Thanks to the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) and the Samajwadi Party (SP), which together account for 43 of 545 Lok Sabha members (which includes two nominated members not eligible to vote), the UPA on Wednesday succeeded in defeating the Opposition motion against FDI in the multi-trade retail sector.
At the conclusion of a tumultuous acrimonious two-day debate, the motion was rejected with 253 members voting against and 218 members in favour. Twenty-two members of the BSP and 21 members of the SP, whose party representatives vehemently opposed the FDI in the course of the debate, staged a walkout before the motion was put to vote.
Minutes after the motion was negated, the Prime Minister Manmohan Singh told reporters that his government has the “support” of the House on the decision to open up multi-brand retail trade to foreign investors.
However, several Opposition leaders, including Leader of the Opposition Sushma Swaraj and D. Raja of the CPI, asserted that it was a “moral” defeat for the government as it could not demonstrate a simple majority of the effective strength of the people’s House.
The results announced by Speaker Meira Kumar, subject to correction, suggest that 29 members were absent from the House. There was no clarity at the time of writing about their identity and the parties they represented. The number of absentees is glaring as all parties had issued whip whose violation could lead to disqualification.
The bail-out of the government by the SP and BSP was along expected lines and their members walked out before the voting.
The House also rejected the motion seeking an amendment to the rules notified by the Reserve Bank under the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) to facilitate FDI in multi-brand retail. While 254 voted in favour of the government, 224 went against it.
The government’s victory on the contentious issue of FDI was hailed by both the Prime Minister and UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi. “FDI policy that we have put in place has the approval of this House [the Lok Sabha],” Dr. Singh said in Parliament House after the voting.
The voting was preceded by passionate and emotional appeals by the mover of the motion Ms. Swaraj and TMC MP Saugata Roy to the treasury benches not to be guided by partisan considerations and to pressure the government to defer the decision.
The crux of Ms. Swaraj’s appeal was that, going by the strength of the members of the parties who spoke against the motion, the majority of the House was completely opposed to FDI in multi-brand retail.
She said that if speeches during the debate gave any indication and the parties too voted accordingly on the motion, the tally would be 282 against FDI and only 224 in its support.
She said 22 leaders of 18 parties had participated in the debate, of which 14 supported the motion in their speeches. The senior BJP leader said this was not a vote on a communal or secular issue but about protecting the interests of the country. She told reporters later that the government “won technically but lost on moral grounds.”
Keywords: FDI in retail, FDI vote, UPA Government, FDI in multi-brand retail, FDI debate, Manmohan Singh government, BJP
"Won technically but lost on moral grounds" says Ms Sushma Swaraj. She is right.
Manipulated numerical superiority robs the vital basic of democracy. Parliament debates are
not to be assessed by numbers alone. For long,the UPA is surviving on technical grounds.
We have a flawed democratic functioning. The credibility of the Govt. is at its lowest.
I think FDI in retail not at all required in our country where Indian
companies have strength to build a proper supply chain management
system. If someone will give example of Thailand, then I would say it
is completely absurd to company India with Thailand. We do have our
own life support system, Thailand does not have.
In fact most of the Indian retail chains are not in profit today, why
are we fetching more investment from outside which will result in
opening up the fragility to whole retail sector to the world market.
Government should Introduce investment plan for retail like they did
for Infrastructure. If sector has too much potential then lets get
people's money out, why are we looking at outside world?
I have said earlier as well, FDI in automobile, agriculture, power
sector , infra, science and technology sector, education and health is
more necessary than retail.
While the machinations of all parties, particularly those who want to have it both ways by
absenting themselves from voting, are not honourable, FDI is not and never will be as big a
deal as the politicians on both sides make it out to be. FDI at best will play a small part in
making the needed investments in Retail or related sectors. Much of the investment will have
to be sourced domestically. Most of the jobs in the retail do not pay a living wage and has not
done so for centuries. The jobs have to move up the education and gaining scale for that to
happen. As India modernizes, there will be many disruptions to the way of life we have had
so far. We have to shed the yoke of feudalism, sooner the better. A good and responsible
government will plan ahead and help prepare the people affected by these changes.
Manmohan Singh's win is India's defeat! Elected representatives abstained from voting!! Don't blame common people for not voting in elections. Probably our democrecy itself flawed!!
