Parliament & State legislatures

Model Answer

Introduction

In a democracy, individual parliamentarians are vital as national lawmakers, responsible for debating and scrutinizing legislation that affects citizens. However, a noticeable decline in their roles has emerged, adversely impacting the quality of parliamentary debates and their outcomes.

Factors Contributing to the Decline

Several factors contribute to the diminishing role of individual parliamentarians:

1. Party Discipline:
   • Strict party discipline often compels parliamentarians to conform to the party line, suppressing individual opinions and dissent. This results in a lack of diverse viewpoints during debates.
2. Rise of Populism:
   • The rise of populist politics emphasizes rhetoric over substantive policy discussions. Politicians often prioritize catchy slogans over in-depth debates, leading to superficial discussions on critical issues (Source: Mounk, Yascha. The People vs. Democracy).
3. Influence of Interest Groups:
   • The lobbying power of interest groups can overshadow the contributions of individual parliamentarians. Financial backing often skews legislative priorities away from genuine concerns (Source: Schlozman, Kay Lehman, et al. The Unheavenly Chorus).

Impact on Debate Quality

The decline in individual contributions has significant repercussions on the quality of debates:

• Reduced Diversity of Opinions:
  • A homogeneous legislative process emerges, with fewer dissenting voices, leading to a lack of comprehensive discussions on laws.
• Less Rigorous Scrutiny of Bills:
  • When parliamentarians prioritize party loyalty over critical examination, bills may not receive the thorough scrutiny they require.
• Lack of In-Depth Discussions:
  • Superficial debates replace meaningful discussions, undermining the legislative process (Source: Parliament of India, Proceedings).

Adverse Legislative Outcomes

The decline also negatively impacts legislative outcomes:

• Poorly Drafted Legislation:
  • Legislation may become poorly crafted, potentially leading to unintended consequences or implementation challenges.
• Limited Accountability:
  • Reduced scrutiny means the government may evade accountability for its legislative actions, undermining democratic governance.
• Reduced Public Trust:
  • As debate quality declines, public trust in legislative processes and democratic institutions deteriorates.

Conclusion

Addressing the decline in individual parliamentarians’ roles is crucial for preserving the integrity of the democratic process. Ensuring well-crafted legislation and holding the government accountable are essential for maintaining public trust and effective governance.

Model Answer

Introduction

Urban Local Bodies (ULBs), which include Municipalities and Municipal Corporations, were established to enhance governance in urban areas through the 74th Constitutional Amendment Act of 1992. Despite this, states in India appear hesitant to empower ULBs functionally and financially.

Reluctance to Empower ULBs Functionally

1. Decentralization Challenges

Despite the constitutional provisions, many states are reluctant to delegate substantial powers to ULBs, undermining grassroots democracy. This is evident in various states where local governance remains heavily centralized.

2. Manpower Shortages

ULBs often lack skilled personnel, which hampers their operational effectiveness. For instance, smaller cities face a shortage of qualified professionals to handle complex urban planning tasks, resulting in mismanagement.

3. Bureaucratic Control

In several states, bureaucratic oversight stifles local initiative. For example, in Lucknow, bureaucrat-led committees frequently override decisions made by ULBs, leading to ineffective governance.

4. Limited Role in City Planning

Although ULBs are intended to lead city planning, state agencies often take precedence. In Bengaluru, crucial planning initiatives are frequently conducted by state bodies, sidelining municipal corporations.

5. Lack of Autonomy in Service Delivery

Key services like water supply and waste management are often controlled by state governments. In Delhi, overlapping authorities have led to fragmented service delivery, adversely affecting urban management.

Reluctance to Empower ULBs Financially

1. Dependence on Grants

Most ULBs rely heavily on state and central grants, experiencing financial challenges when these funds are delayed. This reliance limits their operational flexibility

2. Financial Mismanagement

Many ULBs face allegations of financial irregularities. The recent corruption case in the Municipal Corporation of Gurugram (2022) highlights this issue.

3. Lack of State Finance Commissions

Few states have established State Finance Commissions to ensure equitable financial distribution, resulting in dysfunctional financial management for ULBs.

4. Property Tax Control

States often hesitate to empower ULBs over property tax reforms, limiting their financial autonomy. For instance, in Karnataka, ULBs have restricted authority in setting property tax rates.

5. Limited Access to Bond Markets

While some ULBs, like Pune, have successfully raised funds through bond markets, many states do not encourage this financial avenue, restricting capital acquisition for development.

6. User Charges and PPP Reluctance

States are often reluctant to allow ULBs to adjust user charges, negatively impacting their revenue. Additionally, there is a broader hesitance to adopt Public-Private Partnerships for urban projects, inhibiting innovative financial solutions.

Conclusion

The vision of decentralized urban governance, as outlined in the 74th Constitutional Amendment Act, remains unfulfilled due to states’ reluctance to fully empower ULBs. Addressing these issues is essential for creating self-reliant and efficient urban local bodies, paving the way for sustainable urban development in India.

Model Answer

Introduction

The Parliamentary Committee system is a vital mechanism in the legislative functioning of Indian democracy. It consists of various committees categorized into Standing and Ad Hoc Committees, each playing a crucial role in investigating and analyzing legislative proposals, budgets, and government activities.

Structure of the Parliamentary Committee System

1. Standing Committees

These are permanent committees established to work continuously on matters allocated to them. For instance, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) reviews the annual audit reports of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG).

2. Ad Hoc Committees

Formed to address specific issues, these committees exist for a limited duration. A recent example is the Joint Parliamentary Committee set up to scrutinize the Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019.

3. Departmentally Related Standing Committees (DRSCs)

These committees scrutinize the demands for grants from various ministries, playing a critical role in examining bills and government policies related to their respective ministries.

4. Financial Committees

Financial committees, such as the Estimates Committee and the PAC, delve into financial matters, presenting detailed reports that help in the effective oversight of government expenditure.

Role of Financial Committees in Institutionalization

1. Scrutiny of Government Expenditure

Financial committees play a crucial role in scrutinizing government expenditures. For example, the PAC’s report on the 2G spectrum allocation brought significant irregularities to light, ensuring accountability.

2. Expert Consultations

These committees often consult experts to enhance their understanding of complex issues. During the formulation of the GST Bill, various economists and industry experts were consulted, ensuring a comprehensive tax system.

3. Cross-Party Deliberations

Financial committees facilitate cross-party discussions, promoting cooperative approaches. The consensus-building during GST discussions in the Rajya Sabha is a testament to this collaborative spirit.

4. Accountability and Transparency

Reports from financial committees have increased accountability and transparency in government actions. The PAC’s detailed report on the Rafale deal underscored the commitment to transparency.

5. Focused Discussions

Committees enable focused discussions, allowing for in-depth exploration of issues. The Joint Parliamentary Committee’s deliberations on the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (2016) exemplify this.

Conclusion

The Parliamentary Committee system is essential for enhancing the efficiency, accountability, and inclusivity of the legislative process in India. Financial committees have significantly contributed to the institutionalization of the Indian Parliament by ensuring scrutiny, transparency, and expert involvement. Addressing existing challenges will further strengthen their role in upholding the democratic ethos of the Indian Parliament.