<b>XI LOK SABHA DEBATES, <i> Session IV (Budget) </i> </b> XI LOK SABHA DEBATES, Session IV (Budget) Tuesday , February 25, 1997 / Phalguna 6, 1918 (Saka)
Type of Debate: MOTION OF THANKS ON THE PRESIDENT'S ADDRESS
Title: Motion of Thanks on the President's Address. (Contd.- Not Concluded) TEXT : 1523 hoursMR. CHAIRMAN (SHRI P.M. SAYEED): Now, we shall take up the Motion of Thanks on the President's Address. Time allotted for it is nine hours. The balance time at our disposal is five hours and twenty-nine minutes. Shrimati Geeta Mukherjee.
SHRIMATI GEETA MUKHERJEE (PANSKURA): Thank you Sir for calling me. I rise to to support the Motion of Thanks on Rashtrapati's Address. The Address has listed some achievements, internal and external within seven months of the tenure of the United Front Government.
For example, among the internal achievements, some of the most important are holding peaceful elections in Kashmir, and imparting a measure of dynamism to the Inter-State Council and related measures which would help in giving more powers and share of resources to the States. Both were long overdue.
Externally, Treaty with Bangladesh for sharing of Ganga waters, considerable improvement in our relations with our neighbours, including People's Republic of China are some such positive examples.
We know there are several pending internal issues which require urgent attention and vigorous action like for example steep rise in the prices of essential commodities which need to be tackled urgently.
Similarly, the matter of reopening the numerous closed industries and rehabilitation of the sick public sector units are issues which have to be urgendly tackled. All these affect the vast masses.
Of course, we, the Left Parties, understand that there are serious problems and several economic compulsions which follow from the past realities created by the earlier regime. We also understand that the Common Minimum Programme cannot be fully implemented in a matter of months.
But we feel that the electorates which brought about this important political change in our country through the last General Election, which installed the United Front Government have certain expectations from it and are carefully watching the direction the United Front Government follow. When the Left Parties criticise certain measures or policy directions of the Government, we hope that our non-Left friends in the United Front will understand that this is an expression of our concern about some of these urgent issues in the interest of the common people and not in any partisan interest of ours.
Hon. Rashtrapatiji's Address contained many important subjects. Speakers of different political parties are dealing with those subjects. The second speaker from CPI will also deal with some of those subjects, but in my speech, today, I want to concentrate on one issue only, that is, on the Eighty-First (Amendment) Bill 1996 providing one-third reservation of seats for women in Lok Sabha and in Legislative Assemblies. I hope my colleagues will not mind to that.
Of course, in Rashtrapatiji's Address, there are only two places where this Bill has been mentioned. One is in the list of pending Bills and the other reference is in Paragraph 29. Here, I would like to quote that paragraph:
"We are also keen to promote gender equality and removal of discrimination against women. As you know, the Government has already introduced a Bill for Reservation of Seats for Women in Lok Sabha and Legislative Assemblies to ensure their better participation in policy making."
But is there any commitment to pass the Bill in this Session itself? There is no such commitment.
As far as the description of the Bill is concerned, there also the word `one-third' is missing before the word `reservation'. Because of this, I believe, not only myself but all the women and men MPs, who want this Bill to be passed, will feel disheartened. Moreover, the women of our country who are eagerly waiting for the passage of this historic Bill will not only be deeply disheartened but may seriously doubt the pious wish expressed in the sentence and I quote:
"We are also keen to promote gender equality and removal of discrimination against women."
I implore the Government to take note of it and to answer the questions which I am going to ask now. Is the Government stepping back from its promise made in its Common Minimum Programme? I would like to remind the Government and would once again like to quote from its Common Minimum Programme:
"That one-third of the elected representatives in Parliament and State Legislatures will be reserved for Women."
Have you forgotten the promise made by all the major political parties? I have the manifestoes of all the major political parties wherein they have promised the same. I will not take the time by reading all of them, but I just would like to draw your attention to the fact that I went through all the manifestoes and found that some kind of a promise has been made in them.
Therefore, I am asking them whether they are stepping back from their Common Minimum Programme. At the moment, this Government is committed to the Common Minimum Programme. I hope, the Government will not forget that. I would like to know why this hesitation is there to implement it. What is the fear?
Some Members are saying that unless the reservation is given to OBC women also within this reservation quota for women, they will not let the Bill be passed.
Sir, I am surprised. With all sympathy for my OBC sisters, may I ask those gentlemen, who are speaking like that, why could they not bring earlier a Private Member's Bill or even a Resolution for providing reservation for OBCs if they are so concerned? Moreover, is it not a fact that among the one-third reserved seats for women, there are bound to be a number of seats which will be OBC dominated? If so, why do they not put up some OBC women candidates there and thereby allowing the OBC women to have a mileage? Further, the Joint Committee has recommended to the Government to consider the question of OBC reservation as and when they think fit. If such a constitutional amendment is brought and the Parliament in its wisdom would pass that Bill, then automatically OBC women will come within the purview of one-third reservation as is the case today with SC and ST women. Then, why do you hold up this Bill on such an excuse?
