No confidence booster

Opposition should have been better prepared

Politics is indeed where the people are, and so was Congress leader Rahul Gandhi a day after the monsoon session of Parliament concluded on Friday, milling with his constituents in Wayanad, his first visit to his Lok Sabha constituency after a Supreme Court order helped restore his membership. Perplexing, however, was the conduct of Mr Gandhi and the rest of the Opposition in Parliament during the monsoon session, much of which they boycotted as the government ensured the passage of over 20 Bills, almost all without any substantive debate.

The no-confidence motion, which the Opposition, the Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance, or INDIA bloc, had moved was never about numbers. It was essentially to make Prime Minister (PM) Narendra Modi speak on the Manipur issue. Thus, the intent of the motion seemed justified. But into the 90th minute of Mr Modi’s 133-minute speech, Mr Gandhi and the rest of the Opposition members trooped out of the Lok Sabha, surrendering their right to reply. Indeed, the PM could have spoken on Manipur at some length, which he did once the Opposition walked out. But he spent most of his time defending the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led government without focusing much on the vital question of how his government planned to ensure peace in the northeastern state. The only BJP MP from Manipur, Rajkumar Ranjan Singh, a member of the Union council of ministers, whose private residence, as the Congress’ Jairam Ramesh pointed out, was burnt down, did not speak. Neither did Lorho S Pfoze, BJP ally Naga People’s Front MP from the Outer Manipur constituency.

In the process, the Opposition abdicated its responsibility to ask the PM why he moved the goalpost from the current situation in Manipur to the past events in Mizoram in 1966. It was a rare instance of the Opposition not exercising its right to respond in the debates of the 28 no-confidence motions since the first that socialist leader J B Kripalani had moved in August 1963. Did Mr Gandhi leave because Mr Modi attacked the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty? That debate 60 years back, in the context of India’s military defeat in the 1962 war, was no less personal and bitter, replete with instances of name-calling. Socialist leader Ram Manohar Lohia accused Jawaharlal Nehru of nepotism, installing Kashmiris in crucial posts in the government, or alleging that the government spent Rs 25,000 on his security and guarding his dog. The Congress then had hit back.

Exceptions aside, the Opposition members could have been better prepared. Mr Gandhi was passionate, but his speech lacked the ingredients of research and performance. Although some members of the Opposition, including Gaurav Gogoi from the Congress, raised pointed questions and issues, the overall performance left much to be desired. In a way, it also highlighted the kind of challenges the INDIA bloc will face in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. The Union home minister did give a detailed account of what’s happening in Manipur. Still, the rancour, jaded rhetoric, and prolonged underwhelming speeches during those 20 hours of debate suggested there could have been better, more cordial ways to force a discussion on an issue like this than the acrimony of a no-confidence motion. The 40 expunctions ordered by the chair and the Opposition’s complaints that Sansad TV cameras moved away when their speakers criticised the government betrayed the level of trust deficit and diverted attention from the real issue.