In a bid to use the nuclear deal to turn Muslim mobilization into a polarization in its favour, the Bahujan Samaj Party is inserting the India-US pact into its grassroots campaign among the community.
The BSP is telling the community that Congress has compromised its interests by signing the nuclear pact. The raging issue would be part of the Dalit outfit's mobilization through 'Muslim bhaichara committees'.
The strident stand taken by CM Mayawati against the nuke deal and her drafting of Islamic scholars to back her stand goes far beyond posturing as partymen are now spreading it to basic organizational units. Bahujan strategists conceived the 'bhaichara' committees as part of their outreach to communities outside its core Dalit base to spread the party's wings.
Not merely Mayawati, the deal has triggered a major reaction among political outfits to use it to tap the Muslim sentiment for electoral gains. While it was first aired by CPM politburo member M K Pandhe to dissuade SP chief Mulayam Singh Yadav from jumping on to the nuke deal bandwagon, the reaction across the political spectrum has been on the same lines.
Congressmen concede there are problems and their concern was evident in AICC showing alacrity in issuing a statement on Tuesday to warn US against any misadventure in Iran.
The scepticism about the deal showed as Congress had a tough time negotiating with allies like MIM and IUML whose support is located in the community. It touched an extreme in Kerala assembly last week when a CPM MLA pushed through a non-official resolution denouncing the nuke pact with "anti-Muslim" George Bush.
BSP also sees potential in it. The focus of bhaichara committees has suddenly turned on the nuke pact to wean away the community from the pro-deal front of Congress and SP. A key BSP functionary said, "No one understands the deal. But it has more to do with the US. It is what we hammer on."
A source felt the nuke deal campaign could pave the way for a big change in the community's political choice. "It is for the first time that elections would be fought on a foreign policy issue. While Left is opposed to the deal, our leader has linked it to the community. It would fetch big results," he said.
Seething with anger against the CBI urgency in her disproportionate assets case, Mayawati has seized upon the nuke deal to use it to her advantage in Lok Sabha polls which she thinks can catapult her into a key role at the Centre. Sources said 'bhaichara committees' are being reconstituted along Lok Sabha constituencies to make them more relevant from poll point of view.
Thursday, July 17, 2008
We need no certificate for patriotism
In her first ever public appearance after the Left withdrew support to the UPA government, Congress president hit back on all the opposition to the nuke deal by saying that the party doesn’t need any certificate from anybody on its patriotism. “There is no question of compromising on our national interest (over N-deal). The Congress gave India its independent foreign policy and the party won’t ever waver from its path,” said Sonia firmly.
She further justified the nuke deal by adding that it is in the best interest of the nation. “We need more power as nation to grow. And the requirement is growing by the day. ”
She also lauded Dr Manmohan Singh by adding that the future generations will recognise what the PM is doing for the nation today.
Taking this opportunity to hit out on the opposition, Sonia said, “We need a politics that unites, not that divides, politics that is not based on narrow interests.”
The Congress president also stressed that India is today recognised as an international power. Moreover, she underlined the UPA’s focus on the farmers saying that it is evident with the massive farm loan waiver scheme announced by the central government.
“Welfare of the farmers is the top-most priority of the Congress,” announced Sonia. Stressing the point further she said that the NREGA programme is being extended to all districts. Every village with a population of more than 2000 will have all urban infrastructures including proper roads.
Sonia also tried to play down the inflation issue by drawing a parallel between the UPA and the NDA.
“The government has to face the huge challenge due to the unprecedented increase in oil prices. She pointed out that during NDA rule the crude oil was at around 35 dollars now its around 145 dollar, but unlike the NDA we have not passed on the whole burden to the conman man,” Sonia said.
She further justified the nuke deal by adding that it is in the best interest of the nation. “We need more power as nation to grow. And the requirement is growing by the day. ”
She also lauded Dr Manmohan Singh by adding that the future generations will recognise what the PM is doing for the nation today.
Taking this opportunity to hit out on the opposition, Sonia said, “We need a politics that unites, not that divides, politics that is not based on narrow interests.”
