Is injustice meted to our current speaker?

D

deepakraam

Deepak Narayanan
There happened a drama after the Govt won the trust vote.Left parties have shown the exit door to the speaker citing that speaker didnot resign after the Left withdrawn the support to the Govt.As per the constitution,it is not mandatory for a speaker to resign.Moreover,speaker post is not a party specific one.So speaker has done as per the legislation.I would appreciate the impartial attitude of the speaker for not tendering his resignation when his party made its stand clear.So it is illogical to point the fingers towards the speaker.Isn't injustice meted to him?

Wat do you say?

-Deepak.
 
yes.........it is, cuz we should respect the speaker and which leads us to more favorable environment of constructive dialogue
 
The final authority for adopting rules for regulating its procedure rests with each House, but a perusal of the rules of the Indian Parliament would indicate that the Presiding Officers in the two Houses are given vast powers by the rules. It is the Presiding Officer who decides the admissibility of a Question; it is she who decides the forms in which amendments may be moved to the Motion of Thanks to the President's Address. With regard to moving amendments to a Bill, the permission of the Chair is required. If a Bill is pending before the House, it is the Speaker who decides whether she should allow amendments to be moved to various clauses of the Bill or not. As regards regulating discussions in the House, it is the Speaker who decides as to when a member shall speak and how long she shall speak. It is left to her to ask a member to discontinue her speech or even decide that what a particular member said may not go on record as part of the proceedings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top