SHRI VIJAY GOEL (CHANDNI CHOWK)

¸ÉÒ Ê´ÉVÉªÉ MÉÉäªÉ±É : VÉ¤É nùä´ÉMÉÉèc÷É VÉÒ +ÉB lÉä iÉÉä ½þ¨É ¦ÉÒ =xÉEòÉ xÉÉ¨É xÉ½þÒÆ VÉÉxÉiÉä lÉä*

SHRI INDRAJIT GUPTA (MIDNAPORE)

¸ÉÒ <ÆpùVÉÒiÉ MÉÖ{iÉ : iÉÉä EªÉÉ +É{É xÉEò±É Eò®úxÉÉ SÉÉ½þiÉä ½þèÆ?

SHRI VIJAY GOEL (CHANDNI CHOWK)

¸ÉÒ Ê´ÉVÉªÉ MÉÉäªÉ±É : +É{É ´É½þ ¤ÉÉiÉ iÉÉä ¨ÉiÉ EòÊ½þªÉä VÉÉä +É{É JÉÖnù Eò®úiÉä ½þèÆ*

MR. SPEAKER: Please do not disturb him.

SHRI INDRAJIT GUPTA : Sir, Shri Vijay Goel has the right to go on interrupting if he likes. I have not uttered a single word here. I could also interrupt but I do not. It is not my habit.

The other point I want to make is that yesterday a Member here from Maharashtra spoke at great length about the background of the communal riots which had taken place in Mumbai after the Babri Masjid demolition and he reminded us - quite correctly I think - that during the period of those riots, the Government which was then in power in Maharashtra, was a Congress Government. I think what he meant to say was that if any part of the responsibility for what happened rested with the State Government, then it was the Congress party whose Chief Minister was there and so they should take the responsibility.

But what I am asking is that if this is a fact, then why is the BJP so hesitant and so chary to allow Justice Srikrishna Commission's Report on this very period to be tabled in the House in Maharashtra? There is a big furore going on about it. First of all, it was stated that during the current Session of the Assembly, the Srikrishna Report would be laid on the Table of the House. Later on, it was said that it would be done later. Still later, it was said that no Action Taken Report had been prepared yet and so it could not be laid with an Action Taken Report. Now that Action Taken Report has to be prepared. In this way, delay has been occurring. After all, we are dealing with events of the riots of that year. So, I want to know that since a Congress Government was in power at that time, why is the BJP so nervous and so chary of allowing the Srikrishna Commission's Report to be tabled in the House? I would like to have a reply to this point.

Then, a lot has been said here about minorities. I do not want to go into all that but I am just pained to find that there have been a whole spate of complaints to the National Human Rights Commission on behalf of certain Christian communities - Catholics and others - recently and they are complaining that some fundamentalist and extremist elements belonging to the BJP have been carrying out physical attacks on Christians in various parts of the country and the Police does not act to defend them. Particularly, they say this in Maharashtra and Gujarat. They have been appealing to the authorities for protection...(Interruptions). So, in view of the very good things which were stated here by the Prime Minister...(Interruptions) SHRI MOHAN RAWALE (MUMBAI SOUTH CENTRAL)

¸ÉÒ ¨ÉÉä½þxÉ ®úÉ´É±Éä (¨ÉÖ¨¤É<Ç nùÊIÉhÉ-¨ÉvªÉ) : BäºÉÉ BEò ¦ÉÒ <ÆºÉÒb÷äÆ]õ xÉ½þÒÆ ½þÖ+É ½þè* ªÉä ½þÉ=ºÉ EòÉä Ê¨Éº±ÉÒb÷ Eò®ú ®ú½þä ½þèÆ*

MR. SPEAKER: Mr. Rawale, please take your seat.

SHRI INDRAJIT GUPTA : Sir, a Christian Organisation of the Pentecost Church in Baroda and a Catholic institution in Latur, the place where Christian voluntary organisations have been working for the rehabilitation of the victims of the earthquake, have complained and the National Human Rights Commission has now told the Directors General of Police of the States of Gujarat and Maharastra to take early action to investigate and find out who is responsible for these attacks and what remedial measures should be taken. I want to know why such things are being permitted even just after the new Government has assumed office here in Delhi.

