Home Tags Posts tagged with "parliament"
Tag:

parliament

Industrial Relations Code (Amendment) Bill, 2026

New Delhi, February 12, 2026: The Lok Sabha on Thursday passed the Industrial Relations Code (Amendment) Bill, 2026, aimed at ensuring legal clarity regarding the repeal of certain labour laws replaced by the Industrial Relations Code, 2020.

The amendment introduces savings provisions to avoid what the government described as any “future unwarranted complication” over the continuity of laws subsumed under the 2020 Code.

The Industrial Relations Code, 2020 consolidated and replaced three major labour legislations: the Trade Unions Act, 1926; the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946; and the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. These laws governed trade unions, industrial employment conditions, and industrial dispute resolution.

Clarifying the Repeal Provision

According to the statement of objects and reasons of the amendment Bill, Section 104 of the Industrial Relations Code already provides for the repeal of the earlier enactments. However, the government said there was a possibility of confusion arising from a “misconceived ground” that the Code delegated the power to repeal those laws to the executive.

The statement clarified that the repeal had occurred by operation of Section 104 itself, and that a notification issued in February 2026 reaffirmed this position. The amendment, it said, is intended to prevent any future legal uncertainty.

“It is considered desirable to introduce the proposed amendment to avoid any future unwarranted complication,” the statement said.

Savings provisions are typically included in legislation to preserve actions, rights, obligations, and proceedings initiated under repealed laws, thereby ensuring continuity and legal certainty.

Government’s Position

Replying to the discussion before the passage of the Bill, Labour Minister Mansukh Mandaviya said the four Labour Codes implemented nearly three months ago ensure key protections for workers.

He stated that the Codes guarantee minimum wages, mandate the issuance of appointment letters, and provide for uniform wages for the same work irrespective of gender.

The four Labour Codes covering wages, industrial relations, social security, and occupational safety were enacted to consolidate multiple central labour laws into a simplified framework. The government has maintained that the reform improves compliance and strengthens worker protections while promoting ease of doing business.

Opposition Criticism

During the debate, members of the Opposition criticised the government’s approach to labour reforms.

Congress MP K. Suresh said that instead of dialogue, the government “has chosen to dominate labourers.” He referred to a strike call given by workers on Thursday, describing it as a “warning signal” and reflecting what he termed policy shortcomings in addressing labour concerns.

Mr. Suresh also contrasted the current government’s approach with that of the previous United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government, citing the introduction of schemes such as the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) and the National Food Security Act as examples of pro-labour policies.

The debate highlighted differing political perspectives on labour reforms and their implementation. While the government emphasised legal clarity and structural reform, Opposition members raised concerns about consultation and worker safeguards.

With the Lok Sabha’s approval, the amendment Bill moves forward in the legislative process.

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Lok Sabha

New Delhi, February 11, 2026: Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi on Wednesday criticised the interim trade agreement between India and the United States, describing it as “one-sided” and alleging that the government had compromised national interests. Speaking in the Lok Sabha, he said the agreement amounted to a “wholesale surrender” and claimed it affected India’s energy security and farmers’ interests.

During his address, Mr. Gandhi alleged that the government had “sold Bharat Mata” through the agreement. He argued that the deal had placed India in a disadvantageous position in negotiations with the United States. He further stated that if an INDIA Bloc government had negotiated the agreement, it would have insisted that India be treated as an equal partner.

Referring to U.S. President Donald Trump, Mr. Gandhi said an alternative government would have clearly conveyed that India must be respected as an equal in bilateral trade discussions. He emphasised that trade negotiations should protect domestic economic priorities and strategic autonomy.

The interim trade agreement between India and the United States has been positioned by the government as a step toward strengthening economic cooperation between the two countries. While specific details of the agreement were not elaborated upon during the debate, it is understood to involve trade facilitation measures and sector-specific adjustments aimed at boosting bilateral commerce.

India and the United States are major trading partners, with cooperation spanning goods, services, technology, defence, and energy. In recent years, both sides have sought to resolve tariff disputes and expand market access in sectors such as agriculture, energy, and manufacturing. Interim agreements are typically seen as transitional arrangements while broader negotiations continue.

Opposition members raised concerns in the House about the potential impact of the agreement on farmers and domestic industries. Mr. Gandhi stated that India’s energy security had been “handed over to America,” though he did not provide detailed data during his speech to substantiate the claim. He maintained that any trade arrangement must safeguard critical sectors and ensure that Indian producers are not placed at a disadvantage.

