The Centre and the BJP on Tuesday studiously avoided addressing the situation in Manipur during the discussion on the no-confidence motion in the Lok Sabha, using the debate to highlight contradictions within the INDIA partnership and talk up the “work and achievements” of the Modi regime.
With the fate of the no-confidence motion a foregone conclusion, given the unassailable majority the BJP enjoys in the Lok Sabha, the main suspense revolves around whether Prime Minister Narendra Modi will put in an appearance before he replies to the debate.
Modi was in the Parliament complex and he did address the MPs of his party on Tuesday but he did not attend the Lok Sabha.
Modi’s reply is scheduled for Thursday and every member of the Opposition who spoke underscored the fact that they were compelled to bring the no-confidence motion to force the Prime Minister to come to the House and speak about Manipur.
The tone and tenor of the BJP’s counter to the motion was set by Nishikant Dubey, the MP representing Godda in Jharkhand, who made only a fleeting reference to Manipur before taking potshots galore at the INDIA parties, questioning them individually for aligning with the Congress.
Reminding the DMK, Trinamul and the RJD that their troubles with the law are essentially because of the Congress, he asked their party leaders why they are against the BJP when it is the Congress they should be targeting.
Subsequent speakers from the BJP and its ally Shiv Sena (Shinde) steered clear of Manipur with Union minister Kiren Rijiju saying home minister Amit Shah would address the issue in detail in his intervention.
In his long intervention, Rijiju simply said the strife in Manipur is not a new one and insisted that it was the result of the Congress’s negligence. His intervention was otherwise a long litany of the achievements of the Modi government and how the current dispensation had given the Northeast ample attention.
The Shinde group of the Shiv Sena chose to field chief minister Eknath Shinde’s son Shrikant who, too, followed the BJP line with the added Maharashtra angle of crossing words with the Thackeray faction in the House.
The INDIA parties, too, digressed from Manipur but each speaker made it a point to spend some part of their intervention on the situation in the state.
Billing Modi’s silence in the face of such misery as “total indifference”, RSP’s N.K. Premachandran said “double-engine governance” had failed in Manipur. What prevented the Prime Minister from making a statement on Manipur and appealing for peace, he asked, pointing out that Modi could have done this in his monthly radio broadcast Mann Ki Baat also.
“Yesterday’s Supreme Court ruling (to supervise, intervene and monitor relief and rehabilitation) is a judicial ratification of the no-confidence motion. The Supreme Court has taken over the Manipur administration…. Is it not a no-confidence of the Supreme Court on the Union government?’’ Premachandran asked.
Saugata Roy of the Trinamul said: “While Opposition-ruled states see delegations flooding in, Manipur’s cries for help have been met with a chilling silence, baring the ruling party’s hollow compassion. The heartlessness and cruelty of those in power have left our fellow brothers and sisters of Manipur to suffer and die without the empathy they deserve.”
He demanded the dismissal of the BJP government headed by Biren Singh in Manipur.
“Is the Prime Minister a roving ambassador or a travelling salesman?’’ Roy asked, drawing attention to the fact that Modi had travelled to seven countries during the time Manipur was on the boil.
NCP’s Supriya Sule, too, demanded the resignation of the Manipur chief minister and said this was about the dignity of women.
“How can we support a government like this?” she asked, having highlighted the fact that the Modi government had brought down nine governments across the country in nine years, failed to double farmers’ income as promised and rolled out high-end trains like Vande Bharat while ignoring general trains used by the poor.
Stating that the BJD can never support a motion brought by the Congress, given the party’s foundation in anti-Congressism, Pinaki Misra agreed that the Manipur government had failed in its duty but maintained that the situation was a legacy issue. He said the Congress had shot itself in the foot by bringing this motion, pointing to earlier instances when the Prime Minister had torn into the Opposition party.
Arvind Sawant of the Shiv Sena (Thackeray) said apart from getting the Prime Minister to Parliament, the purpose of the no-confidence motion was to force the government to break its silence on Manipur.
It took a rap from the Supreme Court for the Prime Minister to speak on the situation in Manipur after 78 days of mayhem which saw numerous deaths, cases of sexual assault and several thousands of people in relief camps.