The Congress president also stressed that India is today recognised as an international power. Moreover, she underlined the UPA’s focus on the farmers saying that it is evident with the massive farm loan waiver scheme announced by the central government.
“Welfare of the farmers is the top-most priority of the Congress,” announced Sonia. Stressing the point further she said that the NREGA programme is being extended to all districts. Every village with a population of more than 2000 will have all urban infrastructures including proper roads.
Sonia also tried to play down the inflation issue by drawing a parallel between the UPA and the NDA.
“The government has to face the huge challenge due to the unprecedented increase in oil prices. She pointed out that during NDA rule the crude oil was at around 35 dollars now its around 145 dollar, but unlike the NDA we have not passed on the whole burden to the conman man,” Sonia said.
Vajpayee's silence is vexing nation
BJP’s STATESMAN, Atal Bihari Vajpayee is tight-lipped on the nuke deal. Its depressing that when the country is debating this issue, a person of his stature should be quiet. The country has high regard for him even today. Does he think this will not be an issue for the next elections? He served the nation not only as the prime minister but also as a foreign minister during Janata Party government. He praised the late Prime Minister Indira Gandhi as ‘Adiparasakthi’ after the victory in Bangladesh war. He possesses a clean record. One of the architects of India, Jawaharlal Nehru, praised him on many occasions. All these instances remind us how great some Indian politicians are.
When people and political parties are engaged in an issue, which relates to the future of the nation, it is expected that a leader will express his opinion. On the issue of Lok Sabha Speaker’s resignation, former speaker Rabi Ray has taken his stand. The former law minister also marked his comments on the nuclear deal. The astonishing thing is not to hear a comment of former Prime Minister VP Singh who reacts on every other issue.
The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has no serious objections as we go by the comments of its leaders and also LK Advani. As an Opposition party they may have some political objections. Because of that should the nuke deal process stop? What they were asking is for some amendments. If they come to power they could sign the deal as part o their foreign policy. Then what would be the difference between communists and them? Taking all these factors into account, BJP should act in this moment in a responsible Other . People of the country are already suffering due to increase in prices, as the inflation rates are mounting due to crude oil rates. In the existing scenario, if they fight on this economic issues, their credibility will grow rather than on the nuke issue.
The infighting in the Communist Party Marxist (CPM) is already sending a signal to people that it is on the verge of division after the voting in the Parliament. It shows that the next elections are almost between the two major national parties. Keeping all this in mind a party like BJP should take a different stand on the nuke deal
When people and political parties are engaged in an issue, which relates to the future of the nation, it is expected that a leader will express his opinion. On the issue of Lok Sabha Speaker’s resignation, former speaker Rabi Ray has taken his stand. The former law minister also marked his comments on the nuclear deal. The astonishing thing is not to hear a comment of former Prime Minister VP Singh who reacts on every other issue.
The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has no serious objections as we go by the comments of its leaders and also LK Advani. As an Opposition party they may have some political objections. Because of that should the nuke deal process stop? What they were asking is for some amendments. If they come to power they could sign the deal as part o their foreign policy. Then what would be the difference between communists and them? Taking all these factors into account, BJP should act in this moment in a responsible Other . People of the country are already suffering due to increase in prices, as the inflation rates are mounting due to crude oil rates. In the existing scenario, if they fight on this economic issues, their credibility will grow rather than on the nuke issue.
The infighting in the Communist Party Marxist (CPM) is already sending a signal to people that it is on the verge of division after the voting in the Parliament. It shows that the next elections are almost between the two major national parties. Keeping all this in mind a party like BJP should take a different stand on the nuke deal
US sends top envoy to IAEA when India presents case tomorrow
The Bush Administration has despatched a top envoy to Vienna to bolster support for the Indo-US civil nuclear deal tomorrow when India is due to brief the IAEA Board of Governors on the safeguards agreement.
William Burns, US undersecretary of state for political affairs, will be at the headquarters of the International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA) enroute to Geneva for a weekend meeting over Iran's controversial nuclear programme.
