M A I N   N E W S

2G Spectrum Scam
Don’t want sermons from CAG, says Cong
MPs mull privilege motion against the govt auditor
Vibha Sharma
Tribune News Service

Congress spokesman Abhishek Singhvi (above-left) on Wednesday presented a rather toned down response to the CAG’s statement, but his colleague Jayanti Natarajan went all out in voicing her “extreme displeasure” over CAG’s “strong statement” on Friday

New Delhi, January 15
Giving further boost to the Congress’ no-holds-barred attack on the Comptroller and Auditor General, UPA sources now say some MPs may move privilege motion against the government auditor on his recent statement.

“The MPs are examining the possibility whether the CAG’s recent statement amounts to contempt of the House,” they say.

The ongoing row between the Congress and the CAG over the government auditor’s estimated losses from the 2G Spectrum scam is intensifying by the day.

After holding its horses for two days, the Congress on Thursday went all out against the CAG claiming there was no clause in the rule book that said MPs could not comment on a report when the document was being examined by a Parliamentary Committee. The party also wondered how CAG findings found way into the media much before they were tabled in Parliament.

What Congress leaders are finding particularly objectionable is CAG remaining silent when Opposition leaders were “openly discussing CAG findings”.

Completely backing Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal's criticism of the report, they question why there was no reaction from the CAG office then. Supporting Sibal, party spokesman Manish Tewari said had the Opposition allowed a discussion on the issue in the Parliament, the government would have made all these points on the floor of the House. However, what is interesting is the party’s decision to turn the heat on the CAG.

While on Wednesday party spokesman Abhishek Singhvi presented a rather toned down response to the CAG’s statement, yesterday his colleague Jayanti Natarajan went all out in voicing her “extreme displeasure” over CAG’s “strong statement”.

Natarajan said she tried searching for the rule that prohibited a MP from speaking on a CAG report while it is being considered by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) but couldn’t find one. “Even if there is any such ruling, it is for the Speaker or the PAC to tell me so,” Natarajan said, adding that CAG’s “strong comments” were particularly surprising when the 2G issue had much debated and discussed before even the report was tabled in the Parliament. Citing Rules of Parliamentary Procedure, the CAG had said that “making public comments on the matter which is being considered by a Parliamentary Committee is highly improper and may even amount to contempt of the House”, while responding to Sibal's comments against its report on the 2G Spectrum allocation scam.

Sibal had recently rubbished CAG's findings on the presumptive loss from the hasty sale of 2G Spectrum, calling the figure of Rs 1.76 lakh crore“utterly erroneous”.

Party leaders maintain if anybody has to object to MPs speaking on an issue under consideration of a Parliamentary Committee, it should either be the PAC or the Speaker. “We don’t want sermons from CAG,” they add.