Some Members of Parliament are asking wherefrom so many able women will come who are fit to be Members of Legislative Assemblies and Lok Sabha? May I say with all humility that this is an assessment of women from the point of view of our patriarchal society or the personal views of some hi-men. Excuse me.
Think back to 1952 - the first general elections. The percentage of women elected to the First Lok Sabha was only 4.4. Are we to believe that among the stalwart freedom fighters of our country there was such a dearth of capable women that they could not put up more candidates and get them in Parliament? Has the situation changed substantially since then? In 1996, the percentage was 7.2. The highest percentage ever reached in Lok Sabha was 8.1 per cent in 1985. Who can deny that over the past fifty years of Independence, despite many difficulties and denial of equal opportunities, our women have made a mark in new and varied fields of life? Many of them have distinguished themselves as teachers, as doctors, as engineers, as officers in different disciplines and most important as social and political workers. Lakhs of common women have participated in the struggle of all sections of our people for winning their own sectoral demands, for improving the quality of life of their families and society, for defending our national unity and for widening the content of our democracy. What better political education can there be for potential candidates to decision-making bodies at all levels?
Another question raised is, if one-third seats are given to women, there will be a dearth of able MPs and MLAs and the standard of performance of the legislative bodies would go down. I would respectfully suggest that the hon. Speaker might consider taking an opinion poll of those who are watching the live TV broadcast of Parliament Sessions. It would be interesting to see what the voters think about the standard of performance of the present House where 92.8 per cent are men MPs and only 7.2 per cent are women.
I take the liberty of quoting here the opening paragraph of a document presented by our Government to the participants of the Inter-Parliamentary Specialised Conference held here in Delhi this month.
In fact, it is a statement by no less a person than Mahatma Gandhi, the Father of our Nation. He wrote:
"Woman is the companion of man gifted with equal mental capacities. She has the right to participate in the minutest details of the activities of man and she has the same right of freedom of liberty as he. By sheer force of a vicious custom, even the most ignorant and worthless men have been enjoying a superiority over women which they do not deserve and ought not to have"
If I have quoted Gandhiji the intention is not to insult any male colleague here but to draw the attention to what he calls the "vicious custom" i.e. that mental attitude of the patriarchal society which gives rise to such a question as referred to earlier. Shall we not try, we men and women together, to fight that vicious custom?
I think the main hurdle in the way of the passage of this Bill is the fear of some men that they will be deprived of their seats and consequently their leadership. It is true that some men MPs will be deprived of their seats for some time as the 7.2 per cent seats held by women now will increase to 33 per cent. But in any case, the seats reserved for women would rotate and moreover the reservation is supposed to be reviewed after 15 years according to the Joint Committee's recommendation. For capable long-standing established political leaders, there should be no problem in contesting and winning from another constituency nearby. In any case, none of us have come to the politics with the idea that we shall be life-long occupants of our seats as MPs and MLAs.
The necessity of giving reservation has arisen from the fact that despite being 50 per cent of the voters, the representation of women in the decision-making bodies remained insignificant. Has it not also deprived the whole society by not utilizing the talents of women in the highest decision-making fora? Does it not impoverish our democracy to a considerable extent?
I again implore my male colleagues here to establish a real partnership between men and women in the highest decision-making fora in order to hit out unitedly against the age old discrimination against women and thereby let us help in the establishment of a joint leadership of men and women which can enrich our democracy and advance our society.
We, the women of India, remember with special gratitude the men social reformers who fought valiantly for the improvement of the lot of women in the face of social ostracism and ridicule. Who can forget Raja Rammohan Roy, Pandit Iswar Chandra Vidyasagar, Rabindra Nath Tagore, Subramania Bharati, Jyotiba Phule and so many other illustrious men who will go down in history as some of the greatest benefactors to our society?
My dear male colleagues of this House, please consider the impact.
SHRI SHARAD PAWAR (BARAMATI): Why do you not address the whole House?
SHRIMATI GEETA MUKHERJEE (PANSKURA): All right, men and women of the whole House, please consider the impact. I know that women are all for it. That is why I addressed like that.
Please consider the impact we can make if in this very Session, we can pass this Bill. If we can do that, it will go down in the history of Indian Parliament as one of the most distinguished Sessions and a memorable contribution in our country's progress towards a fuller and more universal democracy and also advanced society.
So, I implore that we should all join in creating that glory by lending everybody's support and voting for the Bill. Please remember that the women who are 50 per cent of the voters will be watching with anxiety and eagerness what we do about this Bill in this Session and will remember you with respect and gratitude if this Bill gets passed in this very Session.
Therefore, let all of us march together towards that fuller democracy where men and women can together build the nation. So, let this Bill be passed in this very Session!