The government has not yet issued a detailed response to Mr. Gandhi’s remarks in Parliament. However, officials have previously stated that trade discussions with the United States are guided by national interest and aim to create opportunities for Indian businesses while maintaining strategic balance.

Trade agreements often involve complex negotiations over tariffs, quotas, regulatory standards, and market access. Such agreements can influence multiple sectors, including agriculture, energy imports, manufacturing exports, and digital services. Analysts note that interim deals are sometimes used to build confidence between negotiating partners before finalising comprehensive frameworks.

The debate in the Lok Sabha reflects broader political differences over economic diplomacy and trade policy. While the ruling coalition has emphasised deeper economic integration with key global partners, the Opposition has called for greater transparency and stronger protections for domestic sectors.

Further details regarding the implementation timeline and sectoral impact of the interim trade agreement are expected to emerge as discussions continue.

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail

Amid continued disruptions in the Budget Session, Opposition parties led by the Congress on Tuesday submitted a no-confidence motion seeking the removal of Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla.

The notice was submitted during repeated adjournments and ruckus in the Lower House, which was adjourned till 2.00 p.m. on Tuesday (February 10, 2026). Chief Whip of the Congress in the Lok Sabha Kodikunnil Suresh and party Whip Mohammed Jawed Ahmed handed over the notice to Lok Sabha Secretary-General Utpal Kumar Singh, sources said.

Constitutional provision and submission

According to Article 94(c) of the Constitution, a Lok Sabha member may give written notice of intention to move a resolution for the removal of the Speaker to the Secretary-General, with a minimum notice period of 14 days.

Congress MP Gaurav Gogoi said the motion was submitted at 1:14 p.m. on Tuesday. He stated that the primary concern of the Opposition was that the Leader of Opposition had not been allowed to speak on several occasions. He added that many Opposition parties shared this concern.

“At 1:14 p.m. today we submitted a motion expressing no-confidence and asking for removal of Speaker Om Birla as per Rule 94(c),” Mr. Gogoi said in a statement.

Signatories and parties involved

The notice seeking the removal of Mr. Birla bears 119 signatures. Among the signatories are DMK MP T.R. Baalu and Samajwadi Party MP Dimple Yadav. Members of the Trinamool Congress did not sign the notice.

Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi has also not signed the motion, as one of the charges in the notice relates to him allegedly not being allowed to speak in the House.

Opposition parties that have signed the notice include the Congress, RJD, Samajwadi Party, DMK, and Left parties.

Allegations against the Speaker

The Congress has accused the Speaker of acting in a partisan manner and denying Rahul Gandhi the opportunity to speak during the debate on the Motion of Thanks to the President’s address.

The notice also refers to the recent suspension of eight Opposition MPs by the Speaker for what was described as unruly behaviour, seven of whom belong to the Congress.

Additionally, the notice alleges differential treatment by the Chair, stating that a BJP member was allowed to make personalised attacks on two former Prime Ministers, while no action was taken despite objections raised by the Opposition.

The motion further objects to remarks made by the Speaker in the House that he had “concrete information” suggesting that several Congress MPs might move towards Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s seat and carry out an “unexpected act.” The notice described this statement as an abuse of the constitutional office of the Speaker.

Separate letter by women MPs

Separately, eight women Members of Parliament from the Congress wrote to the Speaker on Monday (February 9), alleging that they were being targeted because they had “consistently fought against PM Modi’s anti-people government and demanded accountability from him.”

The no-confidence motion marks a significant escalation in the ongoing confrontation between the Opposition and the government during the Budget Session.

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Parliament Budget Session

The Budget Session of Parliament on Friday was marked by repeated disruptions and political confrontation, resulting in frequent adjournments in both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha. Opposition protests prevented the scheduled business from being carried out, and both Houses were eventually adjourned for the day. Proceedings are set to resume on Monday at 11 am.

In the Lok Sabha, a general discussion on the Union Budget 2026–27 was initiated. However, continuous sloganeering by Opposition members disrupted the debate, preventing detailed discussion on budgetary proposals. Due to the sustained disruptions, most of the listed agenda items could not be taken up.

The Rajya Sabha also witnessed interruptions during the day. Prime Minister Narendra Modi addressed the Upper House, where he defended the government’s economic and foreign policy approach. Referring to India’s growing engagement with the United States and the European Union, the Prime Minister described these agreements as significant for global economic stability.

