West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee returned to her favourite role of agitator on Monday: at a public meeting at Jantar Mantar here, she threatened to bring a no-confidence motion in the coming winter session of Parliament against the UPA government, if the Samajwadi Party supported the move – and take her battle against the slew of economic decisions taken by the Centre to various parts of the country. Surrounded by her party MPs, she addressed a gathering of farmers largely from neighbouring Haryana, mobilised by her resourceful colleague, Rajya Sabha MP, K.D. Singh.
Seated next to Ms. Banerjee was National Democratic Alliance (NDA) chairperson Sharad Yadav: describing her as the tigress of Bengal, he said she was the true inheritor of the ideals propagated by the socialist leaders of the past, from Ram Manohar Lohia to Charan Singh. But Mr. Yadav’s fiery rhetoric against the Centre comes a day after he told journalists that the NDA had no intention of bringing a no-confidence motion against the government.
But while the principal Opposition grouping does not seem to be in a mood to try and topple the government, the Dravida Munnetra Kazagham (DMK), a key UPA ally with 18 Lok Sabha MPs, said in Chennai that it would back any Opposition-sponsored resolution in Parliament against allowing FDI in multi-brand retail.
At a meeting of its national executive, the party while repeating that it did not wish to see any more representation from the party in the Union Council of Ministers, sought to bring pressure on the Centre to bring a review petition in the Supreme Court against the cancellation of 122 telecom licences.
To add to the UPA’s woes, two MPs of the Babulal Marandi-led Jharkand Vikas Morcha also withdrew support on Monday.
"I will form a federal front"
“The country is not run from Delhi, I will form a federal front,” Trinamool Congress chief Mamata Banerjee told a rally at Jantar Mantar here on Monday.
Stressing that she expected general elections next year, she extended an invitation to the Yadavs, Mulayam and Sharad, to join her rally against FDI in Lucknow in November 17.
This provoked the Nationalist Congress Party’s Tariq Anwar to point out that it was a matter of time before Ms. Banerjee returned to the NDA, of which the BJP is a part.
And even though the DMK has assured the government it will not withdraw support, there is no denying the discontent in its ranks visible on Monday in Chennai.
The Congress sought to counter all this, with Delhi Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit holding a counter rally in the national capital defending the government’s economic decisions, while the party’s State unit in West Bengal held a similar rally in Kolkata, taking advantage of Ms. Banerjee’s absence from the city.
But the Congress is officially not attacking Ms. Banerjee: Congress spokesperson Manish Tewari said, “There comes a time in the life of every political party and politician when you have to evolve from an agitator to an administrator... from a street fighter to a statesman. These are personal decisions and a matter of self-introspection. We want to leave to her only this very small suggestion.”
Keywords: TMC protest, FDI in retail, LPG cap, diesel price hike, UPA, national politics, NDA,
BJP must be aware that Mamata is also a Congress woman in another garb and should not rush to support her in her folly.
The political parties are legit Mafia families. The aim, organization,
method of using muscle power, taking care of its army, division of
territorial rights and operation - all these things are common to both
legitimate organization and outlaw organisations. As for as political
parties are concerned the issues on which they differ with each other
and fight is shadow boxing. The real issue will be known only to
Babus. In the Prime Minister's vision the 1.2 billion people will not
come but only the political leaders of other parties. For example, ask
him when he is not on guard or unprepared as to how many states are in
India, what are its main languages, their food habits - he will never
be able to answer this without the info provided by a Babu. But he is
concerned about the welfare of Indian people of all regions. What a
funny drama is indian democracy!
God help this nation from the cheap gimmicks, histrionics, heresay, mercurial belligerence and erratic autocratic behaviour and defamatory half truths either used by politicians either reflecting their true nature or as a matter of convenient, opportunist and concious put-on garb of self-righteous indignation to score political points.
It will not be far from the truth to say that most politicians today have come to the fore either because they are "flexible" or "rigid" when it comes to the matter that eats into the very fabric of our national identity today - corruption as a way of life being a de-facto truth. The race is for twisting public perception of public loot by the political parties which hitherto have shied away from adopting clean membership and clean funds to field candidates for elections - irrespective of the "legally clean" image of their candidates.
It seems focus of TMC leader is much more to isolate left front in
parliament than real motive of NCM. she know very well that her NCM
against govt will not bring the govt down.
So why do we need a parliament for? if you have a hand full of MP'S and if you don't like a proposal you don't just walk out and vow to pull down the government, this is a proposal worth discussing as there is opportunity to create jobs and more trade, discussions will produce ways and means to prevent loss of jobs or trade for other sections of our society, but just making noise in Calcutta will not solve anything.
The above statements seem to be TMC is against the government for some other reason and is using FDI as a weapon. As a citizen, I would like TMC to come out what clause is against people and what can be corrected. I read about some analysis in other sites and feel that 'FDI in retail' is a broad subject. The specifics matter more than the heading. We may, probably, have to approach the idea as how we did for 'Globalization'. I request oppostion parties to genuinely study the clauses, example 70% max import, and come up with amendments. A blanket NO seems to be that agriculture and manufacturing efficiency may remain as is now or may be unreliable.
Please Email the Editor