'Breaking Up My Country'

Updated on: 8 June 2006 12:0 am

BLAST FROM THE PAST

'Breaking Up MyCountry'

'You have taken the country to the edgeof caste wars .. We have problems if caste is defined to enshrine casteism inour country. We have problems if the weakest amongst the classes are not helpedand if the weakest among the minority religions are not helped. The Congresscannot stand by and watch this nation being divided for the politicalconvenience of one individual.'

RAJIV GANDHI

Rajiv Gandhi was the Leader of Opposition whenimplementation of the Mandal Commission Report "in toto" was announced by the then PrimeMinister V.P. Singh. Recently, there have been many media-reports about RajivGandhi's two-and-a-half hour speech in the Lok Sabha of 6th of September 1990.We present the full-text of the debate here and will follow this up with V.P.Singh's reply next week.

Briefly, while Rajiv Gandhi said that he wasnot trying " to point out that this report is worthless, and should bethrown away" and agreed that "there is a lot of substance in thereport", he insisted that it should not just be accepted " withoutdiscussing it or without debating it". He emphasised that "it needsmore looking into" and all the " very wide ranging, sweeping actionthat needs to be taken" suggested by Kalelkar Commission or the MandalCommission ought to be implemented for "Socially and Educationally BackwardClasses" [SEBC] as "that is what the constitution hadsaid".

Another point made very strongly by him wasabout the removal of "creamy layer" so that the benefits of suchmeasures go to "those groups of people within the SEBCs. who deserve suchhelp most. We are not in favour of having such measures being cornered by oneparticular group within the SEBCs. The benefits must seep down to those who needthem the most."

Coming to the specifics of the report, hepoints out that the report is based on data from the cost indexing of 1891 andthe census of 1931. “We are talking about data which is a hundred years old orsixty years old. Is that valid today?” Add 16 years to what he said, and itperhaps holds as good today.

He also points out: " Only 810 villagesout of over 5 lakh villages were surveyed as a sample. Now this could have beenvalid if he was to check the validity of a report. To do such a small samplingcheck is a valid step when you are checking the validity of a report. But is ita valid step on which to base a complete report like this?"

And perhaps the most crucial part is when hecomes to the constitutional provisions: " The Constitution very clearlydifferentiates between Scheduled Castes and backward classes. Why did ourConstitution makers make this distinction? They had something in their minds.Why have we lost that distinction today?"

Questioning the very definition of"backward" in the report, he points out: “Many castes that arelisted in (this) list are forward castes and are scheduled castes ... I know fora fact that Brahmins are included, Reddys are included, Vokkaligas are included,Kammas are included, Lingayats are included, Gounders are included, Chettiyarsare included. Are these backward castes? Do they need the help? This is how 52per cent has been derived.”

And this is where he argues that the benefits"should go not only to such underprivileged groups and many others likethem, but to people from all religions who are under-privileged and this iswhere I have a grave difference with what the Government is bringing in. They'relooking almost entirely at caste. Not only that. They have not includedvery large sections of the minority who should be included."

He concludes by pointing out that "nospecialist, no sociologist was involved with this report apart from these eightdays”, and uses the Commission's own admission -- "that this operationsis not scientific, is not technically sophisticated and it is not even academically satisfying" -- on its owndata collection.-- to underline what V.P. Singh himself had told a group ofeditors: “The report was purely a political strategy and that he was not sofoolish.”

Full text of his unedited speech withinterventions and interjections from the opposition that add to the flavour ofthe debate.

***

Shri Rajiv Gandhi (Amethi): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, before I start onwhat I really wanted to say, I must say that I have been terribly pained withwhat I have heard just now from one of the members of the Government, one of theMinisters. It is extremely sad that the thinking in this Government revolvesaround caste and perhaps that is why we are at this sorry [Interruptions]

Shri Nathu Singh (Dausa): What about you? ... [Interruptions]

Mr Deputy Speaker: May I request the Members not to interrupt likethat. If you feel very strongly, you may have the opportunity to have your sayover here. I would request the Members on this side also not to respond in such a fashion that the Member speaking is disturbed....

[Interruptions]

Mr. Deputy Speaker: This is not the way, please. You have been doing this thing, youshould not do that..

[Interruptions]

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Sir, I would like to point out that we are workingon a fairly tight time scheduled today. The time allocated was from 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. Thenwe had a little bit of questioning. You than extended it. If this is the way debate isgoing to function, it will be very difficult to accommodate the Government business before8 p.m. and I think the Government should be aware of that.