The Prime Minister’s remarks drew sharp reactions from Opposition parties, leading to further protests. Several suspended Members of Parliament staged demonstrations both inside and outside the Parliament complex, alleging that the government had entered into unfavourable international trade arrangements. Some Opposition leaders described these arrangements as a “US–India trap deal”.

Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge criticised the Prime Minister’s address, alleging that the government was repeating misleading claims and avoiding accountability on key national issues.

The repeated disruptions throughout the day resulted in a substantial loss of parliamentary time. Political confrontation dominated proceedings, overshadowing substantive discussion on the Union Budget.

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Parliament Bugdet Session

The proceedings of the Lok Sabha were adjourned for the day on Tuesday following the suspension of eight Opposition Members of Parliament amid continued uproar in the House.

According to reports, the disruption occurred after papers were allegedly thrown towards the Chair during the proceedings. In response, Union Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju moved a resolution seeking the suspension of certain Opposition MPs for alleged unruly behaviour. The resolution was passed by a voice vote.

Speaker in the Chair Dilip Saikia subsequently announced the suspension of the members for the remainder of the current session.

The MPs suspended include Hibi Eden, Amarinder Singh Raja Warring, Manickam Tagore, Gurjeet Singh Aujla, Kiran Kumar Reddy, Prashant Yadaorao Padole, S Venkatesan, and Dean Kuriakose, as reported by news agency ANI.

Following the announcement, the House continued to witness disruptions, leading to the adjournment of proceedings for the day.

After his suspension, Congress MP Prashant Yadaorao Padole told ANI that the Opposition was attempting to raise issues in the House and alleged that their voices were being suppressed. He stated that the suspension followed protests by Opposition members against what they described as attempts to silence them.

The suspension of MPs for disorderly conduct is permitted under parliamentary rules when members are found to be obstructing proceedings. Such actions, however, often draw sharp political reactions and have been a recurring point of contention between the government and the Opposition during parliamentary sessions.

The Lok Sabha is expected to resume proceedings as per the scheduled business on the next working day.

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Budget Session

New Delhi | Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman on January 29, 2026, tabled the Economic Survey 2025–26 in both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha during the ongoing Budget Session of Parliament, presenting the government’s official assessment of the Indian economy ahead of the Union Budget.

The Survey projected real GDP growth for FY27 in the range of 6.8% to 7.2%, driven primarily by resilient domestic demand, steady consumption patterns, and sustained public capital expenditure. It highlighted India’s continued focus on infrastructure development, digitalisation, and investment-led growth as key pillars supporting economic momentum.

The Economic Survey also examined progress on fiscal consolidation, noting efforts to balance growth priorities with macroeconomic stability. Inflation trends were reviewed, alongside risks emerging from global economic uncertainties, including geopolitical tensions and volatile commodity prices.

Sectoral performance featured prominently in the Survey, with particular emphasis on infrastructure expansion, manufacturing, services, and the growing role of digital technologies in productivity enhancement and governance reforms.

Following the tabling of the Economic Survey, proceedings in both Houses of Parliament were adjourned for the day. Parliament is scheduled to reconvene on February 1, 2026, when Finance Minister Sitharaman will present the Union Budget 2026–27.

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Parliament Winter Session 2025

Parliament’s Winter Session of 2025 concluded abruptly on December 19, with both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha adjourned sine die shortly after resuming for the day. The closing moments mirrored the overall tone of the session—intense, confrontational, and dominated by political disagreement, particularly over the newly passed Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) Bill, or VB-G RAM G Bill.

What was expected to be a routine final sitting instead unfolded as a continuation of the unrest that had marked the previous day. Protests by Opposition members, which had extended overnight within the Parliament complex, set the backdrop for a session that ended without further legislative business.

Protests Spill Over Into the Final Day

Opposition parties remained firm in their opposition to the VB-G RAM G Bill, which replaces the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), a programme that has been in place for nearly two decades. The Bill’s passage earlier triggered strong reactions, with Opposition leaders accusing the government of pushing through a major policy change without sufficient consultation or scrutiny.

By the final morning, tensions had not eased. Opposition members reiterated their objections and announced plans to carry their protest beyond Parliament, signalling nationwide demonstrations. They argued that the new law weakens rural employment protections and dismantles an existing social safety net.

Rajya Sabha Session Formally Concluded

In the Rajya Sabha, Vice-President and Chairman C. P. Radhakrishnan formally brought the 269th session to a close. In his concluding remarks, he described the session as productive overall, citing improved participation during Question Hour and Zero Hour.

