Disruptions in House

Refer to ‘Misuse of Central agencies…’; rowdy disruptions and walkouts by MPs have become routine rather than an aberration, leading to a complete washout of a session, at times. Citizens expect serious discussions from elected members leading to the framing of laws that are for the welfare of the public and the country as a whole. The role of opposition parties is as important as that of the party in power. A strong Opposition is the cornerstone of a thriving democracy. It should question the government on any flaws in Bills to be passed and implementation of policies. The Opposition is the watchdog appointed by the people. Members from both benches should engage in serious discussions, rising above personal animosity and not resorting to name-calling. Members from the ruling party are expected to lend an ear to issues raised by Opposition parties and work out ways to settle and compromise. Neutrality of the Speaker should be clearly evident.

Yoginder Singhal, by mail

Restore order

The allegation by the Opposition that for the first time in Parliament’s history, the treasury benches were not letting the august Houses work, is not without substance. Presiding officers are vested with enough power to curb disruptions in case self-regulation fails. Adjournments smack of shirking responsibility to restore order. Taxpayers have every right to seek accountability for time and resources wasted but paid for by them through their nose.

Lalit Bharadwaj, Panchkula

Cut in allocation

The AAP government has reduced the budgetary allocation to Punjabi University by Rs 36 crore, with an assurance that it will make amends later. The Vice-Chancellor initially showed courage and questioned the surprise cut in the grant, but later relented and accepted the decision, probably under pressure. Nonetheless, there is widespread resentment against the decision among students and the faculty, both in-service and retired. For long, salaries to all employees have been inordinately delayed, leading to financial and mental distress.

BHUPINDER SINGH, Patiala

Political expediency

Apropos of ‘A sudden change of heart’; Biden’s intent to strengthen bilateral ties with India could be interpreted as a policy of modus vivendi. It cannot be attributed to Putin’s change of heart, nor can it be regarded as a victory of India’s foreign policy or America’s magnanimity. Policy being adopted by the US in relation to India accrues from cold politico-economic calculations, geopolitical considerations, intra-party wranglings and unalloyed pragmatism. Liberal Democrats are a force to reckon with, and they want Biden to shun Modi’s India due to rights violations, non-existence of free press and attitude towards the minorities. India’s formidable position in the global hierarchical order may have compelled the US not to precipitate a fight against India, which it wants to use for the containment of China. Politics of expediency and pragmatism with no consistency and adherence to any principles is driving the two countries to enter into a marriage of convenience.

Roshan Lal Goel, by mail

Poor comparison

Refer to ‘India is not Ukraine’ (Nous Indica); Rahul Gandhi has the stature of a national leader by virtue of being a member of the Gandhi family. Equating India with Ukraine and Russia with China is an insult to the might and pride of our nation. In 1971, India thrashed Pakistan, which had the support of the US, the UK and China, and cut Pakistan to size and formed Bangladesh. Foreign media takes advantage of such statements and tries to denigrate India. Rahul must refrain from issuing such statements which downgrade India’s image internationally.

Bhupinder Gupta, Shimla

Neutral stance

Reference to ‘India is not Ukraine’; being a poor nation, India cannot annoy superpowers, nor can it compromise with its defence-preparedness. The Non-Aligned Movement and Panchsheel were evolved in the larger interest of the nation. Indira Gandhi had proved herself right in internal and external affairs. She did not compromise the domestic economy while taking a loan from the IMF. Pakistan’s Zia-ul-Haq, a former dictator, had to confess that the then government of Pakistan was primarily responsible for the creation of Bangladesh. Indira set aside principles of free market economy in the interest of the poor. The Congress should follow in the footsteps of its erstwhile visionary leaders.

NIRMAL KUMAR, PANCHKULA

Letters to the Editor, typed in double space, should not exceed the 200-word limit. These should be cogently written and can be sent by e-mail to: Letters@tribunemail.com