Mumbai: English newspaper editorials have unanimously criticized Rajya Sabha Vice President Harivansh Narayan Singh’s refusal to carry out a vote split and the ensuing chaos that followed in passing the Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) bill of 2020 Farm Products and The Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Guarantee and Farm Services Act, 2020 on September 20.
Hindustan Times, who had previously supported the government’s efforts to achieve a new legislative and political architecture for agriculture as a “method of empowering farmers,” felt on Sunday the process was undermined in Rajya Sabha. This, the newspaper said, “reflected poorly on India’s parliamentary democracy.” The newspaper noted that ideally the opposition’s enthusiasm for sending the bills to a select committee should have been followed, and that both the content and the process of the bills should have been adhered to.
“The discussion in the House was hasty, since the government wants to pass other legislation quickly, before the session comes to an end. And there was no division, but a voice vote, which raised genuine questions about whether the government had the numbers, “the editorial said.
Similary, The Hindu he called the conduct of Rajya Sabha’s vice president a sign of “sheer impudence.” “The bills in question have been challenged on constitutional and practical grounds, but that’s a different point. The procedural rules regarding voting are unequivocal in the sense that if a voice vote is challenged, “the votes will be taken by operating the automatic vote recorder or by members entering the Lobbies,” the newspaper observed.
Calling the explanation that the members were not demanding a division of their seats and claiming that the House was not in order is false, the newspaper took a position that the disorder was actually caused by the president’s refusal to order a division. . The newspaper called the chaos “unpleasant” and also blamed the opposition for not “adhering to decorum” while expressing concern. “Parliament is a deliberative forum and not a theater for protest demonstrations,” the newspaper observed.
the Indian express, in his editorial titled ‘The Custodian’, questioned why Singh did not show enough grace within the House, as he showed when offering tea to the eight opposition MPs suspended for Sunday’s fight. “The job of the presiding officer is to run the House, not just make sure that government business is done. Any response to rebellious behavior must be consistent with the democratic spirit and must not be influenced by the position of the party to which it belongs or supports it, ”the newspaper critically pointed out.
the Times of India assumed that parliament’s two key farm reform bills have the potential to boost farm incomes and productivity. It should have been a historic occasion, but it didn’t get the solidarity it deserved, the newspaper observed. “While a big jump in agricultural trade is anticipated, the laws undermine the regulatory privileges enjoyed by state governments. This has stoked farmers’ unrest in some states and many states not ruled by the BJP, and opposition MPs, with a respectable number in Rajya Sabha, came prepared for a confrontation, ”the editorial said.
.