The All India Catholic Union has warned that these incidents have generated serious misapprehension in the minds of the Christian community and the Police seems to be paralysed to act against the fundamentalist mobs. This is a matter which requires clarification and explanation as to why it cannot be known to the Central Government and why such things are being allowed to go on.

I am only dealing with one or two points. My next point is that the candidate who was set up by the B.J.P. in Faizabad constituency, next to Ayodhya, Shri Vinay Katiyar, who has been defeated -- he was a Member of this House for a long time -- has published a lengthy statement in which he accuses the B.J.P. leadership for many of the reverses which they have suffered in various parts of the country including - I suppose he means - his own constituency which he attributes to the fact that these issues which are being mentioned here - Article 370, Uniform Civil Code, whether there should be a temple built at Ayodhya or whether it should be converted into a national monument as somebody has suggested etc. - according to him, these things have aroused misgivings in the minds of the general Hindu population which thinks that the B.J.P. leadership is now backtracking and trying to get out of its earlier commitments. This has created confusion and has led to a loss of votes on a large scale among the Hindu community.

So, I want to know about these issues, which are being mentioned here, which the B.J.P. leadership, in its wisdom, has said that they are not insisting on these now and that they are trying to put them aside for the time being. I do not know whether these issues are like some sort of caps which you put on your heads and take off whenever it is necessary and then put them on again. I hope that these caps will not be put on again as soon as the compulsions of the election are over and the Ministry-making is over.

But, Shri Vinay Katiyar, I believe, belongs to the Bajrang Dal. He is the Secretary of the Bajrang Dal. What I want to say is that the allies of the B.J.P. are not only these parties and individuals who have collected here. Much closer allies are the Sangh Parivar people and the Sangh Parivar people include the R.S.S. which has been practising some kind of influence and remote control on the B.J.P. leadership. They do not like these things which are being done.

So, how are we to have confidence that this commitment or this assurance being given to the country that these issues - because they are contentious and they are divisive - will not be taken up in future? How are we to believe that they will be put on the backburner, as it were, and the people should not have any apprehension on that score? It is because that it means that the V.H.P., incuding the R.S.S. and so on have agreed to these kinds of manouvers.

But I have great doubts as to whether they can ever agree to this. The whole matter will again be brought up and we will again be facing a lot of trouble.

Then, on the question of nuclear options, we are confused, we do not know exactly what the proposition of the Government now is. In their document, they have spoken about nuclear options being exercised. Later on, one of the Ministers, including the Defence Minister, has tried to point out that they are actually not going in for any nuclear weapons now and so nobody has to be alarmed about that matter. What am I saying is that they have printed their document and they should please read what they have written in it about exercising this policy of nuclear option. Are they standing by that or is there any dilution or revision of that? What is the message that they want to send out to the other neighbouring countries, particularly round about India who consider themselves to be weaker than India? They are, of course, smaller than India and they cannot think of exercising any nuclear weapons policy. There should be a categorical statement, particularly from the Prime Minister as to what actually is their stand and the latest official stand regarding the question of nuclear option so that some wrong message does not go out to other countries which potentially are our friends and who may have all kinds of misgivings and apprehensions if they feel that the new Government is going to reverse its policy and going for nuclear weapons. This should be clarified.

There are reports that the big business houses, particularly in Mumbai and in some other parts of the country - of course, I can understand - are very friendly disposed towards the BJP and the new Government. I am sure that they helped them on a massive scale during the recent election though some of the people who are supposed to be or known to be their favourites within the BJP came a cropper and did not manage to get through. I do not know why. But anyway, big businessmen are not people who work for charity; they also want their own pound of flesh. So, if they are pledging support to Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee and his party for carrying on their Government in a way which will satisfy them, I am sure that they are also putting forward their own demands. Big businessmen have got many demands, as we all know. They are not charitable organisations.

A lot of discussion and debates have been taking place on these issues of swadeshi and multinationals, to what extent we should and how we should allow foreign capital to be invested, in which sectors and all that. In this regard, I would like to know what the demands which big businessmen putting forward on our Government are in exchange of the help that they have given and propose to give in future, because later on, we should not be pressurised into positions like the one in which we are, for example, under the WTO.

The whole question is to what extent we have got the liberty to protect our domestic industries from unequal foreign competition and it is a very important matter, whether you call it swadeshi or you call it by some other name. Every Indian would like to see that these industries which have grown up in our own country, domestic industries, are not weakened or destroyed by unequal foreign competition coming from these big multinational corporations and other foreign companies which have got immense resources at their disposal. What is the position in this regard? I would like some assurance to be given by the Prime Minister.