At the same time, he expressed strong disapproval of the conduct witnessed during the previous day’s proceedings. Referring to scenes where members protested during a minister’s reply and tore documents, he said such actions were not in keeping with the dignity of the House. The Rajya Sabha adjourned sine die with the customary playing of Vande Mataram.

Lok Sabha Adjourned Amid Continuing Protests

Soon after, Speaker Om Birla adjourned the Lok Sabha sine die as protests continued within the House. Prime Minister Narendra Modi was present during the adjournment, which effectively ended the Winter Session on a tense and unresolved note.

The scenes in the Lok Sabha reflected the sharp divide between the government and the Opposition, with the VB-G RAM G Bill remaining the central point of contention even after its passage.

Productivity Figures Despite Disruptions

Despite the political turbulence, parliamentary authorities highlighted strong productivity during the session. The Rajya Sabha recorded productivity of 121 per cent, while the Lok Sabha achieved 111 per cent. Several government Bills were introduced and passed, indicating that legislative business continued at a steady pace for much of the session.

However, the final days underscored how political disagreements can overshadow legislative achievements, particularly when major policy shifts are involved.

Political Reactions Continue After Adjournment

Reactions to the VB-G RAM G Bill remained sharp even after Parliament adjourned. Opposition leaders described the legislation as detrimental to rural workers and accused the government of undermining employment security. Some warned that public resistance could intensify and suggested that sustained pressure might force a reconsideration of the law, drawing parallels with past policy reversals.

The government, meanwhile, has maintained that the new law represents a modernised approach to rural employment, aligned with long-term development goals. These opposing narratives are expected to dominate political discourse in the coming weeks.

An Attempt to Restore Dialogue

Following the adjournment, Speaker Om Birla met leaders of various political parties in his chamber. Such meetings are a customary post-session practice, aimed at easing tensions and reopening channels of dialogue after contentious sittings.

Whether this engagement will translate into consensus remains uncertain, as the debate over rural employment reform now moves beyond Parliament and into the public domain.

A Session That Sets the Tone Ahead

As Parliament rose, the Winter Session of 2025 came to be defined by a mix of high legislative output and deep political division. The passage of the VB-G RAM G Bill ensured that the session will be remembered not just for the number of laws passed, but for the intensity of the debate surrounding one of them.

With protests expected to continue outside the House, the issues raised during the session are likely to shape political discussions well beyond the winter recess.

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Parliament Winter Session day 14

The Lok Sabha on December 18, 2025, passed the Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin), known as the VB-G RAM G Bill, bringing a significant change to India’s rural employment framework. The legislation seeks to replace the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), which has been in place for nearly two decades, with a new programme guaranteeing 125 days of employment each year.

The Bill was passed through a voice vote amid protests by Opposition members, who raised slogans and expressed objections during the proceedings. Despite the disruptions, the government maintained that the legislation represents a necessary update to align rural employment policy with current development priorities.

Government’s Rationale for Replacing MGNREGA

Responding to a lengthy debate that stretched over eight hours, Rural Development Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan defended the decision to replace MGNREGA. He argued that while the earlier scheme played an important role in providing income support, it had limitations that needed to be addressed.

According to the Minister, large public expenditures—estimated at ₹10–11 lakh crore over the years—had primarily gone toward wage payments. He stated that the new approach aims to balance employment generation with the creation of durable assets that contribute to long-term rural development. The emphasis, he said, should be on building “fully developed villages” rather than focusing only on short-term employment relief.

Focus Areas Under the New Programme

The VB-G RAM G Bill outlines a broader scope of work compared to its predecessor. The government has said the programme will prioritise projects related to water security, including the construction of lakes, water bodies, and micro-irrigation channels. These initiatives are intended to address chronic water shortages and improve agricultural resilience.

In addition, the scheme will support the development of core rural and livelihood infrastructure, such as access roads and facilities linked to local economic activity. Special provisions have also been included for works aimed at reducing the impact of extreme weather events, reflecting growing concerns around climate variability in rural areas.

All assets created under the programme will be digitally mapped and integrated into the proposed Viksit Bharat National Rural Infrastructure Stack. The government has described this as a way to improve transparency, planning, and coordination across rural development initiatives.

Opposition Objections and Demand for Scrutiny

At the start of the sitting, Congress MP K.C. Venugopal requested that the Bill be referred to a parliamentary committee for detailed examination. He argued that a policy shift of this scale required deeper scrutiny and wider consultation.

