You must Sign In to post a response.
  • Category: India

    Why this no confidence motion?

    We all know the way BJP government came to power with a huge majority and still, they have a majority in Loksabha.
    And knowing all this Telugu desham party still bought No confidence motion to show their aggression for not getting special status for Andhra Pradesh. They can choose other ways to show their aggression but why to waste the time of loksabha.
    Isn't this just waste of public money?
    when there are so many bills pending, isn't its just a waste of time?
    What are your views about this no-confidence motion?
  • #642573
    The so called opposition parties are not having any concrete issues on hand to fight this NDA government and thus citing some issues of no importance and thinking having garnered the support of like minded parties, the Congress is confident of winning the no confidence motion this time. After the Karnataka elections, there was a move for the third front and in that melee, the Congress also started itself to open the doors for alliance with like minded parties and we were surprised to see even bitter opponent Chandrababu Naidu raising hands of opposition unity with Congress President at Bengaluru two months ago. So by seeing that emotional outburst of regional parties , Congress felt that it can now floor the Modi government with no confidence motion just on one single major issue of not giving special status to AP. But BJP has the figures to fight out.
    K Mohan
    'Idhuvum Kadandhu Pogum "
    Even this challenging situation would ease

  • #642582
    The main culprit here is Chandra Babu Naidu. He shouldn't have accepted the Special package instead of Special status to Andhra Pradesh. When the Special Package was announced, Chandra Babu Naidu and his Colleagues celebrated saying that Special Package is better than Special status and he told people of Andhra Pradesh that whoever raises slogans for Special Status, they will be put behind the bar. But the opposition Parties like YSRCP and Janasena did not leave the issue and people also started supporting them. Realising his mistake, now Chandra Babu started demanding for Special Status. It is purely opportunistic move by Chandra Babu Naidu. He wants the Special Package, announced by BJP, is to be disbursed within his tenure as Chief Minister, but BJP says it will be given gradually. Till now, Chandra Babu Naidu didn't do any development in Andhra Pradesh. He somewhat wants to gain some mileage by making some political overtures.

  • #642596
    The no-confidence motion is of no use. Everybody knows that BJP is having a majority and we can't expect cross-voting from that party. But somehow the opposition parties want to create some problem and see that their voice is heard by the public.
    Coming to Special Status to AP, it is true that Babu accepted special package offered by the central government and kept silent on special status. Central government might have acted fast on that issue and seen that the promises made by them are recorded and might have given a programme or schedule of payment releases and they might have taken a decision on Vizag railway zone and steel factory. But they ignored and taken the things lightly.
    Both Babu, as well as Modi, are equally responsible for the present status. But Congress talking about AP is a joke. They are the people responsible for the present status. They might have planned the division much better. Anyhow between Naidu, Modi and Sonia, AP is suffering.

    always confident

  • #642620
    No confidence motion gives the members an opportunity to speak and criticise the government. After one no confidence motion is dismissed the next one can be taken only after six months. Participating in no confidence motion the opposition can expose the government on its inaction or errors and lack of performance. There is immunity for their talk. Usually it is these times (especially when opposition is sure that motion will be voted out and dismissed) that all parties give chance to their young and new members to speak. It is from such occasions that parties discover promising brilliant parliament speakers.

    By moving no-confidence motion the opposition can put ruling side on pressure and embarrassment. When they feel that the ruling coalition is shaky, they may try best to create wedges in them and exploit the situation. The ruling part may then have to succumb to partners pressure.Those sitting on fence will have a good time.

  • #642624
    [Response removed by Admin. Read forum policies.]

  • #642630
    I agree Neelam, that the move is a wastage of time and our money. But, should we be surrendering ourselves to a majority? As you had stated, the BJP or the NDA did the same when they were in the opposition. And they were better placed. If the Modi government feel that they can do anything, keeping in mind the majority, I do feel that they need to rethink. It is, after all, a new experience!
    Chandrababu Naidu is an experienced hand and knows very well to play the game of politics (may be better than Modi or Amit Shah, the master manipulator). Let us look forward to better times.

    And, to be frank, I have nothing against any political party. I would like to call a spade a spade.

    “Give instructions only to those people who seek knowledge after they have discovered their ignorance.”-Confucius

  • #642632
    Now it has become increasingly clear that the no confidence motion will be defeated and the NDA Government will sail through but what the TDP and BJP would argue in the house has to be seen.
    K Mohan
    'Idhuvum Kadandhu Pogum "
    Even this challenging situation would ease

  • #642643
    I am very happy to note the maturity of Ms. Neelam. Please don't let this logical mind get dominated by propaganda. Why did this No-confidence motion now? The answer is simple. Let me explain.

    The monsoon session is only for 21 days (including Saturdays and Sundays). The No-confidence motion will easily take 7 days. Thereafter, the opposition parties will boycott alleging that their views have not been heard/they did not get enough opportunity. Then they will boycott or disturb the session for the remaining period. In this way, they will stall important bills like 'Triple Talaq' Bill, Women Reservation Bill and discussion on 'niqah-halala' so that their anti-woman stand doesn't get exposed.

    Ms. Neelam! I think you have correctly anticipated the game-plan.

    Beware! I question everything and everybody.