Sir, when one looks at the timing of the announcement made by the PrimeMinister, a very important factor comes up. This is a time when the nation is going througha number of very serious, perhaps even severe problems. The situation in Kashmir is worsethan it has ever been since independence. The situation in Punjab is again perhaps worsethan it has ever been. Assam has joined that list. Tamil Nadu is drawing very close tothat. In fact the Prime Minister, if I remember correctly, speaking in this very House,had asked the nation to be prepared for war or some such words -- psychologically preparedfor war. Then, apart from that we already have North-South tension brewing on the question of language becausecertain Chief Minister who belong to the ruling party here at the Centre have raised theissue of language and caused a North-South divide. It is only because of the Congresswhich is a responsible party and the majority of Members... (Interruptions) Sir,I will not speak while interruptions are going on. With your permission, everythingI haveto say ( Interruptions) Hansna hai to hans lo.

Sir, I notice that today they have got a replacement crutch; the normalcrutch is not here. It is a standby unit which there. It is a stepeney, if you don't likestandby.

Sir, apart from language, is also the question of communal tension. Again, it is highand in the coming couple of months there is every indication--it is going to escalate evenhigher, not because what we are doing something but because one of your parties is doingso and because of that you are not able to cope with that. Then, there is the question ofthe rural-urban divide which has been created just recently because there are certaindifferences in the ruling party (Interruptions)

Sir, I would like to point out that there is only one Member on the opposite side whofeels that there is no difference (Interruptions)

Sir, on top of that, there has been, after a very long time, a castetension like the one that has developed and the caste tension that we have seen today ison two levels-the first wave of caste tension was caused by the formula used by theNational Front to get together, the AJGAR formula. The AJGAR formula was thecasteist formula and it brought back casteism to electoral policy after a break ofapproximately 10 years. If you think back, it was in 1980 that the Congress under theleadership of Indira Gandhili, had raised the slogan

"Na jaat par na patt par"

Shri Syed Masudal Hossain: Devratha Baba ki Laat par"

(Interruptions)

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Sir, in this sort of a prevailing situation, withthe pressures from outside and the pressures from within what was needed was the soothingtouch from the Government. Where the nation and our society needed a soothing touch, whatdoes the Government go and do? They announce without preparing any ground. Mr. Gupta whois a very responsible Member of this House, a very senior Member of this House and a verystrong supporter of the Government, himself has said that--I think the words usedare, 'It was not done in a hurry', something like that.

Shri Indrajit Gupta: Hasty.

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: It was hasty. Now, what does 'hasty' mean? 'Hasty'does not mean that it was hanging for 10 years, so you put on the switch and it comes out.'Hasty' means that the ground has not been prepared and the proof that the ground has notbeen prepared is that the people are getting killed outside, buses are getting burnt,trains are getting burnt and buildings are being destroyed. That is the proof.

Shri Nathu Singh: What happened in 1975? (Interruptions)

Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Nathu Singh, please don't comment. If you feel like speaking, Iwil allow you to speak.

[Interruptions]

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Sir, where on the one hand the Prime Minister is asking the nation tobe psychologically prepared for war, he is doing exactly the opposite to the nation. He iscausing rift in our society so that the nation can be psychologically prepared to facethe foreign threat of Pakistan like he has said. This is a totally irresponsible standthat the Government has taken.

There are a number of national goals. If we try to picture what thenational goals are, each party will have a slightly different picture, but many items inthat will be common and I think nobody in this House will say that the removal ofbackwardness and the removal of poverty are not part of that national goal. I think,equally nobody in this House will say that the removal of casteism is not part of thatnational goat. We must remember both. When we think of poverty and backwardness, it is notjust a question of righting a social wrong which has existed for many years. Today we needto harness all the energies of the nation to develop so fast as to compete with othercountries. That can only be done if we harness all the resources of our people. Thatincludes the weakest, the most backward, the poorest They can not be left out. I don'tthink anybody in this House will say that when a child is born, there is a substantialdifference in merit between one child and another child. They are all the same.The difference comes when equal opportunity is not given. The first thing in removingbackwardness and poverty is to look at the root of the problem, give equalopportunity.Whether that child is a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe or a backward or a forward ora minority community of any religion, the merits are all there, but it does not get theopportunity to develop those merits and if he cannot develop them, the nation cannot usethat at least for the development of the nation. So, it is imperative that we harness allour energies to help these children, all the children of the country to develop thetalents as best as they can.

