NEW DELHI: The government found itself under severe attack from the opposition after three days of respite when opposition leaders returned to participate in the Lok Sabha debate on the motion of thanks to the President for his address on Thursday.

Opposition members took the government to task for not taking any concrete steps to solve the Punjab problem and even alleged that the Centre was keeping the issue alive out of electoral considerations. As the opposition mounted a concerted attack on this as well as other failures of the Centre, ruling party members were hard to put to defend the government by eulogizing its various achievements,

The strongest attack on the government came from the CPIM members, Mr. Somnath Chatterji, who described the government’s resolve to end terrorism in Punjab as hollow because it had not taken any political action on the issue.

Mr. Chatterji said the Jodhpur detainees had not been released no action had been taken against the people responsible for November riots in Delhi, the Longowal accord had not been implemented and the Government had no meeting with the opposition to discuss the Punjab problem. The government, in fact, was only perpetuating the crisis, he said.

Earlier on the withdrawal of boycott he said the opposition had no choice to condemn the unprovoked and unwanted remarks of the Prime Minister. He said, “As for terrorism no one had condemned it more than us. Even the Prime Minister had grudgingly accepted it.” About the Prime Minister’s clarification, he said that there should not be such an attitude of arrogance and he had the strongest objection to what had happened in the House. Mr. Chaterji said the opposition had returned to the House in larger public interest.

He said, “The address of the President is as insipid and colorless as the performance of the government and it failed miserably to project the policies of the government.

Mr. Chatterji said the government had lost “all its moorings and failed on all fronts” referring to recent elections in states, particularly in Tamil Nadu. He said the government was charged with corruption at the highest level and had not come out clean.

He said the address was full of generalizations cliches and platitudes.

Referring to the Bhopal tragedy and the recent settlement with the union carbide, he said. For this one act alone, the government is not fit to remain in power even for one minute. He charged that the government had acted in collusion with the multinational company and was a Privy to conspiracy. “I charge that the government had agreed to the figure arrived at in the settlement with Union Carbide before the court mentioned this figure.

Mr. Chatterji lambasted the ruling party members for speaking against the West Bengal governor, against the “man of great learning and impeccable integrity” while some governors were too eager to please the ruling party at the Centre,

 

The government’s proposal to revamp the panchayati Raj system was another example of Centre’s interference in state affairs. He pointed out that it was the ruling Congress (I) party which had dissolved municipal bodies and panchayasts in different parts of the country and not holding elections for years. The Centre wanted to have all power and in the name of decentralization it was indulging in over centralization, Mr. Chatterji remarked.

Other opposition who followed spoke in much the same vein with predictable variations. The Akali Dal member Mr. Charanjit Singh Walia asked what prevented the government from solving the Punjab problem. The only solution to the problem was to declare a general amnesty and release Akali leaders like Mr. Simranjit Singh Mann and Mr. Parkash Singh badal and all Jodhpur detainees who had been kept in carcerated for the past five years.

Mr. Balwant Singh Ramoowalia (Akali) while pointing out that the police repression in Punjab had gone up considerably and regretted that the Cabinet subcommittee on Punjab, constituted on October 8 last year had not met even once to date. “Is this the seriousness that the problem deserves, he asked and charged the government of depending distrust in the state among different communities.

Article extracted from this publication >>  March 17, 1989