The comment by Vivek "It is high time something dramatic happened in the Indian Political System" is exactly what millions of its citizens sincerly hope and pray for. Not even a bloody revolution can change the situation in our country because patiotism doesn't exist here.
The solution to such a farce is simple, make voting compulsory for MPs. I would have suggested the same for public as well, if not for the difficulty in implementation.
I can't believe trayee though it says it is for retail customers for
schemes of multinational banks, insurance and telecom sectors. I know
that they are diplomatic.
FDI in retail is really a welcome step. The experience of Thailand has been inspiring for many Asian countries to allow FDI in multi brand retailing. However,there are some important steps which are to be taken to realize the potential of organized retailing- 1- A model code of conduct( legislation) has to be incorporated which >would guide how big organised retailers would behave in the market while dealing with small retailers. 2- Now, small retailers would give more items on credit as it helps them in retaining their customers. But the availability of credit to these small retailers by financial institutions is very limited. Hence,this must be strengthened. 3- Cooperative institutions have a great role to play now.They should be ready to procure supply from farmers and sell it to organised retailers. 4- Saving of Indian consumer could be spent on consumptive items.Hence, efforts must be made to maintain our saving rate, which has saved us during global financial crisis.
The govt. has won on technicalities. Vast majority of the people of the country represented by 70 per cent of the House are against this move and the govt. is bull-dozing its way through to protect foreign interests. If this is not anti-national then what is? They have proved that anti-national acts can be committed even through Parliament!
Hearing the debate in parliament on FDI one could not help feeling the lawyers' instinct among the various parties opposed to FDI in multibrand retail arguing the case as if they were representing some client of theirs. Often examples were quoted out of context. FDI in retail no doubt would succeed if safeguards as envisaged are strictly implemented and administered with loop holes plugged effectively since as a nation we are adept in discovering loop holes in the law and circumventing the law. Short circuiting the system for gaining illegal advantage is the order of the day sacrificing the nation's interests. As a nation we need to think of the country ahead of self if we want the country to march ahead to become most developed nation of the world as is being forecasted by external surveys. The opposition should stop asking what the ruling party has done during the 50 years it has been in power as it is a meaningless question in parenthesis.
It is highly shameful that some regional political parties talk against FDI and some walked out and some voted for FDI. It is not a win to PM or UPA but it put them under shame. Two vote win but 72 votes not included as they shameless not voted. In Kerala CM was against FDI but MPs voted for FDI. Delhi CM said FDIs will be built outside Delhi. The CMs that supported are very small states. If the states who said yes to FDI, when the parties that said no to FDI comes to power then what happens. The government's Ananda Sharma said 30% of Indian agriculture products will purchaged by FDIs, that means 70% will come from outside India. Does this not affect Indian agriculture? Cold storage facilities will be built by FDIs but will they help farmers or FDIs? This is a perfect quid pro co -- like money for vote. Is it not so -- to protect SP & BSP and DMK from CBI?
NPR covered this development today. The reporter was probably intrigued
and so remarked that "the prime minister sat expressionless for the
duration of the session". At least theres one thing thats consistent
with our fearless leader :)
As SP and BSP did not vote , this is not a positive response for govt.
They have to go the people and let them hold mid term polls. Since scams
after scams , plus the IOA scandal ( this was shown on TV channels all
over the world according to my NRI friends with a severe critique) .
Best is to hold mid term polls rather than cling to power.
Congress has realised that its loosing the game, hence to save their
face they are trying to bring in FDI in he name of economic reform. We
have our own corporate retail stores like Reliance, Big Bazar, More etc
then why Walmart? Believe me, we'll only get cheap stuff from across the
border (China). Walmart quality is considered notorious even in the US.
We are creating a monster probably! There has to be some regulations to
the FDI policy even if its imposed. It is definitely a cause of concern
for the entire nation.
All this is fair game?
Why is it not illegal for abstaining from voting on such key
legislatures?
The elected members of a nation are public sector employees.
If an employee fails to do his job, it requires the employer to ¨fire¨
him.
Its time that certain policies of national interest require mandatory
vote by at least 98% of the members. If they cannot make it to the
assembly, I believe such causes they can vote online!
This is ridiculous that such a big nation is run by petty politics.
