Cutting across party lines, members of the Council condemned the alleged remarks against the council by Krishnappa who had moved a private member’s resolution seeking abolition of the Upper House in the Assembly on Thursday.
Krishnappa, while moving the private member’s bill, stated that the House had become a rehabilitation centre for those who could not win elections. He said, the government was spending Rs 300 crore every year on the Upper House and the House had become a white elephant.
Also Read
Krishnappa had also remarked on the quality of members entering the Upper House and had stated that the purpose of creating the Upper House was not being served.
When the members brought the issue to the notice of Chairman D H Shankaramurthy, he allowed a discussion during the Zero Hour. Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, in his reply, said neither he nor his party favoured the abolition of the Upper House.
The opposition chief whip, Ganesh Karnik, said that while moving the private bill, the MLA had made some unsavoury remarks against the upper house and its members. It only shows his ignorance of the sanctity and the constitutional validity of the House.
The council was not the creation of the assembly.
Article 168 of the Constitution provided for the creation of the upper house, Karnik said. Makers of the Constitution provided for creation of the upper house to see that experts from different fields entered the legislature, debated the legislations thoroughly and make them more people-oriented, he said.
Referring to remarks against the house on a TV news channel, he demanded laying of restrictions on individuals passing judgements over a constitutional institution like the Upper House.
JD(S) member Basavaraj Horatti said that his party did not concur with Krishnappa and that his remarks against the council were condemnable. The debate over the issue in the assembly was unfortunate, he said. Veeranna Mattikatti of the Congress too condemned the remarks.