Avoid boycott of the People’s House

Everything has a limit beyond which it ought not to be carried, and the world is witnessing evidence of that in the drama being played out in Washington between the principal protagonists, President Joe Biden and Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy. Fixing an arbitrary ceiling on debt, absent any flexibility or a cutoff date when the measure would end, is irrational. This is being proved by the way Speaker McCarthy is trying to force the White House to agree to spending cuts that the Republican Party itself did not make when it was in power not even three years ago. Biden did himself no favours by prematurely declaring that he would stand for re-election, for that has motivated several Republicans to work hard at sabotaging his agenda. Rather than advance the period when the next Presidential election by a premature announcement by Biden of his decision to contest in 2024, and given the toxicity of election politics in the US, it would have been wiser for him to have delayed the announcement. He ought to have waited until an increase in the debt ceiling (preferably to a level that would be viable for not just a single year but three) was passed by the US Congress. Rather than assist in securing a fresh term, the US President has given the impression of being hungry for power and eager to continue to enjoy the perquisites available to the occupant of the White House. Unsurprisingly, several Republicans would like to block him from doing anything that may boost his voter tally in the next contest for the White House. The problem is that to do so even in a matter as critical to the reputation and future of the US as causing delays in repaying the national debt, what is sought to be thrown out is not just the “bathwater” (Biden) but the “baby” (the future of the US as the world’s principal power.
The US example ought to be a cautionary tale for India, that opposition parties should oppose the ruling party by all means, but not where national welfare, security or honour is at stake. The new Parliament House complex is the brainchild of Prime Minister Narendra Modi. It was his desire to have a bigger complex that is better suited to the needs of the MPs than the present structure, which certainly deserves to be preserved and respected. But for the fact that he is the Prime Minister of India, the complex would not have been ready for the opening on 28 May. Parliament House is the most potent representative structure of the will of the people than any other. The people elect MPs to the Lok Sabha, who in turn choose a Prime Minister of their liking. Under the Constitution, the President of India does not choose the PM, although the Head of State swears in him or her, only the MPs from the Lok Sabha do. India does not have a presidential but a parliamentary system, which is why Parliament is the foundation of power in the country.
Boycotting the opening of the new Parliament building is to decline the chance to be a participant in history, for the new complex will be serving the nation for centuries, and children and grandchildren can tour Parliament House and say that their parents or grandparents were there at the inauguration. India needs to set an example for US politicians rather than follow in their path of fracturing every situation into mutually hostile camps. When Prime Minister Anthony Albanese of Australia accompanied Prime Minister Modi to the diaspora rally in Sydney, the former Prime Minister was there, as were several in his party. After all, the 20,000 spectators were Australian voters, not Indians, and Prime Minister Modi leads a country that is crucial to the security of the Indo-Pacific. Had it been a new headquarters for the BJP, boycotting the function would have been understandable. But what some opposition parties are boycotting is the very House of the People that they seek to have a majority in some day. How many opposition leaders who are keeping away from the opening ceremony are staying in the same residence that they were born in? Very few, if any at all. In much the same way, now that the country is in its 75th year, MPs need to move into a complex that is capable of accommodating research and other staff for MPs. And while those states who have successfully controlled their populations should not be penalised by seeing the proportion of parliamentary seats held by them to fall while states that have not controlled population growth achieve a substantial majority in both Houses of Parliament, there is a strong case for increasing the number of seats in the same proportions as at present. India needs a net reproduction rate of 2.0, and those with a higher rate should not be encouraged to continue on such a path. In each of the parties saying that they will boycott the opening ceremony of the new Parliament complex, there are men and women of honour and patriotism who need to ensure that the House of the People get shown the respect it merits, for only then can it be said that the people who have elected them are truly respected. Let politics stop at Parliament’s door and every invitee accept the honour done to them and the responsibility that comes with it
MDN