The problems of backwardness are very real and they cannot be handledjust by looking at any one aspect. You cannot say that we will give only education, sobackwardness will go. You will start hitting at the roots, but it will take anumber ofyears; you cannot say that we will give financial assistance and backwardness will go. Itwill help, but you cannot say only reservations will do. The fact is that you need acomprehensive plan. You need a comprehensive vision; you cannot look at these things in anisolated manner. We, the Congress, are in favour of a comprehensive action plan, anaffirmative action plan for the backward communities. We need that. The problem cannot besolved by playing politics or by limited politically motivated manipulations.(Interruptions) Sir, I appeal to the Left Members. Now that the real crutch is back,they might let him intervene

Sir, if I can quote from the Mandal Commission Report, in paragraph1.4, the Mandal Commission recalls what the Kaka Saheb Kalelkar Commission had said. Therecommendations of the Commission for the upliftment of the backward classes are extremelywide-ranging and comprehensive. They cover such diverse fields as extensive land reforms,reorganization of the village economy, Bhoodan movement development of livestock, dairyfarming, cattle insurance, bee keeping, piggeries, fisheries, development of rural andcottage industries, rural housing, public heath, rural water supply, adult literacy,university education, representation of backward classes in Government, etc.

Then, from here, the Mandal Commission goes on to give veryfar-reaching recommendations in chapter 13. These are covered from paragraph 13.2 to13.17on reservations, from paragraph13.18 to 13.26 on educational assistance, financialassistance and structural changes. Then there are miscellaneous proposals and there isCentral assistance.

It is not just a question of taking one item. Both of them, whether itis the Kalelkar Commission or the Mandal Commission, talk of very wide ranging, sweepingaction that needs to be taken. We must remember that. The Congress is for such assistanceto 'Socially and Educationally Backward Classes'. That is what the constitution had said.But having said that we are in favour of all such measures, I am including 'all' because Ibelieve some questions were raised yesterday in this House. The Congress is in favour ofall such measures. But I would like to emphasise the 'but'-- we would like that all suchmeasures go to those groups of people within the SEBCs. who deserve such help most. We arenot in favour of having such measures being cornered by one particular group within theSEBCs. The benefits must seep down to those who need them the most.

Who are the groups, who are the people who are the more privilegedamong any group? I am not continuing this only to SEBCs. But when you want to givesomething, when you want to take some affirmative action, give something positive, youmust accept that there are those people who perhaps, though originally of a socially,educationally backward group, are today under no circumstances they can be described associally and educationally backward.

I will give an example. Supposing we have a person who has been aSupreme Court judge for a number of years, say 10 or 15 years and then joins politics andbecomes a Cabinet Minister. Is he socially backwards Is he educationally backward? Do hischildren need help?

An. Hon. Memeber: How many ?

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: I am not saying how many. Even if there is one, thatassistance should go to somebody else rather than to him. This is the point.

(Interruptions)

For example do we want the benefit that the Government is giving to becornered by the Ministers or the sons of Ministers or the families of ? Do we want thebenefits that are being given by the Government to be cornered by big landlords and peoplewho have a lot of property? (interruptions)

The Minister of Textiles and Minister of Food Processing Industries (ShriSharad Yadav): I am on a point of order.

Shri Vasant Sathe: Under the guise of point of order, if he sayssomething else it should not form part of the record.

[Translation]

Shri Sharad Yadav: I would like to submit one thing. My point of orderis that (interruptions) I have not interrupted you Kindly listen to my point of order. Iwill take just half a minute. My point of order is that why it was not done in the Congressruled states or during the regime of Shri Rajiv Gandhi.

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: This is not a point of order.

Second example is, do we want all these benefits to be cornered and takenaway by land-holders and land lords? Why do we not exclude the people with acertainmember of properties from such benefits? Do we want these benefits to go to high seniorGovernment officers who already have got that privilege? Yes they are a very few, I agree.But why should those few corner all the privileges? (Interruptions)

[Translation]

Shri Harsh Pal (Meerut): Whether this was the only reason that you didnot provide it tothem during your tenure.