"Friday, he's (Burns) going to have some consultations at the International Atomic Energy Agency, related to the nuclear deal," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack told reporters here.
"... I don't have many more details for you than that, that he is going to be in Vienna at the IAEA for some consultations on the civil nuclear deal...," he said of the trip by Burns, the third ranking American diplomat who succeeded Nick Burns, the US pointsman for the deal since it was conceived.
As the UPA Government braced for a trust vote on July 22 in the Lok Sabha, India yesterday said it has decided to scale down tomorrow's special briefing for the IAEA on the safeguards agreement and other aspects of Indo-US nuclear deal, confining it to its 35-member Board of Governors and NSG countries which are not part of the Board. Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon will be presenting India's case.
The IAEA has said its Board of Governors will meet on August 1 to discuss a draft safeguards agreement with India, necessary for the implementation of the deal.
In addition, India must obtain a waiver from the Nuclear Suppliers Group(NSG), a group of 45 states that export nuclear fuel and technology before it gets the approval of the US Congress
William Burns, US undersecretary of state for political affairs, will be at the headquarters of the International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA) enroute to Geneva for a weekend meeting over Iran's controversial nuclear programme.
"Friday, he's (Burns) going to have some consultations at the International Atomic Energy Agency, related to the nuclear deal," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack told reporters here.
"... I don't have many more details for you than that, that he is going to be in Vienna at the IAEA for some consultations on the civil nuclear deal...," he said of the trip by Burns, the third ranking American diplomat who succeeded Nick Burns, the US pointsman for the deal since it was conceived.
As the UPA Government braced for a trust vote on July 22 in the Lok Sabha, India yesterday said it has decided to scale down tomorrow's special briefing for the IAEA on the safeguards agreement and other aspects of Indo-US nuclear deal, confining it to its 35-member Board of Governors and NSG countries which are not part of the Board. Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon will be presenting India's case.
The IAEA has said its Board of Governors will meet on August 1 to discuss a draft safeguards agreement with India, necessary for the implementation of the deal.
In addition, India must obtain a waiver from the Nuclear Suppliers Group(NSG), a group of 45 states that export nuclear fuel and technology before it gets the approval of the US Congress
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
DA for govt employees raised by 5 per cent
The government has increased the dearness allowance for officers and employees of the central public sector enterprises (CPSEs) by 5 per cent, to help them meet the increasing cost of living.
The CPSE employees, pursuant to a notification issued by the government, would get industrial Dearness Allowance (IDA) at 84.4 per cent of basic pay with effect from July 1.
The employees and workers of the CPSEs were earlier getting an IDA of 79.4 per cent of the basic pay, which came into effect on April 1.
The decision, according to a Standing Conference of Public Enterprises (SCOPE) official, would benefit all board level executives, below board level officers, employees and workers of the central PSUs.
The government revises the IDA for the PSU staff every quarter depending upon the movement of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) with a view to compensating them for the rising cost of living.
The hike in IDA would provide some relief to the CPSE staff, reeling under the spate of rapidly rising wholesale price-based inflation, which is nearing a 13-year high mark of 12 per cent.
The next installment of the IDA would become due on October 1, 2008.
The CPSE employees, pursuant to a notification issued by the government, would get industrial Dearness Allowance (IDA) at 84.4 per cent of basic pay with effect from July 1.
The employees and workers of the CPSEs were earlier getting an IDA of 79.4 per cent of the basic pay, which came into effect on April 1.
The decision, according to a Standing Conference of Public Enterprises (SCOPE) official, would benefit all board level executives, below board level officers, employees and workers of the central PSUs.
The government revises the IDA for the PSU staff every quarter depending upon the movement of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) with a view to compensating them for the rising cost of living.
The hike in IDA would provide some relief to the CPSE staff, reeling under the spate of rapidly rising wholesale price-based inflation, which is nearing a 13-year high mark of 12 per cent.
The next installment of the IDA would become due on October 1, 2008.
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Viacom Decides It Doesn't Need YouTube Histories
Viacom has backed off a request to gain access to all YouTube user histories after public outcry over privacy concerns, according to a YouTube blog post.