  • #642644
    Partha sir, I contradict with your views here. It is the Government which allowed the no-confidence motion through the Speaker. If it didn't allow the motion, we have already seen what has happened in the last Budget session. Same mess will continue even in this session if it didn't allow. So, the Government has allowed it. After the no-confidence motion, the Government will bring those Bills what you have mentioned.

  • #642645
    Mr. Bhuvan: We had to study Parliamentary Procedure. If the proposed motion contains the signature of the requisite number of MPs and if it submitted 3 working days in advance with no technical fault, then the speaker is bound to allow the motion. There is no question of involvement of the Government. Even the Speaker can't use his discretion.
    Beware! I question everything and everybody.

  • #642646
    Even I have studied the Parliamentary Procedures to some extent. Do you think last time when TDP and YSRCP proposed the no-confidence motion 13 times, they proposed it without having the requisite numbers?

  • #642647
    Either there was a shortage of the requisite number of MPs or sufficient days' notice was given or there was some other technical fault like the wording of the motion, etc. Further, initial examination of No-confidence motion is done by the Secretary-General of Lok Sabha Secretariat. He points out the fault, if any, to the Speaker and then the Speaker takes the final decision.
    Beware! I question everything and everybody.

  • #642649
    Partha sir, we have to accept the truth. There was no technical fault at all in all the 13 times it was introduced. At that time BJP did not want to discuss the matter. That's all. If we clearly understands the politics in Andhra Pradesh, during these days, TDP is facing lot of anti-incumbency and people are not in a position to trust TDP at all. Hence, BJP allowed the no-confidence motion on special status this time. If you follow Andhra politics, lot has changed in these 2-3 months because of Janasena Party of actor turned politician Mr. Pawan Kalyan.

  • #642689
    I am really happy with the responses of the members of the ISC regarding the political scenario where everyone is just playing the game of politics.
    As Saji Ganesh sir said Chandra Babu Naidu knows the game of politics well this clearly tells us how the politics have become just a game for political leaders. The people who should be there for serving the nation are playing such conspiracy using various tactics to win the public support not to serve them.
    Thank You Partha sir for supporting my notion.
    We all know that there is no such constitutional thing like special status for states but the way its demand is increasing from one after the other state government will soon have no option other than to declare all the state into this category and this word will lose its meaning.

    "It is hardest thing in the world to be good thinker without being a good self examiner"

  • #642701
    In India , the opposition parties are having a very bad practice of bringing no confidence motion against the government in spite of the fact that the ruling party has the required majority and the confidence would be defeated. But still a hullah has been created after speaker has accepted the motion and through the session every opposition leader would be given chance to speak in favor of the motion tabled. If the chance is given and when the leaders wont come out with right figures and valuation of the government, they become the laughing stock in front of the people who are watching live all the proceedings. Are our leaders really prepared for this discussion ?
    K Mohan
    'Idhuvum Kadandhu Pogum "
    Even this challenging situation would ease

  • #642717
    We are in a democratic country with the same rights to opposition parties as is with the ruling party. So lets enjoy this as each one of us would be trying to prove their potential on the floor. As author has rightly pointed out that this got nothing but the wastage of time & money of the tax payer's like us. But this is a hard truth which we required to digest. This is not the first time & not the last time but will continue to exist even in the future.

    But in a positive note this will again pave the way for assisting us with more reasons to support & vote for the right political parties.

  • #642720
    A No-Confidence motion is a Non-Confidence motion, Whether accepted by the Chair or not. It is an indication that a section of the people has lost their faith in the government. And it does speak a lot! Chandrababu Naidu has made it clear that it is not very easy for Modi and team in the next election. Shri Modi or Amit Shah won't find their path very easy in the next election.
    “Give instructions only to those people who seek knowledge after they have discovered their ignorance.”-Confucius

  • #642730
    #642717, This is not at all a wastage of time. The framers of our Constitution did not simply put Adjournment Motion, Censure Motion and No-confidence Motion into our Constitution. There is lot of meaning in it. At the time of framing the Constitution, there were no bigger parties other than Congress. At the time approval of the Constitution, most of the members of the Constituent Assembly were from Congress and the Government at the Centre was also Congress. If the members of the Constituent Assembly had thought that there would be danger for their Government in future, they could have removed these motions from the Parliamentary procedures of the Constitution. There isn't any rule that opposition can't introduce these motions if Government has absolute majority. It also means that some important issues need to be discussed.

    #642689, There may not be Constitutional provision for special status, but 11 states are still enjoyiong it. You have to understand how Andhra Pradesh got divided. 30-40 percent of revenues of the undivided Andhra Pradesh was coming from Hyderabad. Now, Hyderabad has gone to Telangana. People of residual Andhra Pradesh never wanted bifurcation of their State. Most of the people, who established industries in Hyderabad are from Andhra region thinking that Hyderabad is their state capital. Telangana state now opposes giving Special status to Andhra Pradesh because if industrial incentives are given to residual AP, these industrialists will return to their home state. Now, you can understand the grave situation of Andhra Pradesh. Though the state has lot entrepreneurial people, they have not established their industries in their home state. Industrial incentives are must for residual AP in order attract new industries.

    If there is no provision which allows giving special status to Andhra Pradesh, then why both Congress and BJP agreed to give special status for 5 years to Andhra Pradesh while bifurcating the state. It may look simple to other state people but not for people of Andhra Pradesh.

  • Sign In to post your comments