The parliamentary standards are declining day by day. There has been brawls earlier too in Lok Sabha sessions, but the difference between the events of 1989 and now is that in the interim period, there has been a complete dumping down of the entire polity. The Parliament back then was still a platform for articulating the concerns of the people. Be it corruption in high places or the Ayodhya issue, the late 80s saw some of the biggest mass movements since the anti Emergency stir. The MPs did what they were voted for articulating the aspirations of the people.
Though misplaced, the protests over the implementation of the Mandal Commission report were the last real instance of people's anger at a mass level. Dissent is going out of fashion in a country where die middle class no longer tries to provide leadership to a nascent-sentiment.
No one really cares if the Parliament ends up wasting people’s money. Reams of documents might show how the quality and quantity of debate has gone down over the years, but as far as the lawmakers are concerned, beyond platitudes, there is little that one hears about. It is all about scoring brownie points now. When the 14th Lok Sabha was convened, the NDA tried to come out its defeat-induced shock by blocking proceedings over the so-called tainted minister’s issue.
For the UPA, it was a convenient breather, which offered it free run at a time when some of its policies needed to be put under the scanner. This has continued. Television, too, has added to the dumping down of the politician. Previously, leaders had to be forge linkages between the sentiments on the street and those in the House. Now it is sufficient to perfect the art of delivering punchy sound bites and leave the rest to satellite television, where star anchors will ensure that there is no further scrutiny. It is all about enactment now. But just as rowdy cricketers became -more unrestrained regardless of stump microphones and ultra slow-motion replays, the elected representatives turned more unresponsive to the pleas of the Chair. Indeed, the wheel turned full circle when the speaker, Mr. Chatterjee was forced to order and dimming of the lights and the turning off of the cameras.
The last four years have seen a litany of scandals: accepting payment to ask questions, while others have been busy using parliamentary cover to traffic people and god alone knows what else. Who in the opposition would respect the Chair when even stalwarts question its impartiality? The Speaker might have fought the judiciary tooth and nail in ensuring that it did not don the role of lawmakers. During the eye-ball-to-eye-ball confrontation between the legislature and the judiciary, all the parties rallied behind the Speaker because they found it an honorable stance; but they forget all about this amid the din in the well of the House. Last year, Mr. Chatterjee resurrected the ‘right to recall’ debate. But after ritualistic endorsement, it was forgotten.