I do not want to take more time because you have also been hustling us a long and also, there is no time left. I, therefore, would say that these are some of the points - there are some other points also - which make it very confusing as to what exactly this Government is going to do or is in a position to do since it has so many contradictions and so many differences with the stated policies of those people whom they call their allies.

I do not think the allied parties and the people have joined the B.J.P. or sought the protection of the B.J.P. umbrella because of any great ideological affection or affinity with the B.J.P. They have done it purely on practical and opportunist grounds. There is no doubt about that, because they hope to be on the right side of the ruling party from which they expect to get some dividends in the shape of governmental seats and ministries and so on. I am not talking about the moral side of the question. That has been dealt with by so many speakers.

Finally, I would say that it is not possible at all, in these circumstances, to give our confidence to this Government and therefore, we propose to vote against this Motion.

Shri T.R. BAALU (MADRAS SOUTH): Mr. Speaker, Sir, on behalf of the D.M.K., I rise to oppose this Motion, moved by the hon. Prime Minister of India.

Sir, before I proceed further, it is my utmost and profound duty to thank my leader and the electorate of South Chennai who have selected and elected me to this august House.

Sir, during the election campaign, hon. Prime Minister Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee went before the electorate and categorically stated about his party's schemes and ideas to the masses. He has also stated, during the campaign, that they would construct a Ram Temple over the debris of the Babri Masjid, that they would scrap Article 370 of the Constitution and that they would bring about an enactment to implement a Uniform Civil Code, if they come to power.

But after the elections, what went wrong? What happened to the election promises made before the electorate, before the public? He has compromised with the promises which he made before the public. One of my friends on the other said yesterday that they have made some compromises. I do not know what compromises that they have made. I would like to know from the hon. Prime Minister whether all these promises which he has made before the masses of the country are going to be fulfilled now or they have been postponed endlessly. I would like to have a categorical answer from the hon. Prime Minister on this point.

Sir, the hon. Prime Minister, who has pleaded for the scrapping of article 370 of the Constitution, had gone to the Rashtrapati Bhavan and submitted a list containing 240 Members of Parliament who were supporting him. At that time, he knew that unless and until he got the support of 272 or, at least, 270 Members of Parliament, he would not be able to form the Government. In spite of it, Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee met the Rashtrapatiji and submitted the list. He came out of the Rashtrapati Bhavan - such a tall and towering personally with full of pride and courage - and met the Press people.

He met the Press outside. He briefed the Press that he has already handed over a list of 240 Members of Parliament to the President of India and that now it is for the President to call him or not to call him. But at the same time he also said that he would not succumb to any pressure.

Sir, my party has made encomium to his courage. My party leaders said that we have got amongst us one of the towering personalities and one of the gigantic persons to lead the nation. He is a better person to be the Prime Minister of India. We have discussed this. My party thought like that. The entire nation thought like that. The whole nation expected him to be like that. But alas! I do not know what happened. An emissary was sent all the way from Delhi to Chennai. Here in Delhi, anguish, trauma and panic prevailed in the headquarters of the B.J.P. But at the same time a drama had been enacted in the city of Chennai. What was the drama? What was the outcome? We do not know. The Press and the entire nation thought something was going to happen. But after two-three days, the things had come to light. They received the support to form a Government. They formed a Government. While announcing the portfolio, the entire nation understood what happened in the drama that took place at Chennai. Sir, the Ministers have been appointed. One of the Ministers was appointed to take care of the Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs to safeguard the interest of a particular person from the litigations... (Interruptions). One of the Ministers was appointed for taking care of the CBI cases... (Interruptions).

THE MINISTER OF LAW, JUSTICE AND COMPANY AFFAIRS (SHRI M. THAMBI DURAI): Sir, I am on point of order. I am the Miinister for this Ministry. This is not the way. He is charging me. He is casting aspersion on me... (Interruptions). If he is alleging against me let him substantiate the charges levelled against me... (Interruptions).

MR. SPEAKER: If there is anything objectionable, I will expunge it from the records.

... (Interruptions)

and say... (Interruptions)

MR. SPEAKER: If it is objectionable, I will expunge it from the records. Shri Baalu, please wind up and you talk on the motion also.