"We are pleased to report that Viacom, MTV and other litigants have backed off their original demand for all users' viewing histories and we will not be providing that information," YouTube said in a statement.
Earlier this month, Judge Louis Stanton with the U.S. District Court for Southern New York ruled that Google must provide Viacom with YouTube user histories in Viacom's ongoing $1 billion copyright infringement lawsuit against the video Web site.
That meant that Google had to hand over all the information contained in its logging database, including the login ID of the users who have watched videos, the time they started to watch the video, users' IP address, and the video identifier.
Privacy advocates were aghast and said the ruling threatened to expose the identities of millions of YouTube users. Viacom had argued that the information it requested would not contain personally identifiable data.
Whether or not an IP address contains such data has been a point of contention. Some argue that not much can be garnered from a bunch of numbers, but combine that with someone's search history or username, and a more industrious Web user might be able to piece some things together about that user's identity.
Under Monday's deal between YouTube and Viacom, YouTube will basically mask user IDs, IP addresses and visitor IDs and describe them in some other manner. The two parties have not yet agreed how that will happen, but under the agreement, YouTube has seven days after the court approves the deal to come up with a workable plan.
Viacom also agreed not to circumvent any encryption techniques YouTube might put in place to protect user identities.
Viacom is apparently still seeking to evaluate the activity of YouTube employees and agents on the site because the masking technique they agreed upon for the average users does not extend to employees and agents, according to the filing. Viacom and YouTube plan to meet on that issue in the next 14 days, it said.
YouTube said Monday that it remains "committed to protecting your privacy and we'll continue to fight for your right to share and broadcast your work on YouTube."
"We are pleased to report that Viacom, MTV and other litigants have backed off their original demand for all users' viewing histories and we will not be providing that information," YouTube said in a statement.
Earlier this month, Judge Louis Stanton with the U.S. District Court for Southern New York ruled that Google must provide Viacom with YouTube user histories in Viacom's ongoing $1 billion copyright infringement lawsuit against the video Web site.
That meant that Google had to hand over all the information contained in its logging database, including the login ID of the users who have watched videos, the time they started to watch the video, users' IP address, and the video identifier.
Privacy advocates were aghast and said the ruling threatened to expose the identities of millions of YouTube users. Viacom had argued that the information it requested would not contain personally identifiable data.
Whether or not an IP address contains such data has been a point of contention. Some argue that not much can be garnered from a bunch of numbers, but combine that with someone's search history or username, and a more industrious Web user might be able to piece some things together about that user's identity.
Under Monday's deal between YouTube and Viacom, YouTube will basically mask user IDs, IP addresses and visitor IDs and describe them in some other manner. The two parties have not yet agreed how that will happen, but under the agreement, YouTube has seven days after the court approves the deal to come up with a workable plan.
Viacom also agreed not to circumvent any encryption techniques YouTube might put in place to protect user identities.
Viacom is apparently still seeking to evaluate the activity of YouTube employees and agents on the site because the masking technique they agreed upon for the average users does not extend to employees and agents, according to the filing. Viacom and YouTube plan to meet on that issue in the next 14 days, it said.
YouTube said Monday that it remains "committed to protecting your privacy and we'll continue to fight for your right to share and broadcast your work on YouTube."
Some jitters about the trust vote
In case the motion of the government under Rule 184 gets carried through, it does not give immunity to the government for another six months from the Opposition, which is free to move a motion of no-confidence under Rule 198 any time — even on the same day itself.
The political crisis created by the Indo-US nuclear cooperation agreement may persist beyond July 22 even if the government is able to secure its vote of confidence. The evidence of the inappropriate manner in which the voting issue has been handled has exposed several inadequacies in the Congress think tank, which continues to put the continuation of the government in serious jeopardy.
On paper, the Congress and the UPA may appear to have the numbers on their side at the moment, but what is in serious doubt is the ability of the Congress managers to ensure that the government gets the majority vote when it seeks the trust of the Lok Sabha. All these years, political managers who have been running the show have not shown any evidence of their grasp over the rules and procedures of Parliament and have spent more time in manipulations aimed at keeping their detractors within the Congress at bay.
