After the sabre-rattling on Sunday, the showdown began in earnest on Monday, with the Opposition BJP training its guns on the Prime Minister.
The PM's blunt comment on Sunday that there were "too many skeletons in its (the Opposition's) cupboard" appears to have compounded the situation. In an unprecedented move, both the leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Sushma Swaraj and leader of Opposition in the Rajya Sabha Arun Jaitley issued a joint statement on Monday castigating Singh for his "ill-advised" remarks which the BJP leaders said had "vitiated" the atmosphere.
Moving swiftly on the opening day of the monsoon session, the BJP revealed its game plan to try and involve the PM in the 2G scam.
It demanded a discussion on corruption related to the 2G spectrum scam, specifically naming both Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and former finance minister P. Chidambaram.
In its bid to isolate the government, the BJP also insisted that the discussion be under a rule that entails voting.
Voting would mean a division.
The BJP's idea, sources said, was that if the Congress, already depleted by the absence of its MPs from Telangana, who are boycotting Parliament, muffs up its floor management, the motion could get through. This would mean that both the PM and Chidambaram, who have not been named in the CBI chargesheet, could nevertheless go down in Parliament records as being involved.
While this scenario has an outside chance of playing out, observers said the move reflected the heightened animosity between the Treasury and Opposition benches. The growing breach was reflected in the tone of the unprecedented joint statement by Swaraj and Jaitley.
Taking strong objection to Singh's reference to BJP skeletons, Jaitley and Swaraj said: "The PM's statement daring to expose the skeletons in the Opposition's cupboard has set a confrontationist tone for the Monsoon session of the Parliament. The rationale behind the Prime Minister's statement cannot be understood." The Opposition is also keeping its ammunition dry on other issues. The BJP has also demanded a debate on price rise under a motion which requires a headcount, while the Left parties have issued separate notices for an urgent discussion on inflation on Tuesday itself.
The Congress, however, rejected outright the BJP's demand for bringing the PM and the former finance minister under the ambit of the discussion on corruption, that too, under a rule that entails voting.
Congress managers told the saffron leaders there was "no question" of naming specific ministers, as the matter, which is sub judice, is being investigated by the joint parliamentary committee probing the 2G scam and is being monitored by the Supreme Court. Sources said Congress leaders even dared the BJP to bring a no-confidence motion in the House, if its idea was to isolate the UPA government in division of votes.
In a counter move, the Congress members have given notices for discussion on corruption and price rise under general rules.
The idea is to corner the BJP on scams emanating from BJP-ruled states and the BJP national leadership's links with the Reddy brothers, who have been accused of large-scale illegal mining in Karnataka.
But the BJP is likely to counter-attack by talking about the PM's alleged flip-flops on the 2G issue. BJP leaders said after initially supporting A. Raja, whom he said was following a well-established policy, the PM then pleaded ignorance about telecom matters and informed Parliament that he had trusted the judgment of his ministers and that when Raja and the then finance minister P. Chidambaram came with an agreed proposal, he unsuspectingly accepted the same.
"Yesterday, the PMO has sought to explain his secretary's noting on the file, which indicated that an indifferent PM had chosen to look the other way and wanted to maintain an 'arms length' distance from what his government was doing.
The PMO now rejects the 'arms length' theory and instead wants to give the impression that the Prime Minister was 'hands on' when it came to the allotment of spectrum," the BJP statement said.
Prior to the allotment of spectrum, Raja wrote nine letters to the PM, informing him that the allocation of spectrum was not by auction and that in 2008, spectrum was being allotted at 2001 prices, the statement added.
Earlier in the day, the Lok Sabha was adjourned soon after obituary references as sitting member Bhajan Lal had passed away (in June), while the Rajya Sabha witnessed bedlam leading to its adjournment.
Upping its ante against the government, the BJP demanded that the Question Hour in the upper House be suspended and a discussion on the 2G scam be conducted.
Before the Houses met, the PM renewed his appeal to all parties to ensure smooth functioning of the House and to jointly tackle the problems facing the nation.
He promised a "structured debate" on matters raised by the Opposition.
"My appeal to the Opposition is to unite to jointly tackle major problems that our nation is faced with," he told reporters. "The matters that are in the courts, are best left to the courts to decide," he said.
But the Opposition is in no mood to listen. "We were of the opinion that for the first time in recent years the government started on a positive note. But the PM has vitiated the environment," said Swaraj and Jaitley.
Apart from the 2G scam, the government has been under pressure over several other issues ranging from the Lokpal Bill, price rise, Telangana and terrorism. The government has agreed to a discussion on terrorism in the Rajya Sabha in the context of the recent Mumbai blasts, on Tuesday.
