Shame on Modi for turning Parliament into a circus
Prime Minister Narendra Modi has lowered the debating standards in Parliament. His reply to the motion of thanks to the President's address could be rated the lowest ever in terms of content, intent and the parliamentary tradition of India.
Humour and sarcasm are great in any speech; dark humour and flippant point-scoring are childish and below the dignity of the high office of the prime minister.
Modi forgot that the occasion of his speech was the reply to the motion of thanks to the President's address to the joint session of Parliament, not a riposte to Congress vice-president Rahul Gandhi's speech. It was a solemn occasion. Modi turned it into a "tu tu mai mai" (petty quarrel) occasion. He turned the Lok Sabha into a circus.
It's true that the Opposition benches are low on calibre and content. It's true that Rahul Gandhi, the leader who spearheads the Opposition's attack, represents the bankruptcy of ideas and talent.
But the prime minster is the leader of the House, not just the leader of the ruling party and the head of the government. He has to lead the House by example, maintain the dignity of Parliament and the office of the prime minister. He is not there to join the race to the bottom, to match and beat an opponent, in this case an incompetent Rahul.
It's also true, as Modi said, that this is his first term as a member of Parliament. But during his long political career, Modi would have watched at least nine prime ministers, from Indira Gandhi to Manmohan Singh. Why was that experience for Modi like water over a duck's back?
The prime minister who set the highest standard in Parliament and who was always keen to raise the bar of debate high was none other Atal Bihari Vajpayee, of Modi's own party. Didn't Modi learn?
Each prime minister had had his/her style, mannerisms and varying degree of commitment to Parliament. Their oratorical calibre, manner of dealing with Opposition members and attention to content and details too differed.
Let's look at how successive prime ministers have conducted themselves in Parliament.
India's first prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru was of course par excellence. He set out to accord the institution of Parliament the respect it deserves. He encouraged parliamentarians to participate in debates and appreciated anyone who impressed him. As he did once when he walked to a young Vajpayee to congratulate him on his fine, though a critical, speech on foreign affairs, a subject close to Nehru's heart.
Indira Gandhi couldn't have been more different. She was given the name of "goongi gudiya" (dumb doll) for her shy and introvert's nature. She was taunted and harassed by Opposition leaders.
That, perhaps, led Indira Gandhi to further develop a habit of aloofness from Parliament. In due course, she developed a sort of contempt for the institution, perhaps as much as she had for the Opposition. She stayed away from Parliament for as long and as often as she could. Her speeches made no impression. She minced no words when time came to attack the Opposition but never stooped low to join a "tu tu mai mai" contest.
Rajiv Gandhi was careless and aloof too in his behaviour. He had the advantage of a brute majority in the Lok Sabha. Midway through his reign, he faced the Bofors corruption scandal. His party members tried to steamroll and silence the Opposition at every inconvenient opportunity. Except through one-liners and witty barbs aimed at the opposition, he maintained the decorum and decency.
PV Narasimha Rao was erudite and scholarly. He ran a minority government while launching the structural reforms through the teeth of opposition. On the floor of the House or outside, Rao never, except in private, showed emotion in dealing with Opposition members. He sat poker-faced in his seat, unmindful of all the criticisms directed at him. He did poke fun at the Opposition but not going beyond subtle sarcasm and biting humour.
VP Singh, Chandrashekhar, HD Deve Gowda and Inder Kumar Gujral were the interregnum prime ministers.
Then comes Vajpayee. His overall ratings in Parliament could even surpass Nehru. Rich in content, laced with humour and all conceivable parts of speech, his oratorical skill was unmatched. Even in the moment of anger, Vajpayee never belittled the Opposition though he could be scathing and devastating against something he felt strongly about.
If Vajpayee was a role model for parliamentarians in his long years as an Opposition member and also as prime minister, Modi has transgressed all decency and decorum that befits the highest forum of debate. His speeches are often low in content. The most recent one in the Lok Sabha was particularly so.
With an arrogant demeanour, Modi is unnecessarily aggressive towards the Opposition. He derives pleasure in throwing insults and belittling the Opposition. He looks to score brownie points whenever he gets up to speak.
In his reply to the motion of thanks to the President's address, Modi should have been explaining his government's performance and laying down the contours of policies. Going beyond the reply, the prime minister is also supposed to address the concerns of the common people raised by the opposition.
Modi didn't address any of the concerns of the Opposition on serious issues such as the debate on sedition, discourse on nationalism, arrests of JNU students and the storm over Hyderabad Central University (HCU) Dalit scholar Rohith Vemula's death.
Sadly, Modi's speech touched a new low. It could be read to school students to show how not to debate.