In another indication of the Akali Dal's hardening stance, Barnala made it clear that his party MPs would be asked to oppose the Uttaranchal Bill in Parliament since it envisaged the inclusion of Udham Singh Nagar in the new State.

In an interview with The Indian Express, Barnala said that problems like these could be sorted out in a coalition government if the Coordination Committee met more frequently to iron out the differences before reaching a decision. He said that the BJP-led government had not discussed the issue of bringing Bihar under President's Rule at the coordination committee.

While clarifying that the ``strains'' in the coalition had not reached any danger levels, Barnala said ``there was nothing that could not be solvedby discussions across the table.'' However, on the question of imposition of President's Rule in States, Barnala said the Akali Dal's views on Article 356 have been clear right from the beginning.

``We ourselves have suffered seven times due to Article 356 and have decided after the Anandpur Sahib resolution, that this Article should be removed from the Consititution itself,'' he stated.

On the issue of Udham Singh Nagar's inclusion in the new Uttranchal State, Barnala said that this would be unfair as it went against the will of the people in the region.

Barnala welcomed the BJP's move to initiate a national debate on the use of Article 356 and said that his party would participate in such a debate to convince other parties that this Article should be removed from the Constitution.

When questioned whether the BJP's comments stating that Bihar was a fit case for the use of the Article 356 was belittling the President's office, Barnala said the party was merely expressing its view just like thePresident had expressed his by rejecting their recommendation. He said that the ``BJP was well within its right to justify the stand it had taken to recommend President's Rule in Bihar''.