Seriously, the whole system needs a revamp. The system functions like
a prehistoric dinosaur!
To the heights of ridicule.
KSV
Majority votes for FDI in multi-brand retail in Lok Sabha.
Congress proved once more that it gets what it wants and BJP couldn't
prove itself to be a strong opposition.
SP and BSP stayed away from voting proving that their political gains
are of more value than taking a stand for or against a policy by
abstaining.
Two major parties at the Lok Sabha abstain from voting where they had
a chance to show what they stand for, and they did, they showed they
stand for their self-interests.
Another sad moment for the Indian democracy.
yet another bad day in indian history...
When Government fail ! People must succeed !!
When Government of India has failed to upheld the Welfare of Masses,
and is trying to usher in the era of dependence on Foreign Marketing
giants for people's day to day shopping, and low IQ party head like
Mulayam and Maya walk out from their responsibilities and become a
part of this sinister design, People of India must succeed by
following a very simple path, shown by American President(This is a
gandhian way, but NONE, I repeat, NONE of Psuedo Gandhian Congress
party leader have shown), The solution is simple, go to your local
grocery and buy your stuff, Go to big malls for Window shopping and
price compare, Try to negotiate the same price from your local
grocers, and see the FDI for retail Vanish along with this FAILED
Government
We do not hold the members of parliament accountable to the votes they cast in matters of national interest. There is not even a way to easily tell who voted which way when they come back for re-election. We need such a system - very badly.
Staging a walkout after the debate without voting is totally unacceptable. Being elected representatives, they should have casted their vote. Speaking against the FDI during the debate and just walking out without voting has exposed their true color. These representatives are trying to fool the people who voted them.
Congress have proved them selves with this move.
The father of modern Indian economy, Hon'ble Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is
absolutely right. this move will help the inflation and the rise in commodities.
The 114th Constitutional amendment bill is pending since 2010. It is the need of the time for
the judicial system. Hope the Congress would work on this now.
The age of judges of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India should also be increased soon.
This is the need of the time for the judicial fraternity. And the government should work on
this. The pendency is increasing and new judges do not work with that speed, in comparision
with the present sitting judges. Vacancies are increasing and that is why pendency is
increasing. As a lawyer of this nation, I expect this is an urgent need of time in India.
Some please educate all members of Parliament that each vote matters and
they cannot simply walkout.
Huge difference between managed to clear the bill Vs "Won" to clear the bill.
What did BSP n SP tried to prove here, are they against FDI or BJP. God please save this
beautiful country....
What shame is this to a nation? Though the FDI's proved to be harm to
local traders and employees in many nations,is this that important to a
country like us? Why to challenge our lives? It's not that UPA & NDA
oppose each other,It's a national issue.Though SP & BSP strictly argued
against FDI's through "mouths',why didn't they do the same thing by
voting against?..I agree Sushma saying "won technically but lost on
moral grounds".
It has been clearly stated that implementation of the FDI in retail rests upon the states' discretion and there is no compulsion on them to implement or not to implement the scheme. As such where does the grudge come? Do the opposition parties or the states that do not want to implement the scheme have a right to thrust their will on the other states which consider the scheme appropriate and want to implement it? The BJP has a moral success as a scheme from its earlier manifesto has been taken for implementation by its rivals too, the ruling congress (UPA) and a technical failure in the lack of sufficient numbers in parliament to defeat the FDI in retail scheme.
The MPs who walked out the Parliament and the Kerala MPs who supported FDI to win in the Parliament were actually deceiving their voters.In their respective states the parties take a negative stand and on time support the FDI.It is grotesque and so deplorable.No MP can vitiate his own state interest. De facto the UPA failed and de jure won in the parliament.
Great. Lets hope the prices would come down and the era of blood-sucking middle is no more. The farmers can get better price. But the govt. should fix minimum target price for some farm commodities.
FDI in retail and distribution of subsidy via bank accounts, these two policies have to be hailed as the greatest policies ever mande in this country.
I am more impressed by the distribution of subsidy, now atleast the individuals who are entitled to receive those benefits can do so without any middlemen.
First Price rise and Lokpal Bill & now FDI, every time government proved
to be in minority. How can they go ahead with big policy decisions
despite of this.
If SP and BSP feel that interests of farmers have been ignored, they
should have voted for the motion. Why abstain from voting?
