 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Issue 6 Vol I, December 31, 2005 newsbag 11
MPs Expelled from India Parliament Eleven Indian parliamentarians created history of sorts. They accepted without blinking eyelid cash for query. Parties across political spectrum joined to expel them. Only right wing Hindu party, Bhartiya Janata Party unsuccessfully got into procedural wrangling to save its five MPs and ends up with a mud on its face. It sought some legal protection to the punishment. These MP drawn from different political parties except the communists were exposed by a television channel accepting bribe. Another set of six mps exposed similarly by another TV channel face a similar punishment. Some cleansing of the Augustan stables, they say. But the rot is too deep to be stemmed was the general comment across the country and has shaken faith in the electoral system and the kind of democracy it creates. On December 23 notwithstanding the uneasiness in certain sections, Parliament took the extreme step of expelling 11 members — 10 from the Lok Sabha and one from Rajya Sabha for their involvement in the cash-for-query scam. There was an effort on the part of the political class to save some of its sullied face The argument of the BJP that proper procedure should have been adopted while taking action against the corrupt members rather failed to convince anyone not its allies. The Congress and the Left maintained that the dignity of the House must be preserved not by any proclamation from the Supreme Court or any other court but by the members themselves. The motion for expelling by Union Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee called for “rising to the occasion and taking courage in both our hands to face the consequences”. But BJP’s Vijay Kumar Malhotra, who had appended a dissenting note in the five-member probe panel headed by Pawan Bansal of the Congress, moved an amendment to the resolution seeking that the matter be referred to the Privileges Committee. The motion was adopted by voice vote amid a walkout by the BJP. However, the JD (United) a constituent of the BJP-led NDA, supporting the expulsion of the members said that the punishment meted out to the MPs caught in the scam was not commensurate with their offence. Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee rejected the contention of a BJP member as, “it is unfair to bring the Chair into controversy”. The decision to appoint a House committee to probe the scam was not taken by him unilaterally but in consultation with party leaders. The report had concluded: “It is difficult to escape the conclusion that accepting money had a direct connection with the work in Parliament. Ten members expelled from Lok Sabha are: Annasahib M.K. Patil, Y.G. Mahajan, Pradeep Gandhi, Suresh Chandel and Chandra Pratap Singh (all BJP), Narendra Kumar Khushwaha, Lal Chandra Kol and Rajaram Pal (all BSP) and Manoj Kumar (RJD) and Ramsewak Singh (Congress). The lone Rajya Sabha member was Chhatarpal Singh Lodha [BJP] which adopted the report of the Ethics Committee headed by Mr Karan Singh. Here too the BJP wanted the matter to be referred to the Privileges Committee. At the same time the party supported the resolution when it came up for voting. Advani was not consulted by his colleagues in Rajya Sabha. The CPM criticised the BJP for dilly dallying on taking action against the MPs involved in the cash-for-questions scandal. Stringent measures would serve as a warning for future parliamentarians. First time in 1951 a Lok Sabha member H.G. Mudgal was fund to be involved with a Bombay Bullion association and was expelled. Bahujan Samaj Party supremo Mayawati took the lead and dumped four MPs from the party. Three were found guilty in the cash-for-question scam while the fourth was found to have entered a polygamous relationship. She also issued stern warning to two BSP MPs Ramakant Yadav (Azamgarh) and Bhal Chandra Yadav (Khalilabad), whose names have figured in a fake passport and visa case. Another set of seven members from both Houses of Parliament were involved in a scandal exposed by a TV channel. It showed the MPs taking bribe for handing over project work under the MP Local Area Development Scheme (MPLADS). The Presiding Officers of Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha have referred to the Special Committee and the Ethics Committee, respectively, for probe by January 31. After consulting leaders of political parties, Somnath Chatterjee ordered an inquiry into the MPLAD scam, as exposed by STAR T V News channel, and urged the five members allegedly involved not to attend the House till their names were cleared. The members facing the inquiry are Alemao Churchill (Cong), Faggan Singh Kulaste (BJP), Ram Swaroop Koli (BJP), Chandra Pratap Singh (BJP) and Parasnath Yadav (SP) from Lok Sabha. Rajya Sabha members Sakshi Maharaj (Rashtriya Kranti Dal) and Isam Singh (BSP) were named by the STAR TV channel in the MPLADS expose code-named “Operation Chakravyuha” and are facing a probe. