Hyderabad: A YSRCP MP has written to Prime Minister Narendra Modi requesting him to hold at least two Parliament sessions every year in South India to strengthen national integration and also in view of Delhi’s extreme weather conditions.
Maddila Gurumoorthy, the YSRCP MP representing Tirupati, wrote this in a letter to PM Modi and Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju, stating it as for operational efficiency, decentralisation, sense of inclusion, and to strengthen national integration.
Maddila’s idea is to have two Parliament sessions annually in the southern region, be it in any of the five states.
The MP’s immediate justification is Delhi’s harsh climate and alarming pollution levels.
“This proposal is rooted in the broader goal of strengthening national integration while addressing the practical challenges faced by lawmakers during the extreme weather conditions in Delhi, particularly in winter and summer. The climate in Delhi during these seasons severely impacts the daily functioning of Parliament,” said Maddila, a medical practitioner (physiotherapist), in the letter dated 28 November.
“The harsh winter chills and scorching summer heat make it increasingly difficult for Members of Parliament and Parliament officials to work efficiently, not to mention the detrimental effect on the overall quality of life in the city.”
The MP says that the core thought behind the initiative “is to allow for more peaceful and productive sessions in a region with a more favorable climate, ensuring smoother legislative processes”.
Maddila backed his idea with historical thoughts of statesmen politicians, prominent personalities on the matter.
The YSRCP MP points out that B.R. Ambedkar, chairman of the Constitution drafting committee, had favoured a second capital at Hyderabad-Secunderabad.
Ambedkar, in his book ‘Thoughts on Linguistic States’, lists Delhi’s disadvantages like distance from the South, harsh climates and its vulnerable location close to hostile nations, while favouring the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad for its equidistance from many parts of the country.
“Similarly, the late Atal Bihari Vajpayee suggested that the government should remain open to the idea of holding Parliament sessions outside Delhi. The discussion was further brought to light in 1968 when Independent MP Prakash Vir Shastri introduced a Private Member’s Bill on the subject,” Maddila says in the letter.
“These historical precedents clearly indicate the relevance and importance of this proposal in fostering a more inclusive and accessible parliamentary system. We believe that conducting sessions in southern India would bring Parliament closer to the people of the region, thereby fostering a greater sense of inclusion. It would also reduce the logistical and climatic challenges faced in Delhi, allowing for more efficient and effective governance.”
“Additionally, it would serve as a symbolic gesture of national unity and decentralisation, showing that Parliament is truly a body that represents the entire country, not just its capital city,” Maddila says, urging the PM to consider his proposal with a positive outlook. “The initiative will benefit the entire nation and help Parliament function in a more inclusive and efficient manner.”
Maddila told ThePrint that issues like weather, present serious pollution situation in Delhi have further stirred him to take up the issue, discuss the idea with his fellow MPs from the south, including those of his YSRCP, and write to the authorities.
“As we oppose delimitation of Lok Sabha seats based on population, we want at-least one Parliament session to be held in southern India annually. This would instil confidence among the southern people, offering a sense of importance.
“We built a new Parliament house spending about a Rs 1,000 crore; we can afford a Rs 1,000 crore or so more for buildings, secretariat staff to ease the logistical etc burdens on south Indians, be it MPs or people needed to travel all the way to New Delhi at present for their job, needs,” Maddila tells ThePrint, adding that “there should be a Supreme Court bench too set up in the South”.
The second-time MP’s idea of south session is finding endorsement of MPs from the region.
“I endorse the suggestion,” Karti Chidambaram, Congress MP from Sivaganga in Tamil Nadu, wrote on ‘X’, tagging Lok Sabha speaker Om Birla and Rajya Sabha Chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar.
“The YSRCP MP raised a very valid point. We must take the Government of India business to other parts, it cannot be so Delhi centric,” Chidambaram, told media in Parliament premises Monday, while pointing that some states have their legislative assemblies held at two locations.
“At least one Parliament session could be held in the south annually, in a revolving manner (in one state each time), to take the government closer to the public.”
However, Karti says instead of building a new Parliament house somewhere in the south, “one of the larger state’s legislative buildings could serve the purpose, refashioned accordingly”.
On the question of the petition possibly rekindling the demand to have two capitals, Karti said, “I don’t think we need another capital, but we definitely need to decentralise administration as India is not just New Delhi. Some ministries can be run from other parts of the country. I have been propagating this model in Tamil Nadu too, favouring Trichy.”
Also Read: A week after Adani US indictment, why Naidu is treading cautiously on Jagan govt-SECI deal
Past demands
Maddila’s seemingly groundbreaking idea is not new. MP Shastri, he says, raised the issue in 1963 and then introduced a private member Bill on the same subject in 1968. The government constituted a committee of 18 MPs, including Shastri, distinguished MPs like G.S.Dhillon, Rabi Ray and K. Hanumanthaiya, with the mandate to “examine the feasibility and financial implications of the proposal to hold the session of Parliament annually in the South”.
However, the panel concluded that a south session was not feasible. It, instead, suggested that Parliamentary committees could hold their meetings during the intersession period in the south, says a research note shared by the MP with ThePrint.
The governments of Mysore and Kerala had earlier put together detailed proposals for the infrastructure required (two legislative chambers, housing for presiding officers, MPs, ministers, government and secretariat staff, etc.) and the money needed to construct it.
Kerala offered free land, while Mysore offered to create space in its newly built Vidhana Soudha building to accommodate a parliamentary session. The central government had to bear the cost of developing and maintaining the infrastructure, Maddila says
To ease staffing requirements, a purely legislative session, without Question Hour could be held. But the central government opposed this idea as it would be considered a pale reflection of itself, lacking in teeth and leaving the opposition dissatisfied, the note says
Some states like Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Odisha, Gujarat, Manipur, and Punjab opposed the Parliament session outside Delhi. Jammu and Kashmir stated that such a move would create pressure on other distant parts of the country.
(Edited by Tony Rai)