Sachin and Rekha “explain” why Rajya Sabha has outlived its utiity

Sachin Tendulkar has been one of the most celebrated heroes in India since he made his international debut in the year 1989. Over the 25 years of his career as a cricketer, cricket fans in India have accorded him a godly status and literally worshipped him. This adulation is not only because of his immense talent as a cricketer, but also the manner in which he conducted himself over the course of his career. He has been one of the rare cricketers, who had his feet firmly on ground and did not get carried away by success.

 

Likewise, Rekha Ganesan has been recognized as a versatile and an extremely capable actress and her portrayal in films like Umrao Jaan, Khubsoorat and many others have been appreciated by the cine buffs in India. She has acted in over 180 films in a career spanning 40 years and has been honored with the Padma Shri by the government of India.

 

As per the constitution of India, the President can appoint 12 members in the Rajya Sabha for their contributions to art, literature, science and social services. As a result of this, both these celebrities accepted nominations to the upper house of the Parliament of India in the year 2012. Sachin was expected to make contributions towards sports in India and Rekha was expected to do the same towards arts. But if one looks at the records of these two celebrities in the parliament, they are abysmal. While Rekha has an attendance of 5% in parliament and has not participated in a single debate, Sachin has managed to do marginally better with 8% attendance and has asked about 20 questions in these five years.

While each Rajya Sabha member is entitled to an MPLAD fund of Rs 5 crore, Sachin and Rekha have spent nothing on their constituency. Neither of them has sent any development project proposal to the government during their tenures as MP.

From the above, it can be safely concluded that while these two celebs did a phenomenal job in their respective fields, their performance as parliamentarians and lawmakers has been rather poor. If they were not interested in this job and felt that politics isn’t their cup of tea, why did they accept a Rajya Sabha nomination in the first place? At the time of accepting the nomination, were they not aware that the job of a parliamentarian is not an easy one and would require them to spend time? Or did they have a brazen ‘India me kuch bhi chalta hai’ view while accepting their nomination?

Only Sachin and Rekha can answer these questions, but the bigger question that comes to mind is the relevance of the upper house in today’s times. Unlike the Lok Sabha, whose members are directly elected by the people of the country, 238 Rajya Sabha members are indirectly elected by members of state legislative assemblies by single transferrable votes, while 12 are elected by the President of India. The Rajya Sabha has almost equal powers as the Lok Sabha, with the only limitations being their inability to push their views on Money Bills and their inability to raise a no confidence motion against the government.

The institution of the Rajya Sabha was created owing to the federal structure in India. The makers of the constitution wanted adequate representation from the individual states. Also, the members of the Rajya Sabha are supposed to be elders and are expected to be a guiding force to the Lok Sabha members and on important legislations. Both these arguments can be refuted. Today, we have various satrap or state specific parties in the country like DMK & AIADMK in Tamil Nadu, JDU & RJD in Bihar, TMC in West Bengal, SP & BSP in Uttar Pradesh, NC & PDP in Jammu and Kashmir and so on. In the Lok Sabha, we have always had adequate representation from these political parties. In fact, the number of MPs in Lok Sabha belonging to AIADMK and TMC today is just marginally less than INC, which is a national party. Coming to the second argument of Rajya Sabha members being elders and provide guidance to Lok Sabha, anyone who has lately witnessed the proceedings in the Rajya Sabha would agree that the members behave more like thugs rather than elders who are to be respected.

Also, a lot of Rajya Sabha members are the ones who fund the political parties and it has all boiled down to money. The Rajya Sabha today is merely used by the opposition as a tool to block some of the important reforms that have been cleared by the Lok Sabha, where the present NDA government enjoys a majority. People supporting the idea of Rajya Sabha will argue that had it not been for Rajya Sabha, we would not have got efficient people like Nirmala Sitaraman, Manohar Parrikar or Smriti Irani as ministers. While one cannot disagree with this, the Rajya Sabha has proven to be more a liability to the country at this point in time. Had it not been for the Rajya Sabha, the all-important GST Bill would have become an act long ago and GST would have even come into effect. Had it not been for the Rajya Sabha, important infrastructure projects would not have been stuck owing to the government’s inability to pass the Land Acquisition Bill. Had it not been for the Rajya Sabha, Nirbhaya’s under-18 monster rapist would not have been a free man today. The Juvenile Justice Act got passed in the Lok Sabha in May 2015, but was stuck in the Rajya Sabha till Jan-16 as the members were busy settling their political scores.

While it is beyond doubt that Sachin and Rekha have displayed sheer arrogance and their attitude towards the Parliament of India smacks of utter negligence, but when democratically elected members are not being able to push through important legislations on time owing to a bunch of people, who have not even been elected by the people, one must ponder over the irrelevance and the worthlessness of the outdated institution of the Rajya Sabha today.