Their first litmus test could be as early as July 22 when the trust motion is likely to be put to vote. But the securing of the trust vote does not put the government out of danger. The Opposition can immediately move a vote of no-confidence. And if it picks up the issue of rising prices and inflation, the government may be in deep trouble.
The very fact that the government has decided to follow an irregular precedent of seeking the trust vote is proof enough of how the political managers have not been able to see an ambush that may be lying ahead. As per the conduct of rules of business of the Lok Sabha, there is no provision for a trust vote. G.V.G. Krishnamurty, one of the foremost experts on parliamentary procedures and constitutional matters, has pointed out that as per the rules of business, only a no-confidence motion can be moved under Rule 198 to dislodge a government. There is no provision of a confidence motion under the current rules, which could have been amended to include such a provision. But they were not.
Now the situation is such that the government citing past precedents dating back from the time of Charan Singh and later V.P. Singh and some others has decided to go in for a confidence motion under Rule 184 of the Lok Sabha. Under this rule, any motion can be moved and thus a confidence motion may be legal, but, as Krishnamurty opines, it is highly irregular.
The logical corollary of this is that in case the motion of the government under Rule 184 gets carried through, it does not give immunity to the government for another six months from the Opposition, which is free to move a motion of no-confidence under Rule 198 any time — even on the same day itself. Therefore, if the government survives on the nuclear deal on July 22, the Opposition could easily trip it on some other issue like rising prices and inflation.
Even the Constitution does not have any mention of a confidence or no-confidence motion. The mention of no-confidence motion is there only in the conduct of business rules of the Lok Sabha. What the Congress and government managers have failed to comprehend are the circumstances under which the confidence motion was moved for the first time under Rule 184 in 1979. President Neelam Sanjeeva Reddy had appointed Charan Singh as the Prime Minister after the fall of the Morarji Desai government, preferring him to Jagjiwan Ram. Charan Singh never faced the House and resigned shortly afterwards.
In 1990, when the V.P. Singh government became a minority after the BJP withdrew support, he moved a confidence motion under the same rule. However, a no-confidence motion under Rule 198 was also moved but the Speaker, perhaps to oblige V.P. Singh, took up the first motion raising many eyebrows. Later P.V. Narasimha Rao, Atal Bihari Vajpayee and H.D. Deve Gowda also used the same irregular method.
In other words, the onus of proving that a government is in a minority is on the Opposition and those who move a motion of no-confidence. By withdrawing support from the government outside the House, the Left parties have proved nothing. It is on the floor of the House that the government’s strength can be challenged. The current presumption in some quarters is that some members of the Samajwadi Party may not vote as per the party line. This is equally applicable to the Left parties. So the floor test is the final test, but only after a motion of no-confidence.
As far as the Left goes, Sonia Gandhi and Manmohan Singh have been very gracious in praising their role in the running of this government. They, unlike some others in the Congress, have not said anything that may burn bridges with the Left. Similarly, veteran CPI(M) leader Jyoti Basu is more pragmatic and has asked the Left not to bring down the government as it has already expressed its opposition to the deal. And voting along with the BJP may send the wrong signals.
Indira and Rajiv Gandhi’s political adviser M.L. Fotedar, too, has reiterated that leaders like Sonia Gandhi, Manmohan Singh, Jyoti Basu and Harkishen Singh Surjeet understand that their biggest enemy are forces represented by the Sangh Parivar and the BJP — and not each other. It is this spirit that should be understood by the Left leadership and Congress office bearers who have been speaking against each other publicly and, therefore, burning all bridges.
And even as politicking among friends-turned-foes appears to be at its peak, the outcome of the July 22 confidence vote is eagerly awaited. Between us.
The political crisis created by the Indo-US nuclear cooperation agreement may persist beyond July 22 even if the government is able to secure its vote of confidence. The evidence of the inappropriate manner in which the voting issue has been handled has exposed several inadequacies in the Congress think tank, which continues to put the continuation of the government in serious jeopardy.