Thank you all.
(ends)
SHRI SOMNATH CHATTERJEE (BOLPUR): Mr. Chairman, Sir, I support the Motion moved by Shri Sharad Yadav.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Do not forget that Bill.
SHRI SOMNATH CHATTERJEE (BOLPUR): Before I go into other important issues, I wish to categorically state that I strongly support Comrade Geeta Mukherjee's proposal. I hope that some way will be found out as to how to take up this Bill and to pass it. I had suggested that we should pass it without discussion and I stick to it. (Interruptions).
SHRI SONTOSH MOHAN DEV (SILCHAR): The Bolpur seat will become a woman's seat.
SHRI SOMNATH CHATTERJEE (BOLPUR): If Bolpur seat becomes a woman's seat and if I am still in the reckoning, I will go to Silchar.
1559 hours (Shri P. C. Chacko in the Chair)
Sir, the last year's President's Address was the product of what I call the constitutional absurdity and lack of political and moral authority. We are happy that this year hon. Rashtrapatiji has been able to read out a speech prepared by a legitimate Government. That is why, the speech reflects the urges and aspirations of the people of this country and addresses some of the basic problems facing the country and the people.
Mr. Chairman, the United Front is not just a combination of political parties born out of political expedience, it is the result of a clearest mandate of the people of this country who have, in no uncertain manner, given their mandate against the forces of communalism and sectarianism. Consciously, I believe, that the people of this country did not vote for a single party. But they have made their choice and expressed it in no uncertain manner, in unmistakable form that they have opted for a secular and democratic administration in this country and they want a Government to be guided by transparency, probity and accountability.
Sir, the coalition government has come to rule this country. I believe that the people of this country realise that one-party rule has not been able to solve the problems of this country when most of the 50 years since our political independence we have had one-party rule. But, Sir, what we find and what is a matter of great importance is that 75 per cent of the voters, three out of four voters in this country, in the last election gave their verdict against communalisation of politics. Sir, their mandate is clear and loud. The people's choice for secular, democratic and liberal administration has to be respected and that is why some of the political parties, 13 or 14, have come together to carry out the mandate of the people. It is not a matter to be scoffed at. We have to have a Government in the Centre. We have to provide an administration which will look into the problems of the people, and try to solve them. Therefore, this United Front, which has been born out of the people's choice and the people's mandate, has a very important duty to perform.
Mr. Chairman, Sir, we are told by the major Opposition Party in this country that this Government lacks legitimacy because on it is own it is not the majority party, that it is supported from outside by the Congress Party which has been ousted from power, and it is supported by the United Front parties not all of whom have joined the Government. Sir, as I said, the clearest decision of the people of this country is that the communal forces have to be halted. This country cannot be allowed to be overrun by those who want to divide the country once again, by those who divide the people on the basis of religion, those who have desecrated a place of worship, those who have violated the Supreme Court order and those who have brought into all seeds of discord in the body politic. Sir, as we have to get rid of the economic corruption from our body polity, from our political life, we have also to get rid of this virus of communalism and separatism from our national life and that is the great obligation which has been imposed on this United Front and it would have been letting the people down ignoring the people's mandate if these political parties who are now in the United Front had not come together to provide an administration which will cater to the needs of the people.
Everybody will realise this that it cannot be a bed of roses for the Government, it cannot be a smooth sailing affair, but they have risen to the occasion and the Common Minimum Programme has been constituted and framed. I believe that even the Congress party has accepted it, which is nothing but, according to me, a testament of hopes, urges and aspirations of the people of this country. It is a charter of comprehensive development of this country and which all parties together, which is a sort of post-electoral alliance, framed. Considering the future of this country, considering the duty of us who are in Parliament, in political life, in public life who try sincerely to remove tears from every eye in this country, they have joined and formulated the United Front, its charter, its programmes and its formulation. I feel that it is the bounden duty of all of us in the Parliament, or even outside, to see that the Government is allowed to do its duty to fulfil the expectations of the people, as indicated in the United Front's Common Minimum Programme.
We have always said and I am happy that the Prime Minister has emphasised on that from time to time, namely, our primary objective is towards the common people, the poor people, how to remove poverty from this country, how to take recourse to the poverty alleviation programmes, how to see that not a single person in this country remains unfed or not fully fed, how to try to provide a shelter on their heads, how to provide that they should have treatment when they are ill or sick. These are the basic minimum rights of any civilised society and it is our bounden duty to fulfil them, specially when a long time has elapsed. Five decades is not a small period. As a nation, we cannot absolve ourselves of the shame that still in our country, there are people below the poverty line, without decent standard of living, there are people who are unable to go to schools or places of learning, there are people in this country who do not get pure drinking water and there are people who die without medical treatment. Therefore, are we not here in this House obliged to see that these minimum facilities are made available?
[NEXT PAGE]