11 March 2005
SHRI SHARAD ANANTRAO JOSHI (MAHARASHTRA): Sir, 15 days back, the lots were drawn and I came at number three. I had proposed a Resolution expressing the House's concern about the ban on export of food grains which is contrary to the National Common Minimum Programme, contrary to the advantages, contrary to all economic principles and I was very happy that I would be able to make my voice heard in this House very shortly on the first Friday that I get in less than half an hour. I stand third and since a Resolution should not take more than half-an-hour each, I should get my turn in less than one-and-a-half hour.
Sir, this morning, I got a telephone call from the Minister for Agriculture, and he said “Your Resolution is at number 3. But it’s not going to come up for discussion because the first Resolution is by Mr. V. Narayanswamy.” Mr. Narayanswamy, you have taken one hour. You will give me, at least, ten minutes. I listened very carefully and patiently to what Mr. Narayanasamy said. I am always full of admiration for Mr. Narayanasamy's performance in the House, and I used to wonder whether anything can out Narayanasamy, and I have found that Narayanasamy in Tamil can out Narayanasamy in English. I congratulate him. The discussion took place for almost two hours. I don't think my Resolution is likely to come here, and I was wondering whether there was not a deliberate attempt to hijack the Friday afternoon, which is meant for Private Members' discussions, Private Members' Resolutions and Bills. The subject, that is put forward, was about the Delhi Development Authority. Mr. Narayanasamy, I am talking of the Delhi Development Authority. If you continue to talk with the neighbours, you may not be able to listen to that. I am talking about the Delhi Development Authority. He started with the Delhi Development Authority, and as he continued to speak, I found that he expanded the scope of what he has proposed in the Resolution, by including, firstly, the corruption in the Delhi state, then, his real purpose came out, and he expanded it and made it into a general anti-NDA discussion. I am not here to support NDA because, I think, what I have been hearing in this House for the last seven months that I have been a Member, is the cup calling the kettle black. If they have done something, and if they point out, then they say, "What did you do during your period?" That is not the kind of argument in which I want to indulge. If the purpose was that a Member from that side wanted to propose that there should be a Resolution, and there should be a Commission, he could have easily gone and talked to Shri Ghulam Nabi Azad, and by now, the Commission would have been appointed, and possibly, the report also would have come because, we have seen reports of Commissions, where the Government is interested coming out pretty fast. By now, we would have had the report. But the idea is not to have a Commission. The idea is merely to score points by blaming each other. They will blame you and you will blame them. But, what is happening in this game, Mr Chairman, is that half a day that we get on Friday afternoon, is being hijacked for official purposes. Now, the kind of information that Mr. Narayanswamy used, and the kind of information that Mr. Rajeev Shukla used, could not have come except from official files, and I actually saw some files coming from the gallery up to here. I think, all the data that he has got, could have come to them only with a certain official complicity. What I saw was that the file came from that direction. It might have been in the official gallery, to begin with. I am not saying what the contents of that file were. All the data that he got could not have come without official complicity. All the time that discussion was happening, Ûãú”û »ÖÖêÝÖÖë Ûêú ´Ö®Ö ´Öë ŸÖÖê »Öøèü ±æú™ü Æüß ¸üÆêü £Öê, ´Öï ¤êüÜÖ ¸üÆüÖ £ÖÖ… I agree to the withdrawal of the reference to the Official Gallery. What I said was that the kind of data that was presented by both Mr. Narayanasamy and Mr. Rajeev Shukla could not have come except with official complicity. The question is: Where did the Library get it from? It means that you only passed the buck to the Library.
You get the name of the allottee. You get the price at which it was given. You get the market price that was going.
The point that I want to raise is, is this a valid use of a Friday afternoon?
I am speaking from my knowledge. You have to wait and take your turn. The main point that I made is that this is Friday afternoon which is sacred, particularly, for people who come from small parties or who are independents, this is the only opportunity that they get for speaking for some time at all and making valid points. And if you go on getting Resolutions of this type which are evidently suited to the purposes of a party and the purpose, again, is to get something from the Government, I think, we are not correctly using the Friday afternoon which is reserved for the Private Members. This is the main point I wanted to make. I am quite sure that my 3rd Resolution will possibly not come during this session and I will have to wait for the next session. Because of this, the fact that the farmers are suffering, particularly, the food grains-growing farmers, who are suffering because of the ban on exports, could not come up before the House, because the Government is interested in getting some kind of a commission appointed on this subject to solve their mutual recrimination. Thank you very much.