Sachin Tendulkar has been one of the most celebrated heroes in India since he made his international debut in the year 1989. Over the 25 years of his career as a cricketer, cricket fans in India have accorded him a godly status and literally worshipped him. This adulation is not only because of his immense talent as a cricketer, but also the manner in which he conducted himself over the course of his career. He has been one of the rare cricketers, who had his feet firmly on ground and did not get carried away by success.

 

Likewise, Rekha Ganesan has been recognized as a versatile and an extremely capable actress and her portrayal in films like Umrao Jaan, Khubsoorat and many others have been appreciated by the cine buffs in India. She has acted in over 180 films in a career spanning 40 years and has been honored with the Padma Shri by the government of India.

 

As per the constitution of India, the President can appoint 12 members in the Rajya Sabha for their contributions to art, literature, science and social services. As a result of this, both these celebrities accepted nominations to the upper house of the Parliament of India in the year 2012. Sachin was expected to make contributions towards sports in India and Rekha was expected to do the same towards arts. But if one looks at the records of these two celebrities in the parliament, they are abysmal. While Rekha has an attendance of 5% in parliament and has not participated in a single debate, Sachin has managed to do marginally better with 8% attendance and has asked about 20 questions in these five years.

While each Rajya Sabha member is entitled to an MPLAD fund of Rs 5 crore, Sachin and Rekha have spent nothing on their constituency. Neither of them has sent any development project proposal to the government during their tenures as MP.

From the above, it can be safely concluded that while these two celebs did a phenomenal job in their respective fields, their performance as parliamentarians and lawmakers has been rather poor. If they were not interested in this job and felt that politics isn’t their cup of tea, why did they accept a Rajya Sabha nomination in the first place? At the time of accepting the nomination, were they not aware that the job of a parliamentarian is not an easy one and would require them to spend time? Or did they have a brazen ‘India me kuch bhi chalta hai’ view while accepting their nomination?

Only Sachin and Rekha can answer these questions, but the bigger question that comes to mind is the relevance of the upper house in today’s times. Unlike the Lok Sabha, whose members are directly elected by the people of the country, 238 Rajya Sabha members are indirectly elected by members of state legislative assemblies by single transferrable votes, while 12 are elected by the President of India. The Rajya Sabha has almost equal powers as the Lok Sabha, with the only limitations being their inability to push their views on Money Bills and their inability to raise a no confidence motion against the government.

The institution of the Rajya Sabha was created owing to the federal structure in India. The makers of the constitution wanted adequate representation from the individual states. Also, the members of the Rajya Sabha are supposed to be elders and are expected to be a guiding force to the Lok Sabha members and on important legislations. Both these arguments can be refuted. Today, we have various satrap or state specific parties in the country like DMK & AIADMK in Tamil Nadu, JDU & RJD in Bihar, TMC in West Bengal, SP & BSP in Uttar Pradesh, NC & PDP in Jammu and Kashmir and so on. In the Lok Sabha, we have always had adequate representation from these political parties. In fact, the number of MPs in Lok Sabha belonging to AIADMK and TMC today is just marginally less than INC, which is a national party. Coming to the second argument of Rajya Sabha members being elders and provide guidance to Lok Sabha, anyone who has lately witnessed the proceedings in the Rajya Sabha would agree that the members behave more like thugs rather than elders who are to be respected.

Also, a lot of Rajya Sabha members are the ones who fund the political parties and it has all boiled down to money. The Rajya Sabha today is merely used by the opposition as a tool to block some of the important reforms that have been cleared by the Lok Sabha, where the present NDA government enjoys a majority. People supporting the idea of Rajya Sabha will argue that had it not been for Rajya Sabha, we would not have got efficient people like Nirmala Sitaraman, Manohar Parrikar or Smriti Irani as ministers. While one cannot disagree with this, the Rajya Sabha has proven to be more a liability to the country at this point in time. Had it not been for the Rajya Sabha, the all-important GST Bill would have become an act long ago and GST would have even come into effect. Had it not been for the Rajya Sabha, important infrastructure projects would not have been stuck owing to the government’s inability to pass the Land Acquisition Bill. Had it not been for the Rajya Sabha, Nirbhaya’s under-18 monster rapist would not have been a free man today. The Juvenile Justice Act got passed in the Lok Sabha in May 2015, but was stuck in the Rajya Sabha till Jan-16 as the members were busy settling their political scores.

While it is beyond doubt that Sachin and Rekha have displayed sheer arrogance and their attitude towards the Parliament of India smacks of utter negligence, but when democratically elected members are not being able to push through important legislations on time owing to a bunch of people, who have not even been elected by the people, one must ponder over the irrelevance and the worthlessness of the outdated institution of the Rajya Sabha today.