Modi vs Opposition: Who is right?

What happened?

Prime Minister Narendra Modi inaugurated the new parliament building on May 28, but 19 opposition parties, including the Congress, the TMC, and the AAP, decided to boycott the ceremony. Two main reasons cited for the boycott were the exclusion of President Draupadi Murmu from the inauguration and concerns over the government's disregard for democracy.

Why it matters?

The inauguration marked the completion of a ₹1200 crore project aimed at improving facilities for lawmakers. The coinciding date with Hindutva idealogue, DV Savarkar's birthday, sparked controversy, as some sections viewed it as a threat to the country's foundation - secularism. The exclusion of President Murmu also sparked debates about respecting the constitutional role of India's President as the head of Parliament.

What are the arguments from both sides?

Side 1: The boycott is valid.

• The President is the head: The President is the head of the legislature and part of Parliament, as per the Constitution. They can summon, suspend, and address both houses of Parliament and dissolve the Lok Sabha. The President also assents to the bills passed by the Parliament, making them law. Thus, leaving out the President from the new Parliament's inauguration is unconstitutional.

• BJP is not democratic: The BJP's moves, like the farm bills and demonetisation, were not discussed in the Parliament and caused widespread protests and hardships for various sections of society. Therefore, the boycott expresses their dissent and dissatisfaction with the government's policies and decisions that affect the lives and rights of millions of Indians. Will a switch to the new Parliament guarantee future decisions are mutually debated?

• Money could have been used for other things: The opposition's boycott is a way to state their disagreement with constructing the new parliament building that cost ₹1200 crores. Critics have also argued that this expenditure is unnecessary and wasteful when the country faces a severe economic, humanitarian, and environmental crisis. They have also questioned why the current building cannot be upgraded or renovated instead of building a new one.

Side 2: The boycott is not valid.

• PM can inaugurate the Parliament: Even though the Constitution clearly defines the roles of a President and a PM, it doesn't explicitly mention anything regarding the inauguration of buildings of national significance. So, this incident being "unconstitutional" holds no legal ground. Additionally, previous PMs have inaugurated Parliamentary bodies, like Indira Gandhi, who inaugurated the Parliament Annexe (1975), and Rajiv Gandhi, who laid the foundation of the Parliament Library (1987).

• President was not disrespected: The Lok Sabha speaker is the custodian of the Parliament. Since the invitation comes from the appropriate authority, it shouldn't be interpreted as an attempt to sideline the President or as an intentional disrespect towards her.

• New Parliament is our pride: The new parliament building is a matter of pride for Indians and reflects the aspirations of a young and dynamic nation. It is also built with the country's taxpayers' money and shouldn't be affiliated with a particular political party. Its inauguration should be marked by something other than creating non-existent political issues.

What next?

The new parliament building will be ready for use in the monsoon session of Parliament, which is expected to start in July 2023. The opposition parties boycotted the inauguration, and it remains uncertain if they will continue to protest by boycotting the sessions. This could deepen the trust deficit and hinder the legislative process.

What is Tamil Nadu's Amul vs Aavin Controversy?

What happened?

Amul, a Gujarat-based dairy cooperative, entered the fresh milk market in Tamil Nadu, a state dominated by Aavin, a state-owned dairy cooperative. Amul bought milk from Aavin's farmers and used its special permission to set up collection centres and chilling plants to store the milk in different parts of Tamil Nadu. Tamil Nadu Chief Minister MK Stalin wrote to Home Minister Amit Shah, alleging Amul was trying to procure milk from the state's farmers at lower prices and sell it at higher rates.

Why it matters?

The introduction of Amul could disrupt Aavin's market share and profitability, impacting the livelihoods of numerous local dairy farmers supplying milk to Aavin. The implications of this development extend beyond the economic sphere and could have political ramifications.

Aavin is widely regarded as a symbol of Tamil pride and self-reliance, making any perceived effort to undermine it susceptible to public backlash and opposition criticism. Amul's entry into Tamil Nadu follows a similar controversy in Karnataka, where it faced opposition from pro-Kannada groups and political parties for allegedly posing a threat to the local brand Nandini.

What are the arguments from both sides?

Side 1: Amul's entry brings positive outcomes.

• Amul could meet consumers’ demand at lower prices: Amul's entry will enhance the availability and affordability of milk and milk products. Aavin currently purchases a mere 30-35 lakh litres of milk daily, despite the state's substantial milk production of 2.3 crore litres. Moreover, Amul's entry may ignite a price war, which means that both Amul and Aavin will try to sell their milk products at lower prices, benefitting the customers.

• Amul’s entry could increase farmers’ incomes: By offering higher prices to farmers compared to Aavin, Amul's entry can significantly increase the income and profitability of local farmers.

