Could the Parsekar government have handled the
three-minute, five-minute or 15-minute session in a
more professional manner? Could a more inspired
leader have infused the session with a sense of purpose
even though the fate of the sitting MLAs is
locked in EVMs, to be revealed on March 11? The interim period
between February 4 and March 11 is akin to being in no-man’s
land. We have a government, but it is led to believe that it is
powerless to do anything. Or is it?
This might be a lame-duck government, but in reality it is
going through the process of identifying bars and liquor outlets
which will be axed, thanks to a Supreme Court order. This
lame-duck government thought the matter important enough
to seek the advice of the advocate general on the matter. Clearly,
there is a lot of heartache over the
order and the manner in which it is
being implemented. Now, whether
constitutional experts like it or not,
there is a government in charge of
the state and it is there to take care
of exigencies. If that is not the case
then the government should have
been dismissed and the Assembly
dissolved prior to February 4.
The 15th session was an opportunity to debate the liquor issue
because action is being taken on the ground and stakeholders
have no avenue to express their anguish. Curtorim MLA Reginaldo
Lourenco echoed this sentiment, but the government
chose to bury its head in the sand. As a result the excise department,
which is part of the government, is going about its task
without any guidance from or supervision of the government.
Leader of the Opposition Pratapsingh Rane wanted to raise an
issue concerning rules of the House. Lourenco wanted to raise
the liquor issue. Why were they not allowed to speak?
Surprisingly, matters that could have been debated inside the
House were discussed outside with CM expressing his mind on
the liquor issue. He said that with the AG’s advice and denotification
of highways passing through towns only 1,470 outlets
would face the axe. What remained unsaid is whether this was
passed on to the excise department? A statement from the government
on the floor of the House would have cleared the air
and kept stakeholders informed about what is likely to happen.
Right from the start everyone was aware that this session was
being called to fulfill a legal technicality which stipulated that
there should not be a gap of more than six months between two
sessions. We do not fault the government for calling the session,
even though Rane pointed out that proper notice should
have been given to MLAs, but it failed in its duty to discuss an
important issue concerning owners of liquor outlets, many of
whom stand to lose their livelihoods. Instead, it behaved like it
had already been voted out. There is no point in having a government
if it is not going to act on matters of importance.