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Canada: Agenda for Elections January 2006Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin has been listing his priorities that define the ideology of the Liberals, often otherwise clogged in rhetoric and jargon.During these short 17 months, Martin provided corporate tax cuts. Canadians are among the lowest effective taxes (27.4%) on corporate income of all industrialised countries and effective rates of taxation far lower than in America with 40%. as health care and education cried for more funds, Paul Martin dished up a 35% decrease in tax rates for corporations--far more than the 21% break for families. The Liberals are banking upon this largesse to win elections. Martin is making tax cuts his top priority as Prime Minister. According to government’s own tax calculator, a single mother of one child earning $15,000 annually would save a much-needed $569 and a single man making $125,000 annually would save over $4,000. Though people earning under $40,000 make up 70% of Canadian taxpayers, they received only 36% of the total cuts in 2000 and later years. These fiscal policies have widened the gap between the rich and the poor, sowing seeds of social tensions and crime. Adding to this increasing gap are the salary differences. Executive salaries are rising; labour is losing as these costs are considered threat to profits. There is a widespread belief that the Liberals by cutting funds, trillion of dollars in areas of water, health care, and education are creating an environment friendly to privatisation. Among Paul Martin's first moves as Prime Minister was the decision to remove his Housing Minister and replace him by a pro privatisation Czar. Despite contrary stated positions, Canada is becoming an alley of the United States in armament production and war efforts. Integration with the US means reduction in Canadian labour costs to reap huge profits from US contracts. There are a plenty of arms contacts and lucrative defence deals. Arms manufacturing is the fastest growing industries. Martin as Finance Minister had invested $2.55 billion from the Canada Pension Plan in arms manufacturers, including weapons used in Iraq and Afghanistan. Martin would like very much to join the US missile defence plan. Canada has to assert its own values, separate from America and the "Washington Consensus"; this will help to check the profiteering by American multi nationals. Martin had cut $40 billion from the EI coffers to finance tax cuts for the richest of the rich. This only increased inequality and hits hard the social sectors like housing. There I an allegation that martin had earlier drastically cut spending on health. And when he had a chance he handed over tax benefits worth c$ 100 billions Liberals have increased university tuition fees by over 100% in a matter of years. Instead of funding education, new student loan programs have been effectively set up as subsidies for Canada's major banks. It is clear that Canadians who are most likely to get a coalition government or another minority government under Liberals would have hard years ahead. It is also time for the NDP to increase its share of seats and thus be more effective in curbing pro rich, pro war efforts of the Liberals. Times such this require more sensible choice of the government. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Virginia gets an Indian Secretary of Technology
Another technology specialist Sanjay Puri has now been named the co-chair of a policy committee to deal with a looming problem across the US -- Internet fraud and identity theft. Both are tech executives in their own right. Chopra, 33, is managing director of the Advisory Board Company, which provides best practices research and analysis to health care companies. Tim Kaine thought high of Chopra and declared: “I look forward to working with him and know that the people of the Commonwealth will be well-served by his inclusion in my cabinet." "The appointment of Aneesh Chopra as Secretary of Technology is a milestone achievement for the Indian American community," said Sanjay Puri, Chairman of USINPAC and a member of the Governor-elect's Transition Team which recommends individuals to serve in the Kaine administration. Chopra's appointment is a direct result of the Indian American community being actively involved in local Virginia politics, and this is one of the missions of USINPAC and a model that USINPAC will follow in order to urge the appointment of Indian Americans throughout the country. In fact, USINPAC successfully used this model in 2004 for Steve Rao, Information Technology Advisory Board for the State of North Carolina. As Mr Rao said, "USINPAC is an outstanding organization which helped me reach out and share my vision with leaders in North Carolina. My appointment was a result of the hard work and efforts of USINPAC." Chopra is currently the Managing Director of the Advisory Board Company which advises 2,500 health systems and medical centers. He graduated with a BA from Johns Hopkins University and a Masters in Public Policy from Harvard University. Prior to this he had been appointed by Governor Warner to serve on Virginia's Board of Medical Regents. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
SOUTH ASIA POST INC. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
G