Imagine sending a leave application to your boss and then it gets rejected with the official reason that you did not take your boss's permission prior to writing the leave application.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/delhi/centre-returns-bills-including-one-on-lokpal-to-delhi-govt/story-oxJHqZBVpA9otsVQCWhsDJ.html
>> headline is be targeted at implying blame game.. true headline would be..
Centre returns 14 bills passed by Delhi Assembly
>> I'm not being able to find an article which actually lists or links to the exact bills. Instance of media acting like high priests.. they are sharing broken down bits and pieces of info along with their own mixings, but not sharing the actual info that they are reporting on. How hard can it possibly be to share a 14-point list?
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-centre-returns-14-bills-to-delhi-govt-aap-infuriated-2227500
>> why is the word "infuriated" being used? The reporter has blandly wrote that AAP / AK is infuriated, without providing any detail or evidence. Did he blow his cock, point his index finger ahead and start screaming at the top of his lungs? Did he tear his muffler and topi to shreds? Did he do one of those Hitler reacts? Surely something qualifying as "infuriated" would have been caught on camera and endlessly looped on all news channels for a whole month. It's TRP gold! But we never saw anything like that. Did he take a glass of water and drink it at one go? (whoops, wrong CM :P) How do the lines below qualify as "infuriated"?
"It is my humble request to Prime Minister Modi that he should have a big heart. Have a big heart. Forget the defeat of the Delhi assembly elections and don't take revenge from the people of the city. Should the Centre have the right to block every law of the Delhi government? Is the Central government the headmaster of the Delhi government?"
Same news, better headline, had to be by another country's media:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-3372436/Kejriwal-urges-Home-Minister-clear-14-Bills-passed-Delhi-Assembly.html
Kejriwal urges Home Minister to clear 14 Bills passed by Delhi Assembly
>> and HELLO, take a look at this sequence of events, which seems to have been conveniently censored out by the other media orgs reporting on same issue:
...To discuss and push for these bills, Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal has sought an appointment with Singh.
...Kejriwal said these Bills have been forwarded to the ministry of home affairs by Lieutenant Governor Najeeb Jung.
..."The lieutenant governor has sent 14 Bills of the Delhi government to the MHA. I have sought an appointment from Rajnath ji to discuss Bills," Kejriwal tweeted.
>> NOWHERE in the DNA or Hindustantimes articles was anything mentioned about the CM seeking an appointment with Centre, about LG having ALREADY forwarded the bills to the Centre. Instead the articles are implying that AAP was "at it again", trying to pass bills on their own and not bothering for properly co-ordinating with the Centre. But if the Centre is complaining that you cannot pass this without my approval and then returning the bills, then HELLO, the bill came to you FOR YOUR APPROVAL. Imagine sending a leave application to your boss and then it gets rejected with the official reason that you did not take your boss's permission prior to writing the leave application.
The Centre has reportedly stated that LG's permission must be taken BEFORE passing it in the assembly. That doesn't make sense.. there are 2 sets of rules governing this and one set (not mentioned here) DOES provide for Assembly clearing the bill first and THEN sending to Centre for approval. Indeed, that is the default sequence of events that has always been followed by all past Delhi govts. But the present govt follows the same procedure and suddenly our media brands them as unprofessional fools.
Think about this logically. Would it make any sense for an elected govt to first send a bill to Centre for permission to even TALK about it at the Assembly floor and have to wait for possibly months for Centre's approval? (some of these have been collecting dust since an year or so with the Centre) In the process of deliberation, the bill might even undergo changes. How do you take pre-approval of that? And after deliberation and passing, the bill AGAIN has to go to Centre for approval. So the Centre is claiming that any piece of legislation for Delhi needs both pre-approval and post-approval. Then is the claim that Centre is acting like the headmaster not valid? What will they want next : the democratically elected representatives of the people of Delhi have to take prior permission from Centre for even thinking about a bill?
What's being implied is a sheer double wastage : first ask Centre permission for even initiating talking about a bill, and then redundantly ask them their permission for passing it. At this rate, why doesn't the Centre simply suspend the democratically elected govt, declare President's Rule in Delhi again and take over the business of creating the bills too?
So let's list down here what India's mainstream media has categorically FAILED to report:
http://www.hindustantimes.com/delhi/centre-returns-bills-including-one-on-lokpal-to-delhi-govt/story-oxJHqZBVpA9otsVQCWhsDJ.html
>> headline is be targeted at implying blame game.. true headline would be..
Centre returns 14 bills passed by Delhi Assembly
>> I'm not being able to find an article which actually lists or links to the exact bills. Instance of media acting like high priests.. they are sharing broken down bits and pieces of info along with their own mixings, but not sharing the actual info that they are reporting on. How hard can it possibly be to share a 14-point list?
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-centre-returns-14-bills-to-delhi-govt-aap-infuriated-2227500
>> why is the word "infuriated" being used? The reporter has blandly wrote that AAP / AK is infuriated, without providing any detail or evidence. Did he blow his cock, point his index finger ahead and start screaming at the top of his lungs? Did he tear his muffler and topi to shreds? Did he do one of those Hitler reacts? Surely something qualifying as "infuriated" would have been caught on camera and endlessly looped on all news channels for a whole month. It's TRP gold! But we never saw anything like that. Did he take a glass of water and drink it at one go? (whoops, wrong CM :P) How do the lines below qualify as "infuriated"?
