M A I N   N E W S

news Analysis
Why govt wants debate, but no voting on FDI
Tribune News Service

New Delhi, November 22
The washout of Day 1 of the winter session of Parliament was a foregone conclusion. Much before it began, contours of a stand-off between parties in the Opposition and the ruling coalition were drawn with the former insisting on a discussion on foreign direct investment on multi-brand retail under rules that entail voting. The Government was not in agreement and the result: a stalemate.

Number Crunch * The 18-MP DMK, the UPA’s second most important constituent after the exit of the 19-MP Trinamool Congress, is opposed to retail FDI * Adding to the woes of the Congress parliamentary managers is the ambivalence of the 22-MP SP, which like the BSP, is offering outside support * The SP had participated in the bandh against FDI and coalition managers would have to work hard to ensure it does not remain with the Opposition

While the Government is ready to discuss the pros and cons of its FDI decision, it is not prepared to have the debate admitted under rules that may result in a show of hands in Parliament.

The reasons are not far to seek. With 18 MPs, the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), the second most important constituent in the UPA after the exit of the 19 MP-strong Trinamool Congress (TMC), is opposed to FDI in retail. Adding to the woes of the Congress parliamentary managers is the ambivalence of the Samajwadi Party, which like the Bahujan Samaj Party is, supporting the ruling coalition at the Centre from outside.

The SP, with 22 MPs, showed up at the September 20 all-India bandh against FDI just as the DMK. Of course, today the SP members stood up in Parliament opposing the cap on supply of subsidised cooking gas cylinders, yet the ruling coalition managers would have to walk the extra mile to ensure the SP does not remain with the Opposition.

As of now, the UPA is leveraging the tactical advantage. Even though notices for a discussion in either House is pending decision by the presiding officers, in practice, motions entailing voting cannot be admitted till the Government agrees.

Here too, the Government can negotiate its wording which on the present issue reads something like: This House disapproves the decision of the Government allowing FDI in multi-brand retailing... Parliamentary affairs Minister Kamal Nath today offered a meeting on Monday with leaders of various parties in the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha separately to work a way out. It is not unusual for Governments to resist attempts by the Opposition to have a discussion under a substantive motion which, if carried, is an embarrassment and seen as a parliamentary rap. Way back in 1997, the United Front Government that was supported by the CPM from outside and CPI and SP from inside, did not agree for a discussion on recall of a Governor under Rule 184.