Speaker Om Birla declined the request, noting that 98 members from across party lines had already participated in the debate, which extended past midnight the previous day. He said the House had given sufficient time for discussion and that the legislative process had been followed.

As the debate progressed, Opposition members continued to protest, with some entering the well of the House and tearing copies of the Bill. The disruptions underscored the political sensitivity surrounding changes to a flagship rural employment programme.

Sharp Political Exchanges in the House

During his reply, Mr. Chouhan strongly criticised the Congress, accusing it of selectively invoking Mahatma Gandhi’s legacy while failing to uphold Gandhian values in practice. He said that refusing to engage with differing viewpoints also went against the principles associated with Gandhi.

The Minister argued that the current government’s welfare initiatives reflected those ideals more effectively. He cited schemes such as PM Awas Yojana, Ujjwala Yojana, Swachh Bharat Mission, and Ayushman Bharat as examples of policies aimed at improving dignity and quality of life for the poor.

He also pointed out that the rural employment scheme was initially launched as NREGA and that Mahatma Gandhi’s name was added later, ahead of the 2009 general elections. This, he suggested, was a political decision rather than a reflection of the programme’s core philosophy.

Linking the Bill to Long-Term Development Goals

Mr. Chouhan stated that the VB-G RAM G Bill should be viewed as part of a larger statutory framework aligned with the government’s vision of Viksit Bharat 2047. He maintained that the new programme is designed to modernise rural employment by integrating it with infrastructure development, climate adaptation, and digital governance.

The Minister also credited Prime Minister Narendra Modi with ensuring the effective implementation of MGNREGA during his tenure, countering Opposition claims that the new Bill undermines earlier welfare efforts. According to him, the proposed law builds on past experience while updating the structure to meet future needs.

What the Passage of the Bill Signals

The passage of the VB-G RAM G Bill marks a turning point in how rural employment is structured in India. Supporters see it as an attempt to move beyond wage support toward asset creation and village-level development. Critics, however, remain concerned about implementation, safeguards, and whether the new framework will provide the same level of employment security as MGNREGA.

With the Bill now cleared by the Lok Sabha, attention will shift to how the programme is rolled out on the ground and how effectively it balances employment generation with long-term rural infrastructure goals.

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Lok Sabha

Amid intensifying concerns about toxic air across several Indian cities, the government has indicated that it is prepared to hold a detailed discussion on air pollution in the Lok Sabha. Union Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju stated that since the Leader of the Opposition raised the matter in the Business Advisory Committee, the government must examine how such a discussion can be formally structured under parliamentary rules. His remarks suggested both willingness and procedural caution, signalling that the stage is being set for a multi-party conversation.

Rijiju reiterated that the government, from day one of the Winter Session, has been open to discussing all major national issues and considering constructive suggestions from the opposition. His comments come at a time when MPs across party lines have repeatedly flagged alarming pollution levels, especially in large urban centres.

Rahul Gandhi Calls for a Non-Ideological, Unified Response

Raising the issue during Zero Hour, Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi emphasised that the worsening air quality is a nationwide challenge, not a political battleground. He expressed hope that the topic would not be reduced to ideological point-scoring, insisting that all parties share common ground on the urgency of clean air.

Gandhi urged the government to prepare a credible national strategy to reduce pollution, and assured that the opposition, including the Congress, would support any serious effort to create actionable solutions. His insistence that the discussion move swiftly reflects the pressure many urban constituencies are feeling as health warnings intensify.

Persistent Demands from the Opposition Bloc

Opposition parties have been calling for the debate since the start of the Winter Session, arguing that air quality has reached a point where legislative intervention is unavoidable. Congress whip Manickam Tagore reiterated the urgency, telling the House that millions of citizens face a “health emergency” that can no longer be brushed aside. With particulate matter levels spiking across northern India, several MPs have echoed similar concerns.

Momentum Builds for a Full-Fledged Parliamentary Discussion

Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla, acknowledging the seriousness of the matter, has already held initial conversations with both the government and opposition leaders regarding the feasibility of a focused discussion. His involvement indicates that the House is moving closer to dedicating formal time to the subject.

If the discussion proceeds, it may open the door to cross-party collaboration on long-pending reforms in urban planning, industrial regulation, transport policy, and emergency-response preparedness. For now, the tone on both sides appears unusually aligned: the crisis cannot be ignored, and the debate must happen.