"It is my humble request to Prime Minister Modi that he should have a big heart. Have a big heart. Forget the defeat of the Delhi assembly elections and don't take revenge from the people of the city. Should the Centre have the right to block every law of the Delhi government? Is the Central government the headmaster of the Delhi government?"
Same news, better headline, had to be by another country's media:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-3372436/Kejriwal-urges-Home-Minister-clear-14-Bills-passed-Delhi-Assembly.html
Kejriwal urges Home Minister to clear 14 Bills passed by Delhi Assembly
>> and HELLO, take a look at this sequence of events, which seems to have been conveniently censored out by the other media orgs reporting on same issue:
...To discuss and push for these bills, Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal has sought an appointment with Singh.
...Kejriwal said these Bills have been forwarded to the ministry of home affairs by Lieutenant Governor Najeeb Jung.
..."The lieutenant governor has sent 14 Bills of the Delhi government to the MHA. I have sought an appointment from Rajnath ji to discuss Bills," Kejriwal tweeted.
>> NOWHERE in the DNA or Hindustantimes articles was anything mentioned about the CM seeking an appointment with Centre, about LG having ALREADY forwarded the bills to the Centre. Instead the articles are implying that AAP was "at it again", trying to pass bills on their own and not bothering for properly co-ordinating with the Centre. But if the Centre is complaining that you cannot pass this without my approval and then returning the bills, then HELLO, the bill came to you FOR YOUR APPROVAL. Imagine sending a leave application to your boss and then it gets rejected with the official reason that you did not take your boss's permission prior to writing the leave application.
The Centre has reportedly stated that LG's permission must be taken BEFORE passing it in the assembly. That doesn't make sense.. there are 2 sets of rules governing this and one set (not mentioned here) DOES provide for Assembly clearing the bill first and THEN sending to Centre for approval. Indeed, that is the default sequence of events that has always been followed by all past Delhi govts. But the present govt follows the same procedure and suddenly our media brands them as unprofessional fools.
Think about this logically. Would it make any sense for an elected govt to first send a bill to Centre for permission to even TALK about it at the Assembly floor and have to wait for possibly months for Centre's approval? (some of these have been collecting dust since an year or so with the Centre) In the process of deliberation, the bill might even undergo changes. How do you take pre-approval of that? And after deliberation and passing, the bill AGAIN has to go to Centre for approval. So the Centre is claiming that any piece of legislation for Delhi needs both pre-approval and post-approval. Then is the claim that Centre is acting like the headmaster not valid? What will they want next : the democratically elected representatives of the people of Delhi have to take prior permission from Centre for even thinking about a bill?
What's being implied is a sheer double wastage : first ask Centre permission for even initiating talking about a bill, and then redundantly ask them their permission for passing it. At this rate, why doesn't the Centre simply suspend the democratically elected govt, declare President's Rule in Delhi again and take over the business of creating the bills too?
So let's list down here what India's mainstream media has categorically FAILED to report:
1. This has NEVER been the due procedure for all past Delhi state governments. The Sheila Dixit govt and the ones before never had to do all this to-and-fro business to pass any bill. This new bureaucratic handicapping has been brought in illegally by the present Central govt without properly codifying into any law, and obviously we can predict that any future non-AAP Delhi govt will not be put through this treatment.. this is exclusively for AAP govt, for the sole purpose of preventing them from fulfilling the duties that they were elected for.
2. Is the Centre even the least bit interested in doing what is best for the people of Delhi? Why aren't any of the 14 bills themselves being highlighted? Are each and every one of them really not passable or truly against the people's best interests? If there are technical hurdles, can't modifications be made, why to completely reject? Does that demonstrate either true statesmanship or federal co-operativism on the Centre's part? Dear media, can we have the details of each of the bills please?
3. If the reason for returning was really as officially stated, then it means that the reason was 'there' when the very first bill itself came. So why let several months pass, why waste taxpayer money in letting not one, not two, not three, but 14 bills collect in MHA office for no use when the Centre could have immediately returned the first bill that came, duly informed the state govt what was wrong and the state govt would have taken remedial steps then itself? Who in the MHA or PMO thought it's a good idea to allowe the count to notch up to 14? Was the Centre sleeping on its Delhi related duties all this time? If not, then why didn't they say anything when the very first bill came? Where is the Centre's apology to the people of Delhi for having wasted their tax money and time? Far from apologizing, from the news reports it sounds like the Central govt is quite pleased with themselves for waiting till 14 bills gather dust, for wasting taxpayer money and dragging this all for so long, and then at the end of it, rejecting all for the same reason. So much for quick and efficient governance. So either the Centre has been caught sleeping on their job, or the reason for rejection/returning has freshly been invented and did not exist when the first bill was sent by Delhi State to Centre for approval. There can be only two possible explanations for the Centre's behaviour in this case: incompetence, or willful dereliction of duty.
No comments:
Post a Comment