The Speaker of the Maharashtra legislative assembly, Haribhau Bagde, who is rightfully credited with initiating and taking the BJP to the masses in Marathwada, has been in the field of politics for around five decades now. He spoke to Abhijit Mulye on various issues regarding the democratic institutions that are being debated off late…
You have vast experience in politics. During the previous Shiv Sena-BJP government, you were a minister. Now you are the Speaker of the assembly. How do you look at these responsibilities?
In a democratic set up, the speaker has more responsibilities in terms of keeping the democratic traditions and principles alive, while the ministers are entrusted with the day-to-day functioning of the government. Both the roles have their own advantages and limitations. A minister is more available for people, the common men. He is answerable to the cabinet and has that forum to make suggestions. The Speaker too has powers to call ministers and the secretaries for discussions and make suggestions regarding the functioning of the government. But, the Speaker’s major role is to see that the house functions well, carries out its business in a desirable fashion and that democratic principles are not undermined. But, going beyond these roles, I feel, basically, the government, the democratic institutions are all targeted towards one goal and that is the people of the state. Whatever responsibility one is carrying out, that person needs to keep in mind that ultimately one is answerable to the people and he has to work for them. From this point of view, it is all the same. Whether you are a minister or a speaker does not make much difference.
You said the Speaker is primarily responsible for the smooth running of the house. What were the changes that you wanted to bring to the functioning of the assembly and you could do?
I was elected to this post on November 12, 2014. That means I shall be completing a year in office soon. In this year, there have been three sessions of the assembly. If you look minutely, you will realise that in all of these three sessions during the past one year, the bulk of parliamentary business conducted in the house measures more than that of any of the sessions in almost the past 10 years. The house worked for on an average of eight hours per day, which is the highest in the past few years. The bills, the discussions, the debates, the motions, addresses by the ruling side and that from the opposition, all sorts of parliamentary business got sufficient time in this past one year. Though some days were lost, overall the house conducted business for more numbers of hours per day than the previous terms. This was one of the most important changes that I wanted to bring to the functioning of the house and I feel I was successful.
The BJP is being accused of undermining parliamentary procedures or customs. How do you look at these accusations?
It is wrong to say that the parliamentary procedures or customs are being undermined. Generally these allegations are made whenever there is less scope for debate in the house. Whenever there are no major debates, people tend to think that the parliamentary procedures are being undermined. The facts tell us something different. I’ve already told you that the house has worked for a longer time every day through the year. Hence, I don’t think there is any merit in these allegations. Also, the speaker’s role is to encourage debate and discussions over any issue and I’ve worked accordingly, which has resulted in the increased number of working hours.
The BJP has always demanded that the number of days the assembly works needs to be increased. What is your take on that now?
The working of the assembly is bound by precedents and norms and customs. Generally, nobody is in favour of overruling these customs or precedents. Many a times it is also seen that the customs have been the most practicable way out. I, too, as a member of the BJP have demanded more work to be carried out in the house. And after assuming charge, I’ve made it happen. The house has carried out more business. Instead of the house being run for a greater number of days, it can run for a more number of hours every working day and carry out more business. We increased the number of hours by starting the meeting of the house an hour earlier and by waiting late till late in the night till the business is completed.
The other component of the assembly is the various committees that are formed to carry out the business. How do you look at the business of these committees?
The various committees of the assembly are important from the point of view of keeping the various traditions, precedents and norms of this great democratic institution alive. Some of the committees also help in the actual carrying out of the business of the house. The committees thoroughly discuss contentious issues and submit their reports to the house. Earlier, such reports were hardly discussed or debated about. But, now we have decided that at least one such report would be submitted to the house and thoroughly debated.
There has been an allegation that MLAs are too sensitive regarding their privileges nowadays. We hear that there has been a rise in the number of privilege motions. How do you look at this issue?
Yes. The numbers appear to be on the rise. I don’t have exact numbers to compare the things, but you can always check the latest figures on the website. Often, members tend to think if they are not invited to a function or if their names are not mentioned on invitations, that amounts to breach of privilege. Such misconceptions will have to be done away with, as they add to the numbers of proposals and the office work that goes in along with that. Generally, whenever a member moves a proposal for breach of privilege motion, the assembly secretariat scrutinises the same and those cases which have some merit are sent to the privileges committee. The committee then decides whether to accept or reject the proposal. If they accept it, the proposal is sent back to the member and a motion is then moved in the house. If the members have a better clarity over the privileges, the number of proposals coming to us would be small. That is it.
There has also been a demand to have all these privileges codified. How do you look at that demand?
Codification is a wider issue. But, we are working on bringing more clarity over the issue of privileges amongst the members of the assembly. We are planning to have a joint meeting of all old and new members over the issue of privileges. Most probably the meeting will be conducted during the winter session. Members tend to be very insistent over their proposals regarding breach of privilege motion. Though the proposals are scrutinised at various levels, the members keep on insisting on taking up the motion for debate in the house. We are planning to have constitutional experts to address the members over the issue, so that they will have a better understanding of the issues and unnecessary heartburning over the issue would be avoided.
