According to the editorial “PM and Parliament” (January 4), Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee is right in saying there is no need for the prime minister to seek the approval of a sub-committee of Parliament when he enjoys the confidence of the elected majority of Parliament. India has adopted the Westminster model of parliamentary democracy and Mr Mukherjee should have known that the UK prime minister regularly appears before the Liaison Committee of the House of Commons to face questions on Cabinet decisions. The prime minister heads Cabinet and is answerable to the people. In a democracy, Parliament is just one of the mediums through which the prime minister or ministers are accountable to the people for the government’s policies and decisions. Joint Parliamentary Committees (JPCs), parliamentary committees, investigating agencies, media and courts of law are other mediums that make the executive accountable.
Also, Mr Mukherjee’s offer of a special session of Parliament to discuss the 2G telecom scam was just a ploy to blunt the Opposition’s demand for a JPC. What was there to be discussed in the special session when a JPC probe demanded by the Opposition was not acceptable to the government? Moreover, it is unfair to say that the Opposition should come out with a no-confidence vote. Had the Opposition had the majority’s support on the floor, it would have been in power. Irrespective of their views on a JPC probe, none of the UPA allies is going to vote against the government on the issue since nothing is more important for them than to remain in power. Does this mean that a government, by virtue of its majority in the lower House, is free to do what it likes and get away by setting the rules and ways of enquiry? The prime minister and finance minister need to understand the Opposition’s demand for a JPC is gaining credibility and the government’s refusal is only leading the people to believe that the government has much to hide.
M C Joshi, Lucknow
