One wonders why the Opposition would move a No-Confidence motion against a party which has its government in fairly 70% states of the country. Did the Opposition actually expect a positive result? Were they that presumptuous of their eminence, or rather of the Bharatiya Janata Party’s alleged decline? No, of course they were not. No one is so audacious as to believe that. The Opposition had a direct vested interest in the motion. They were playing for the gallery- they wanted to reveal the government’s faults to the public before the upcoming polls. One more major factor to be taken into consideration was the need to portray Rahul Gandhi as a competent leader of the apparently united opposition front, though, of course, that didn’t work out perfectly well.
The motion was introduced by 9 opposition parties, which the speaker accepted at the start of the Monsoon session and allotted the debate to be held for July 20, Friday.
The Indian National Congress President, Rahul Gandhi, surprised the nation in multiple ways that day. He started off very strongly, with a confident body language and hand-gestures, all of which were a stark contrast to his past speeches. He not only spoke about all the pseudo promises made by PM Narendra Modi to provide employment to 2 crore youths but also topics concerning the welfare of farmers, Dalits, tribals and women in the country. He raised a strong point, recalling the initial introduction of GST by the UPA Government, which had been rejected by Modi as Gujarat CM.
Here was when the downfall started, when RaGa, directly accused the Defence Minister, Nirmala Sitharaman, of lying to the country, about the confidential French Rafale deal. Referring to a Cabinet Minister in a motion introduced after 15 years in the Parliament, was clear evidence of the Congress President’s obvious lack of political experience. RaGa risked a privilege motion being evoked on him, which would have resulted in his disqualification from elections for 5 years, thereby paralysing his already-wobbling political career.
The hot trending topic of the dismal affairs of the country i.e. the alarming increase in the number of lynching cases was also discussed, and it was implicitly implied that the Centre was silent on mob-lynching issues, and was not taking any steps to curb it.
Congress was aggravated over being allotted merely 38 minutes to present their point, but considering the insubstantial address of the party president, and the lack of evidence, was the less time really so unfortunate? Or did it actually save the party from being robbed of its leader, and its dignity thereof?
Drama rides over debating skills. When faced with disruptions from the Lower House during his address, a common occurrence in the Indian legislative bodies, he was clearly fazed and disconcerted, unlike his counterparts. One cannot expect a political party to let its opponent have a free run and listen to them, the way disciples do.
His amateur discourse earned him a reprimand from the Speaker, Sumitra Mahajan, who expressed displeasure over his ‘natak’ in the House of People, on national television, referring to the hug followed by the wink.
Recollecting an incident from 30 years back when there were only 2 people to represent the party in the Parliament, Rajnath Singh, in his speech, compared it to the present situation where the Opposition had to assemble members to introduce a no-confidence motion against the aforementioned party.
Mulayam Singh Yadav, from the Samajwadi Party, expressed concern over the government not paying heed to the financial problems faced by the farmers, and how raw materials were provided to them at high rates.
The PM, in his speech, expressed astonishment at being charged with a no-confidence motion, believing that the Opposition did not seem to understand the mindset and feelings of the people, who had full confidence in the government. Though his speech was laced with the usual oratory skills, and witty subtle remarks, members of other parties believed it was disconnected from reality and did not answer any of the Oppositions questions and doubts.
The motion, as was expected, ended with the NDA winning 325 votes against 126 of the Opposition.
Now, the question arises: Who is the greater evil? Is it the UPA, with its laid-back attitude, corruption scams, and puppet Prime Ministers? Or is it the NDA, with its 56-inch wide chested leaders, saffron agenda, triggering communal violence across the country? It’s up to the people to decide, and they have less than a year to do so. Unless the Opposition acquires a leader who does not playfully wink in the Parliament, or who gives a significant discourse without mixing up Hindi and English words, we all know who the country will be forced to vote for.
By Shimon Chadha
Image source: news18.com