Government strategists said they were hopeful of an amicable solution to the stand-off in a day or two. Soon after Parliament was adjourned, the GoM on media comprising Chidambaram, law minister Salman Khurshid, telecom minister Kapil Sibal, I& B minister Ambika Soni, parliamentary affairs minister Pawan Kumar Bansal and V. Naryanaswamy, minister of state in the PMO, discussed the logjam.
Unfazed by the Opposition belligerence, Congress sources claimed that the government has the numbers to survive in the event of a no-confidence motion.
OPPOSITION'S AMMO AGAINST PM
* When Dayanidhi Maran informed the PM that the entry fee would be decided by him and not by the EGoM as a part of their arrangement, was it an alert that a 'hands on' PM meekly gave in to Maran's request?
* Why did the PM not insist that the advice of the law ministry be followed and the EGoM should decide the spectrum pricing?
* Did it not strike the PM that after insisting on auction, his finance minister suddenly changed his stance on January 15, 2008?
* If the PM received nine letters from Raja giving all minute details, did it not strike him that spectrum was being sold for a song. That there was nepotism in the selection of licencees and the criteria of firstcome-first-served was not being followed?
* The PM has informed Parliament that he accepted the entry fee suggested by then FM and the telecom minister on June 4, 2008. This doesn't stand to reason. The spectrum had already been allotted on January 11, 2008
* Most importantly, the latest disclosures now reveal that the PM was involved in the micro management of 2G spectrum and that even when two of the licencees went in for offloading their additional equity through the FDI route , he was informed about the legality of the act. Did it not strike the PM that if a sale of a fraction of the shares of a company, which owned the licence and the spectrum could fetch Rs 6,000 crore, how could the government has allotted the entire spectrum at Rs 1,651 crore? This was simple economics, a subject the PM specialises in
* The rules of the game were being altered midway. Only applications filed till September 25, 2007 were to be considered instead of October 1, 2007 which was the original cut-off date announced by the ministry of telecommunications.
* Did this advancement of date not appear motivated to the PM? Did the unfairness of the procedure not alert the PM?
WHO'S ACCUSING WHOM?
FORMER TELECOM MINISTER A. RAJA
* Prime Minister Manmohan Singh: Chose not to constitute GoM on spectrum policy
* Home minister (thenfinance minister) P. Chidambaram: Approved dilution of shares in Unitech Wireless and Swan Telecom
* Attorney general (then-solicitor general) G. E. Vahanvati: Cleared spectrum allocation policy
* Predecessors: Arun Shourie and Dayanidhi Maran, who carried out the same policy of not auctioning spectrum as he did
* DoT officers: The creators of the policy Raja pursued
* Former telecom minister A. Raja: Behind all official actions and decisions taken by Chandolia
* Corporate lobbyist Niira Radia: Lobbied through Raja to get Kalaignar TV into the Tata Sky bouqet
* Ratan Tata: Installed two representatives (WPC Officers) in the DoT through Radia
* Raja's alleged associate Aseervatham Achary: Acted as a conduit between Radia and Raja on the Kalaignar TV deal
* Datacom: Benefited from the allocation; got 2G licences in 21 circles
SWAN TELECOM PROMOTER SHAHID BALWA
* PM Manmohan Singh: Defended the 2G policy in Parliament and the marking on a letter stating he had "seen and deliberated" the spectrum policy details
* Telecom minister Kapil Sibal: Asserted in Parliament that there had been no loss
* Finance minister (then minister for external affairs) Pranab Mukherjee: Had a personal discussion with G. E. Vahanvati about spectrum allocation policy
* AG (then SG) G. E. Vahanvati: Cleared details of the first-come-first-served policy
* Tata Sons Co.: Caused the maximum notional loss of Rs 4,913 crore of the presumptive Rs 30,000 crore loss, and also pocketed Rs 3,000 crore
* Corporate lobbyist Niira Radia: Lobbied for Ratan Tata and for telecom portfolio to A. Raja
TELECOM EX-SECY SIDDHARTHA BEHURA
* RBI governor (then finance secretary) D. Subbarao: Supported the decision to not to raise entry fee beyond 2001 prices
* Home minister (then finance minister) P. Chidambaram: Despite being aware of entry fee decision, chose not to convene a cabinet meet
* Prime Minister Manmohan Singh: PMO was kept in the loop on details of firstcome-first-served policy
* Attorney general (then-solicitor general) G. E. Vahanvati: Cleared details of the policy
* Former telecom secretary D. S. Mathur: Cleared spectrum allocation policy
* Former member-finance (DoT) Manju Madhavan: Disagreed with non-revision of entry fees in a note but kept silent when matter was brought up
No comments:
Post a Comment