GS2 PYQ (Mains Answer Writing): Parliamentary Debates and Motions | Indian Polity for UPSC CSE PDF Download

Individual Parliamentarian's role as the national lawmaker is on a decline, which in turn, has adversely impacted the quality of debates and their outcome. Discuss. (UPSC GS2 Mains)

Introduction
The Constitution provides for the legislature to make laws, the government to implement laws, and the courts to interpret and enforce these laws. While the judiciary is independent from the other two branches, the government is formed with the support of a majority of members in the legislature. Therefore, the government is collectively responsible to Parliament for its actions. This also implies that Parliament (i.e. Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha) can hold the government accountable for its decisions, and scrutinize its functioning. This may be done using various methods including, during debates on Bills or issues on the floor of Parliament, by posing questions to ministers during Question Hour, and in parliamentary committees. Within this reference framework, role of Individual Parliamentarian as the national lawmaker assumes greater significance in the health and vitality of the Parliamentary democracy.
Parliamentarian’s role as the national lawmaker: 

• • MPs may raise issues of public importance in Parliament, and examine the government’s response to problems being faced by citizens through: 
  • a debate, which entails a reply by the concerned minister, or 
  • a motion which entails a vote. 
• Using these methods, MPs may discuss important matters, policies, and topical issues. The concerned minister while replying to the debate may make assurances to the House regarding steps that will be taken to address the situation. 
• Alternatively, MPs may move a motion for: 
  • discussing important issues (such as inflation, drought, and corruption), 
  • adjournment of business in a House in order to express displeasure over a government policy, or 
  • expressing no confidence in the government leading to its resignation. 
• To improve government accountability in Parliament, the opposition in some countries such as the UK, Canada, and Australia forms a shadow cabinet. Under such a system, opposition MPs track a certain portfolio, scrutinize its performance and suggest alternate programs. This allows for detailed tracking and scrutiny of ministries, and assists MPs in making constructive suggestions. Some of these countries also provide for days when the opposition parties decide the agenda for Parliament. 

However, given the dominance of parties, independence of MPs are rare. There are other causes as well which have led to the decline in the Individual Parliamentarian’s role as the national lawmaker: 

• Judicial activism by higher Judiciary (High Courts and the Supreme Court). 
• Brute Majority in the ruling government - giving little or no space for democratic dissent. 
• Instead of Lawmakers deciding on Policy matters and the formulation of law, these critical factors are inserted by the Party High Command. 
• Lack of Subject matter knowledge by the lawmakers leading to delegating the matter to the bureaucracy. 
• Avoidance of Pre - vetting process in the inner Party deliberations. 
• Penalizing MP/MLAs if they speak and vote their mind against Party lines in the Legislature under the anti defection law. 

Individual members have a great role to play in furthering our representative democracy by contributing to productive debates. Steps like, 

• Equipping them with relevant information 
• Unbiased role of speaker in allotting them time. 
• Freeing them from party whip 
• Maintaining the decorum of the house must be taken for them to fulfill their role. 

Some unknown facts 

• Nearly half of the newly-elected Lok Sabha members have criminal charges against them, a 26% increase as compared to 2014, according to the Association of Democratic Reforms (ADR). 
• Of the 539 winning candidates analysed by the ADR, as many as 233 MPs or 43% have criminal charges. 
• The BJP has 116 MPs or 39% of its winning candidates with criminal cases, followed by 29 MPs (57%) from the Congress, 13 (81%) from the JDU, 10 (43%) from the DMK and nine (41%) from the TMC, the ADR said. 
• In 2014, 185 Lok Sabha members (34%) had criminal charges and 112 MPs had serious criminal cases against them. In 2009, 162 (nearly 30%) out of the 543 Lok Sabha MPs had criminal charges and 14% had serious criminal charges, it said. 
• In the new Lok Sabha, nearly 29% of the cases are related to rape, murder, attempt to murder or crime against women.Pragya Singh Thakur, the newly-elected BJP MP from Bhopal, faces terror charges in connection with the 2008 Malegaon blasts 
• About 75 per cent of MPs in the Lok Sabha have at least a graduate degree, while 10 per cent are only matriculates, according to a report by PRS Legislative Research. 
• The percentage of MPs elected in the 2014 general elections who do not have a matriculate degree is significantly higher (13 per cent) in comparison to the 15th Lok Sabha (3 per cent). 

Conclusion
India’s citizens need a more robust legislative system that offers public representatives — our MPs, Ministers and the Prime Minister — a greater sense of authority. However, one must stand wary against rank populism infecting our body politic. Parliament should be a space for policy and not for politics.According to a 2014 survey among national voters to study the perception of voters regarding MPs in their respective constituencies; an MP’s own high education may not be a guarantee for promotion of literacy and education in his constituency. In the survey, views on 21 most educated members of the 15th Lok Sabha, those with a PhD, did not reflect any better performance in promotionof literacy. Only 10 out of these 21 MPs scored above the national average when it came to better schooling in.

Topics covered - MPs, MLAs, Legislation in India, Parliament