Minimum government can mean repeal of laws that have provided the framework of our democratic edifice. So, I would like to have some clarity. I am not against minimum government, maximum governance. We are all for maximum governance. We are all for a better government. We are all for a quality government, but this word "minimum government" raises more questions than it answers. Similarly, "Ek Bharat - Shreshtha Bharat", who can disagree with this? But let us also recognise that India is an example of unity in diversity, not just unity in diversity, but unity through diversity. I hope that the government doesn't want to impose uniformity in the name of the unity. We want unity, but we do not want uniformity.
India is an example in which there is diversity of extraordinary kinds - religious diversity, linguistic diversity, caste diversity, regional diversity, diversity of thought, diversity of action, the great advantage of India is chaos, the great advantage of India is the fact that people are free to think, people are free to express their voice, people are free to dissent. I hope in the name of "Ek Bharat - Shreshtha Bharat" we do not quell dissent, we do not become intolerant of diversity, we do not accommodate different points of view, and we go on the assumption that whatever one person, or, one government says is the ultimate truth. I hope that is not the meaning of "Ek Bharat", and, therefore, here also, Sir, we need some clarity on exactly what the government needs.
Finally, I am very happy that the president's address shows pragmatism on the part of the government to abandon positions that were taken when they were not in government. One of the fundamental rules of the parliamentary democracy is where you stand depends on where you sit; and those who are sitting on that side were sitting here. They took certain positions. Piyush Goyal, knows what I am going to refer to. Sir, the Goods and Services Tax (GST) was an idea of Yashwant Sinha. It was taken forward by P Chidambaram and Pranab Mukherjee. But we could not implement GST because of the opposition from a couple of members of the government. Now, I am very glad, Sir, that president's address recommits the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government to the introduction of GST. You will have full support. We will not go into the question of why you didn't support us for a five-year period.
Continued by Jairam Ramesh: But better late than never, and I hope that GST will soon become a reality. Similarly, Sir, my senior colleague has already mentioned about the paragraph, which was lucid to his ears, that is, Para 17, which is a ringing endorsement of the Ministry of Minority Affairs that was objected to when it was created in 2004. Also, on the nuclear agreement, when the government says, "We will take the Indo-US Nuclear Trade forward," I am reminded of those days when our government was berated, when Manmohan Singh was berated, for bartering away India's sovereignty to the US. But I am glad that today this government sees merit in the nuclear agreement and wants to take it forward.
Now, about interlinking of rivers, there is a very small phrase that has been introduced on the interlinking of rivers which shows a welcome pragmatism and I commend the minister of environment who may, perhaps, have included this phrase. The position of the NDA government is that there should be interlinking of rivers, that it must be there at all costs. But I am glad that two words have crept in into the president's address. I do not know whether knowingly or unknowingly, it says, "Including linking of rivers 'wherever feasible'." I welcome this introduction because interlinking of rivers has environmental, social, political and ecological consequences. I am not saying that it should not be interlinked. But "wherever feasible" is the operative term.
Minister of Urban Development Venkaiah Naidu: Are you opposing interlinking of rivers?
Jairam Ramesh: This is not the time to discuss the issue of interlinking of rivers. I am not in the dock, but they are in the dock. ...(Interruptions)...
Chairman: Please, let the honourable member finish.
Jairam Ramesh: I am commenting on the president's address. My views on interlinking of rivers are immaterial because right now you are in power. This is the address of your government. And, Sir, the freedom of the Opposition is to criticise, but we will also give constructive co-operation where there are areas of agreement. So, what I stand for on the interlinking of rivers is immaterial to this particular debate. Sir, in short, what I want to say is that the president's address reflects the priorities of the government. The priorities of the government reflect continuity of programmes. This is a new government, just two weeks old, and I can only plead with my colleagues in the government that they should seriously look at some of these programmes that have been there on the ground. The Swachch Bharat Abhiyan is nothing but the Nirmal Bharat Abhiyan. You can have nice packaging. The Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchai Yojana is nothing but the Accelerated Irrigation Benefit Scheme. I mean, you can package these schemes better; you can give nice sounding names. But I would request you, whatever is worth keeping, please keep it, do not abandon it.
Edited excerpts from Congress Rajya Sabha MP, Jairam Ramesh's speech on the motion of thanks to the President's Address, June 11, 2014, New Delhi