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Parliament Winter Session 2025 Day 7

The day in the Parliament began with the lower house locked in a furious, nearly 10-hour debate on Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. Government lawmakers defended the exercise as a constitutionally valid, technologically enhanced method to eliminate duplicate, migrated, and deceased voter entries and ensure cleaner, more accurate voter lists. On the other side, the Opposition painted it as a selective, partisan exercise that disproportionately impacts minority and opposition-leaning constituencies calling it “vote-chori” and questioning the neutrality of the Election Commission of India (EC). Demands for transparency, full roll-verification, and independent auditing echoed throughout the proceedings.

Meanwhile, in the upper house a ceremony meant to commemorate 150 years of Vande Mataram turned into a bitter debate about national identity and cultural symbolism. The ruling alliance insisted the song be institutionally honoured for its historical role uniting freedom fighters; the Opposition countered that patriotism cannot be enforced by legislation, accusing the treasury benches of playing identity politics and ignoring urgent social and economic issues.

Overlapping with these flashpoints, the nation’s aviation system battered by repeated cancellations and passenger chaos came under fire. The Civil Aviation Ministry faced tough questions over a recent spate of flight disruptions by IndiGo. In response, the minister announced that new Flight Duty Time Limitations (FDTL) for pilots are now in force to curb crew fatigue and improve safety. The House was told airlines, including IndiGo, would face strict DGCA oversight; regulators may penalize future lapses, and a parliamentary standing committee has asked to summon airline executives and DGCA officials next week to investigate the systemic breakdown.

On internal security, the Home Ministry laid bare recent gains in the fight against left-wing extremism, reporting that since 2019, 29 top Maoist leaders have been neutralised, over 7,300 cadres arrested, and roughly 5,571 militants surrendered. According to the government, the number of “severely affected” districts has shrunk thanks to increased security deployments, better inter-agency intel-sharing, and developmental outreach. MPs pressed for details on rehabilitation for surrendered cadres and sought fresh district-wise data.

Adding another layer, Parliament’s committees revealed economic and administrative developments: public-sector banks have written off more than ₹6.15 lakh crore in bad loans over recent years, prompting opposition demands for a full disclosure of beneficiaries and recovery breakdowns. The government announced plans to shut down 25 loss-making central PSUs under its restructuring drive triggering concerns about job security, asset valuation, and possible privatization. On the taxation front, simpler income-tax return forms are reportedly coming soon, aimed at easing compliance.

Last but perhaps most explosive: the opposition bloc formally signalled its intention to bring an impeachment motion against Justice G. R. Swaminathan of the Madras High Court, citing alleged misconduct. If they secure the necessary signatures, this could trigger a major constitutional confrontation between Parliament and the judiciary.

As the Winter Session (scheduled from December 1–19, 2025) enters its second week, what began as a planned session has evolved into one of the most turbulent, politically charged sittings in recent memory with every debate, symbolic gesture, and procedural move turned into a battleground of competing narratives about democracy, governance, identity, and institutional trust.

Why Today Matters: The Stakes Are Bigger Than Politics

  • The SIR debate is about more than updating voter lists, it strikes at the heart of electoral fairness and democracy, raising questions about who gets to vote and whose votes may be discarded.
  • The “Vande Mataram” controversy illustrates how cultural and symbolic politics can overshadow substantive issues like economy, jobs, public welfare.
  • The IndiGo crisis underscores systemic vulnerabilities in essential public services and highlights the challenge of regulating large private players under public interest.
  • Security updates on left-wing extremism point to government claims of success but the call for data and rehabilitation signals continuing skepticism.
  • Economic disclosures and PSU shutdowns reflect broader structural changes, but also spark anxiety over job security and transparency.
  • The potential impeachment of a High Court judge threatens a constitutional standoff raising fundamental questions about checks and balances, judicial independence, and parliamentary power.

In short: what unfolded today isn’t just politics as usual. It is a microcosm of India’s larger struggles — about identity and inclusion, about economic reform and fairness, about institutional integrity and trust — and a clear signal that the next few months in Parliament will shape more than just laws.

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Newer Posts

Our News Portal

We provide accurate, balanced, and impartial coverage of national and international affairs, focusing on the activities and developments within the parliament and its surrounding political landscape. We aim to foster informed public discourse and promote transparency in governance through our news articles, features, and opinion pieces.

Newsletter

Laest News

@2023 – All Right Reserved. Designed and Developed by The Parliament News

Are you sure want to unlock this post?
Unlock left : 0
Are you sure want to cancel subscription?
-
00:00
00:00
Update Required Flash plugin
-
00:00
00:00