur was under curfew by the afternoon, but news about the tension had spread to Chamanpura and Meldimata Mandir (under the Behrampura police station). Late in the evening, a 5,000-strong mob attacked neighbouring Muslim localities. Later yet, Muslims set fire to houses in Vejalpur, razing four huts. By the end of the day, an exhausted police force was reporting mounting tension in the Nagoriwad and Bhilwas areas of Shahpur police station.

On the same day, Hindus and Muslims were engaged in stone-pelting in Kadi. When that didn’t suffice, they proceeded to set fire to commercial establishments owned by the rival community. For good measure, Khera, Mehsana, Bharuch and Vadodara were reported as being tense. All this in the space of 24 hours!

This by itself should have been subject enough for a debate in Parliament the next day (Monday). But what did the Congress do? It wasted time yelling over a procedural issue — how to debate instead of what to debate! So Parliament was disrupted, the presiding officers adjourned the Houses, and everyone went home. How did this help Gujarat, leave alone the Budget? Is this really what parliamentary democracy is all about?

Permit me to quote William Ewart Gladstone, thrice chancellor of the exchequer, four times prime minister, and a member of the House of Commons for 50 years: ‘‘Your business is not to govern the country, but to call to account those who do so.’’

By that simple yardstick, do you think Parliament in general, and the opposition specifically, has attended to its business this Budget Session?

Earlier Columns