• There are other successful examples of regional cooperatives working together: Amul's successful coexistence with regional cooperatives like Mother Dairy (Delhi) and Sudha (Bihar) is a prime example of how different cooperatives can thrive together. With its national presence and established brand, Amul can complement regional cooperatives' local expertise and market focus.

Side 2: Amul's entry raises concerns.

• Amul’s entry may take away jobs: The entry of Amul in Tamil Nadu can adversely affect the local dairy cooperatives associated with Aavin, providing crucial employment and income opportunities to rural women.

• Milk prices may increase: Amul's entry can create a shortage of milk products as Amul and Aavin will buy more milk from the farmers, leaving less for other private players or local consumption. This scarcity may result in higher prices and reduced availability of milk products, negatively affecting consumers.

• Monopoly would be created: Amul could create a monopoly in the dairy sector, as in other states. The company may exploit its dominant position to dictate milk procurement and processing terms and conditions in Tamil Nadu. Amul may also influence the policies and regulations of the state government to favour its interests over those of Aavin and other local players.

What next?

Chief Minister Stalin has accused Amul of violating the spirit of 'Operation White Flood' (a national milk grid program that linked producers across India to consumers in 700+ towns) and creating unhealthy competition between cooperatives. This could intensify state-centre relations, triggering disagreements over cooperative federalism and state autonomy. It may also spark a political and cultural clash between Gujarat and Tamil Nadu, as both states have strong dairy brand identities.

Should Heat Waves Worry India?

What happened?

Last week, two more cheetah cubs fell victim to the blistering heat at Kuno National Park, dying of dehydration and heat stroke. These cubs were part of a reintroduction program that brought eight cheetahs from South Africa to India. As temperatures soar above 45 degrees Celsius for days, this tragic incident highlights the escalating frequency, intensity, and duration of heat waves in India fueled by climate change.

Why it matters?

India faces grave implications from climate change. The India Meteorological Department has predicted hotter days, more heatwaves, and below-normal summer rainfall. Such conditions increase the risk of cardiovascular and respiratory diseases. For example, in Maharashtra, 11 people died during an award ceremony attended by Amit Shah. Heat waves also harm poor farmers who rely on stable weather and irrigation, leading to crop losses.

In addition, heat waves increase electricity and fuel demand, straining the power network and risking blackouts; cause price hikes, ecological damage, and wildlife habitat threats, as seen in Goa's forest fires in March 2023. The International Labour Organization predicts a staggering loss of six per cent of working hours—equivalent to 3.4 crore full-time jobs in India —due to heat stress by 2030, surpassing all other countries.

What are the arguments from both sides?

Side 1: India Should Worry:

• Big economic impact: Heat waves provide undeniable proof of global warming, making India highly vulnerable. A World Bank report showed that India could lose 2.8% of its GDP by 2050 if temperatures rise and rainfall patterns change.

• Heat worsens our health crisis: India's public health system is strained and under-resourced, and heat waves amplify the challenge. Heat waves can lead to various illnesses, including heat cramps, exhaustion, stroke, and hyperthermia. A study comparing the number of heat-related deaths in India between 2000 and 2004 and between 2017 and 2021 showed a 55% increase in fatalities. With a dismal public health spending of INR 1600 per capita per year, India could be on the brink of a public health emergency if swift action is not taken.

• Farmers would be significantly impacted: The agricultural sector, employing over half of India's population and contributing 15% to the GDP, suffers drastically from heat waves. Crop yields plummet, pests run rampant, and livestock perish. Just in 2020, nearly 10,000 Indian farmers and agricultural workers were believed to have committed suicide because of low productivity owing to rising heat. The same report found that a rainfall deficit of just 5% annually claimed the lives of 810 farmers on average.

Side 2: India Should Not Worry: There is no other side to this story. Climate change is real, and Indians have no option but to worry.

What next?

India must implement and scale up its heat action plans (HAPs) nationwide to deal with heat waves. HAPs are measures to reduce the vulnerability of people and systems to heat stress and enhance their preparedness and response capacity. India released its national guidelines on managing heat waves in 2019, which provide a framework and best practices for developing and implementing HAPs at different levels.

NOTE WORTHY 📑

• Preserving Heritage: The Art of Bone Carving in Lucknow.

• How This Rope Dancer From Kerala Charmed Hitler.

• How a Parsi team Brought India Its First Cricket Victory.

• Singer: How This Company Transformed Women's Lives.

SHARE THIS VICHAAR 🙌

If you enjoyed reading my newsletter, please do consider sharing it with your loved ones.

Was this forwarded to you? Sign up here.

If you want to give us feedback, Click here.