On paper, the Congress and the UPA may appear to have the numbers on their side at the moment, but what is in serious doubt is the ability of the Congress managers to ensure that the government gets the majority vote when it seeks the trust of the Lok Sabha. All these years, political managers who have been running the show have not shown any evidence of their grasp over the rules and procedures of Parliament and have spent more time in manipulations aimed at keeping their detractors within the Congress at bay.
Their first litmus test could be as early as July 22 when the trust motion is likely to be put to vote. But the securing of the trust vote does not put the government out of danger. The Opposition can immediately move a vote of no-confidence. And if it picks up the issue of rising prices and inflation, the government may be in deep trouble.
The very fact that the government has decided to follow an irregular precedent of seeking the trust vote is proof enough of how the political managers have not been able to see an ambush that may be lying ahead. As per the conduct of rules of business of the Lok Sabha, there is no provision for a trust vote. G.V.G. Krishnamurty, one of the foremost experts on parliamentary procedures and constitutional matters, has pointed out that as per the rules of business, only a no-confidence motion can be moved under Rule 198 to dislodge a government. There is no provision of a confidence motion under the current rules, which could have been amended to include such a provision. But they were not.
Now the situation is such that the government citing past precedents dating back from the time of Charan Singh and later V.P. Singh and some others has decided to go in for a confidence motion under Rule 184 of the Lok Sabha. Under this rule, any motion can be moved and thus a confidence motion may be legal, but, as Krishnamurty opines, it is highly irregular.
The logical corollary of this is that in case the motion of the government under Rule 184 gets carried through, it does not give immunity to the government for another six months from the Opposition, which is free to move a motion of no-confidence under Rule 198 any time — even on the same day itself. Therefore, if the government survives on the nuclear deal on July 22, the Opposition could easily trip it on some other issue like rising prices and inflation.
Even the Constitution does not have any mention of a confidence or no-confidence motion. The mention of no-confidence motion is there only in the conduct of business rules of the Lok Sabha. What the Congress and government managers have failed to comprehend are the circumstances under which the confidence motion was moved for the first time under Rule 184 in 1979. President Neelam Sanjeeva Reddy had appointed Charan Singh as the Prime Minister after the fall of the Morarji Desai government, preferring him to Jagjiwan Ram. Charan Singh never faced the House and resigned shortly afterwards.
In 1990, when the V.P. Singh government became a minority after the BJP withdrew support, he moved a confidence motion under the same rule. However, a no-confidence motion under Rule 198 was also moved but the Speaker, perhaps to oblige V.P. Singh, took up the first motion raising many eyebrows. Later P.V. Narasimha Rao, Atal Bihari Vajpayee and H.D. Deve Gowda also used the same irregular method.
In other words, the onus of proving that a government is in a minority is on the Opposition and those who move a motion of no-confidence. By withdrawing support from the government outside the House, the Left parties have proved nothing. It is on the floor of the House that the government’s strength can be challenged. The current presumption in some quarters is that some members of the Samajwadi Party may not vote as per the party line. This is equally applicable to the Left parties. So the floor test is the final test, but only after a motion of no-confidence.
As far as the Left goes, Sonia Gandhi and Manmohan Singh have been very gracious in praising their role in the running of this government. They, unlike some others in the Congress, have not said anything that may burn bridges with the Left. Similarly, veteran CPI(M) leader Jyoti Basu is more pragmatic and has asked the Left not to bring down the government as it has already expressed its opposition to the deal. And voting along with the BJP may send the wrong signals.
Indira and Rajiv Gandhi’s political adviser M.L. Fotedar, too, has reiterated that leaders like Sonia Gandhi, Manmohan Singh, Jyoti Basu and Harkishen Singh Surjeet understand that their biggest enemy are forces represented by the Sangh Parivar and the BJP — and not each other. It is this spirit that should be understood by the Left leadership and Congress office bearers who have been speaking against each other publicly and, therefore, burning all bridges.
And even as politicking among friends-turned-foes appears to be at its peak, the outcome of the July 22 confidence vote is eagerly awaited. Between us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)