Tvs, papers did not question why we need FDI-a poverty of mind.China took FDI in exportable technologies.PC has said UPA govt has no money& in Debt of 350 billions.RBI figures.Every month trade deficit is 3-10 billion$-96 months =300 billions.So PC is taxing us.Retail FDI is bad -will not bring much.it is bad agri ministry cannot under Pawar create cold storages, give water for 1-2 crops in villages in 60 years .So PC is abily managing finances.UPA has made India uncompetitive with high interest , low production techs.Agri production can be low cost-NREGA pushed prices- so Govt then gives subsidy.We people are not aware how govt works- it is inefficient, costly, & partisan.So Govt has to help poor .We need mass production, low cost economy- people will not complain of high costs.FDI for exports is a must-india is a huge importer-MNC client with increasing debt.
In case the entry permission is fixed for cities with 2 million (20
lakh) population, there will be only 19 cities (instead of 53) in the
whole list and all 19 can be covered under the purview of the opening
up of FDI. Even then just two cities will be covered from both Tamil
Nadu (Chennai and Coimbatore) and just one city each from Karnataka
and Andhra Pradesh. But one more city from Kerala will be covered; it
is Kozhikode, the 19th city with 2.02 million populations.
Thus the opening of Retail sector will not be more visible even if
state governments permits MNCs based on the licences granted by The
Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB)!
An executive decision has become a cabinet and parliamentary one with a clear mandate. Hats off to Dr Singh's government. The move can now be on fast track and retail market will see a sea change in the not too distant future. Whether it is for good or bad - only time will tell.
This whole FDI debate is so staged that it resembles a perverse combination of tragic
farce and a traveling circus. The BSP and SP were utterly irresponsible in their
behaviour, by walking out at the crucial juncture. There is no doubt in my mind that
this action was pre-planned and sanctioned by the the powers that be, as the best
possible way to avoid registering 43 NO votes, and thus victory for the Congress led
Corporate Forces and political cover for SP and BSP. The real losers are the small
retailers in the short run and the Indian public in the long run.
Why should people be paid if they don't participate in the proceedings and stage a
walkout. They should go unpaid or even removed from the house for not contributing.
When representatives thought that the FDI in retail was against the
interests of farmers and small retailers, they should have stayed in the
house and voted.
Besides the walkout is to further the political ambition one party and
the other party wants the Bill for reservation in promotions for SC/ST
employees to be brought in as quid pro quo.
Hard to believe but that is exactly how the coalitions work.
There were so many factually inaccurate information in Sushma Swaraj's speech against FDI that I do not trust her confidence. I wonder who was providing her statistics. McDonald and PepsiCo both have refuted her arguments by presenting facts. Is not it morally wrong to deceive people by giving wrong information on the grounds of nationalism as what Sushma Swaraj and her party have repeatedly done?
Those who argued against the FDI are morally bound to vote against it, especially when there is no chance government having to quit.How could voting aginst FDI help BJP.Walkout is not avoid favouring BJP. It is only to please the government for the selfish interest of the leaders of the two parties.
Every policy has got its own merits and demerits ,same with FDI in
multi brand retail.Well, after reading a few articles on this issue, I
felt that merits outweighed demerits. Cabinet has clearly stated that
FDI in multi brand retail can be implemented in states at their own
will. What I don't understand is when states have the option of not
implementing, why there is all this fuzz ??
and one more thing, when BJP was in power, they thought of the same
policy at that time, how come it be ok to have the same policy when
they are in power and not ok when are in the opposition?.
It is all about politics in this country!! :(
What is the point in having political parties like SP,BSP inside a democracy? When the voter (common people) voted for the members of these parties they expected the members to take their voice and present it inside the Parliament. The leaders of both these parties had vehemently opposed FDI in retail both inside and outside the Parliament, which mean they knew what the people who voted them to power expected from them.However during the time of voting the members of these parties chose to absentee from voting.This is nothing but an act of betrayal and act of breach of trust.They have done this infinite number of times in the last 10years due to which an unpopular and corrupt Government is surviving. The election commissioner must take note of this "breach of trust" and must ban these two political outfits.
