The dates for the forthcoming Budget session of Parliament have been announced. Once again, at very short notice. We did some research and here is what we found. Historically, the Indian Parliament provided ample time for preparation. The first two Lok Sabhas (1952–1962) averaged a commendable 47 days between the time the notice was given, and the start of the session. Over the years, however, this gap has narrowed significantly. Under the current government, the average has plummeted to 17 days' notice for summoning sessions—one of the lowest in the history of independent India. This time around, the Parliamentary bulletin announcing the starting date (January 31) of the Budget Session, was announced on January 17. Abysmal. Fifteen days' notice!
India's Parliament has seen this troubling trend in the last two decades. The lack of proper planning hurts the functioning of a Parliamentary democracy. The diminishing lead time between the issuance of summons and the commencement of sessions is only one of the many ills that are ‘turning Parliament into a deep, dark chamber'. If schools and colleges can set up their calendars way in advance, why can't Parliament? There are multiple advantages of preparing and then announcing a calendar for Parliament with sufficient lead time. Proper lead time will ensure higher quality of outputs from Members of Parliament (MPs).
The Constitutional Gap
Unlike many other democracies, India does not have a fixed parliamentary calendar. Conventionally, Parliament meets for three sessions a year:
- Budget Session (usually February-May),
- Monsoon Session (usually July-August), and
- Winter Session (usually November-December)
The only constitutional requirement is that there should not be more than six months between two sessions. The gap has enabled successive governments to carve out timing for sessions to suit themselves. This selfish tactic undermines the robustness of Parliament and raises serious questions. Can a Parliament that meets sporadically, with just two weeks' notice, be an effective amplifier to voice concerns of citizens? Can a Parliament that gives MPs insufficient time to prepare, be a shining example of representative governance? Members of the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha are elected not just to legislate, but also to hold the government accountable, scrutinise its actions, and debate matters of national importance. These responsibilities will be fulfilled far better with a structured and predictable Parliamentary calendar.
Efforts to address this issue go back many decades. In 1955, the General Purposes Committee of the Lok Sabha explored the idea of a fixed Parliamentary calendar. Then again in 2002, the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution, emphasised the need for a minimum number of sittings. Unfortunately, these proposals have still not been implemented.
The 2019 Bill
In 2019, your columnist introduced a Private Member's Bill in Parliament to establish a fixed calendar for Parliamentary sessions and mandate a minimum of 100 sitting days annually. This aimed to enhance the functioning of Parliament by ensuring governments do not evade accountability by delaying sessions or cutting them short. A fixed schedule would allow Members of Parliament to plan their legislative and constituency responsibilities effectively, ensuring adequate time for debating and scrutinising bills, policies, and issues of public importance. By guaranteeing at least 100 sitting days, the bill sought to strengthen the democratic process, improve legislative efficiency, and uphold transparency and accountability in governance.
Restoring The Purpose
During the Constituent Assembly debates, members like K.T. Shah argued that the flexibility of not having a fixed calendar should not lead to misuse, emphasising that Parliament must meet often to ensure proper oversight of the executive. India prides itself on being the world's largest democracy. Yet, the strength of a democracy is measured not by its size but by the effectiveness of its institutions. Parliament is the cornerstone of this system, and its proper functioning is essential for ensuring that the voices of citizens are heard and their concerns addressed. A fixed Parliamentary calendar is not just a procedural reform, it will be a big step toward restoring some measure of the dignity and purpose of this institution.
In countries like the UK and the US, Parliament and Congress have fixed session schedules. For instance, the UK House of Commons follows an annual calendar approved months in advance, ensuring MPs can prepare and balance their legislative and constituency duties.
This issue transcends political affiliations. It is about safeguarding the democratic framework and ensuring that Parliament fulfils its constitutional mandate. Seventy-five years after adopting the Constitution, is as good a time as any, to give the world's largest Parliamentary democracy a calendar with a well-planned schedule, and at least 100 days of Parliament being in session.
Let's get this done.
(Derek O'Brien, MP, leads the Trinamool Congress in the Rajya Sabha)
(Additional research: Chahat Mangtani, Dheemunt Jain)