How can an elected representative abstain from voting? Abstaining means running away from the responsibility to provide a valid opinion on behalf of the constituents who elected that representative. Abstaining should be removed as an option for the MPs. They are taking all the perks and salary for being an MP, but shy away from voting on important matters? The responsibility lies with the constituents to question these MPs who did not vote on such an important matter. Unless the MPs realize that they will be questioned by their electors, we have no control over our elected member's actions. This highlights the need for more NGOs and civil society debate about important issues of our society. The legislative leaders should be made answerable and they should think about their responsibility towards their electors before taking a call. It is their inherent responsibility. But, I seriously doubt if any of them hold such ethical standards. Think fellow citizens and act!
The facts that deserve brooding are: i) if the level of corruption continues as it is, the present multi-party parliamentary democracy will remain defunct. ii) FDI can not be proved wrong in any sector if the system is honest, which unfortunately is not. iii) FDI will never generate employment, it will kill some. But the consumer and farmer may benefit. India, with large population dependent on self-employment in retail trade, should not have gone for it.
It is a clear case of diversionary politics when the ruling party instead of mainly dealing with the FDI appealed to the members to turn their attention to the politics of BJP. By garnering the support of unprincipled parties like SP and BSP applying pressure tactics the ruling party might have achieved their objective by throwing all democratic norms to the winds. But what answer they will give to the common man who is going to be the worst sufferer when they seek their votes at the next general elections
What a pity? This is a black day for India and Indians. Now Dear " THE HINDU" please keep allocate one or two complete pages for reporting suicides of farmers in villages through out India and street vendors suicides in cities after 2-3 years. Get ready to consume made in China goods and pay directly to US treasury.
Well Mulayam Yadav spoke eloquently why FDI was not beneficial but turned out to be
a coward and a paper tiger. If he had voted, FDI would have been defeated. Now here's
a new catch. The motion to let FDI through requires an amendment of an act
forbidding it, instituted in 1999. Although government won the FDI vote by default... it
lost the vote on changing the act forbidding FDI so now the whole tamasha has to
move to the Rajya Sabha. I guess this whole drama is being enacted so every politician
in both houses can have his glory in full TV headlights and show his gift of making
speeches and debating in Parliament. Apparently in the Rajya Sabha there is more
opposition to FDI as the leaders there are more savvy on the cons of FDI...Both the
Yadavs and Mayawati have corruption cases against them and therefore obviously
ended up by supporting this corrupt, and inept government. Deadly GM foods,
deadlier nuclear plants and now just as deadly FDI is being shoved down our throats.
Help!
You know the voting was the drama whoose script was well written by Congress party and where SP AND BSP were co-script writer.
And in case of BJP they too wanted FDI But there "baniya" vote bank was at stake SO for them it was unavitable to create seen of that kind.
But fine the good thing had occured in form of FDI. May be its all good or its great sin but its the need of the hour for the nation
Congragulations Dr. Singh & UPA II. Where there is will, there is a way! The opposition parties will oppose everything just for the sake of it. Entry of Mobile, computers were subjugated with same idea that we will become slave of foreigners. But now? It is leading industry in India and World.
Now that it has passed the vote and is pending in the RS. Will the Left and the BJP respect the wishes of the people in the form of our Parliamentary Democracy and move on? Or will the they take to the streets and damage public property because they are sore losers? If they cannot respect parliamentary democracy, then what is the point in having an election to parliament or having a parliament at all?
When they say, "it is not about the FDI, it is about defeating BJP's
politics", it underlines the dangerous direction our leaders have
taken the country to. All that matters to them are the dynamics of
political power. FDI or no FDI , the decision doesn't affect these
powerful people who rule above the heads of the billion plus people.
It is high time something dramatic happened in the Indian political
system. The idea of democracy is being taunted and ruthlessly torn
apart. And the irony is, all that is being done under the watchful
protection of the law itself, which has been rendered useless.
Maybe the world was not meant to have democracy, or atleast in the
manner that it is implemented now. The only good logic behind
democracy is to share power among the ones capable of claiming it. It
is more similar to a case where princes settle their disputes by
sharing power, than a case where princes give their lands to the poor.
Sigh..
Let each member of Parliament choose his or her vote based on the interest of his constituency and his conscience.
In my personal opinion absconding the vote is escaping from the responsibility of legislature.
Let the votes decide and each member need to act in the best interest of parliamentary system.
Please Email the Editor