[English]

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: I can't help if you have objection and feeling hurt overit. (Interruptions) once an individual has risen above a certain level and becomesa doctoror a lawyer or an engineer or a professional, does his family need it or should this benefit go to anothersocially educationally backward who is less privileged and who will have lessadvantage? (Interruptions)

[Translation]

Yesterday, when you spoke everybody listened silently Now please listen quietly

[English ]

Do we want these benefits, for example, to go to taxpayers who are obviously in theupper class of society? There will be many other such groupings. It needs to be thought outa little more deeply. Is the Government looking at one particular vested interest or is theGovernment really looking at the socially and educationally backward classes?

This is the question I want to put to the Prime. Minister (Interruptions)

[Translation]

Kindly listen to me first

[English ]

When the Prime Minster speaks, I will answer if he asks the question. Let the PrimeMinister answer the questions I am raising.

[Translation]

The Prime Minister, Shri Vishwanath Pratap Sungh: I will give the reply but first youconclude.

[English]

Shri Santosh Mohan Dev (Tripura, West): The Prime Minister should not intervene Unlessallowed by the Deputy Speaker.

Shri Nirmal Kanti Chatterjee (Dumdum): Let him help the tax evaders. There can be noobjection. (Interruptions)

[Tnanslation]

Mr Deputy Speaker: Please sit quietly.

[English]

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: What objection can there be to what I am saying? Infact, every objectionthat I am hearing is only confirming my fear that this Government is aiming these benefits ata particularly privileged group and not looking at the really poor. (Interruptions) I amnot yielding.

[Tnanslation]

Shri Ram Dhan (Lalganj): Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I have a point of order.You listento it first.

(Interruptions)

Mr Deputy Speaker: If you behave in this manner, nothing concrete canbe done Please take your seat.

(Interruptions)

Shri Ram Dhan: My point of order is that the leader of opposition has saidthat he hasobjection to our interruption. Every member has a right to interrupt and therecan beinterruptions

[English ]

Shri Y.S. Rajasekhar Reddy (Cuddapah): What is this? He says thatinterrupting the speakeris his right.

Mr Deputy Speaker: I will take one minute.

Shri R.N. Rakesh (Chail): I will also interrupt. This is my right.

Mr Deputy Speaker: This is exactly what happens if everybody wants toenjoy the right to interrupt. Nobody has a right to interrupt. Everybody has a rightto speak here. This kind of a point of order is really in disorder. One more thing Iwould like to say. If you have really got anything to ask and if the speaker yields, youmay please ask. But don't, under the guise of raising a point of order, disturb it.You may note the point and if necessary, you may reply. Members are quite capableof replying toeach other's points and debate. Here also, I would like to say that when one Member is sayingsomething and you respond, then it become very difficult to control the House.

(Interruptions)

Mr Deputy Speaker: Please leave it to me. So, you have the capacity,you have the time -- if you need -- to reply to each other's point. But do not disturbor interruptthe debate like this. This is my request.

(interruptions)

Shri Khemchandbhai Somabhai Chavda (Patan): Sir, decorum anddecency ofthis House demands that when the Leader of the Opposition Shri Rajiv Gandhi is on his legsand when he is interrupted, he should resume his seat. (Interruptions)

[Translation]

Mr Deputy Speaker: Do not waste your intelligence like that. Please speak when your turncomes.

[English]

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Sir, I will yield to the Prime Minister on one condition. Almost 25minutes of my time is being taken by interruptions on the other side. if interruptionscontinue in this way, then the agreement that was brought about between ShriUpendra and the Congress that certain business will be transacted after this, may not bepossible. So, let us be clear about this now. I will yield to the Prime Minister.

Shri Vishwanath Pratap Singh: The point I wanted to make is this. The Leader of theOpposition was making that
certain persons, individuals who have risen above the economic strata, why are they beinggiven this benefit. What is being addressed, the issue, is on the whole section of thesociety, backward -- educationally and socially backward classes, not socially andeconomically backward persons. This is the issue. When a class moves up, then, ofcourse, weaning out can be there. But when the whole class is under just zero and one percent, that is not the issue. The issue is whether the whole class has gone up or not. Thatis the issue.

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: I think the hon. Prime Minister has totally missed the point The pointis within a particular class who do you want to help? Do you want to help thosepersonswithin a particular class who are already well-off?

An Hon. Member: How many?

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: I will answer how many. If the number is negligible, if the number isonly one or two, then you should
have no objection at all because you are only eliminating two out of the 42 or 43 crores.What is your objection then? The fact is that within a class when you want to give someassistance, if should go to the poorest. I would recommend it...

[Translation]

Shri Ram Dhan: Delhi University was shifted to his House for his children.

[English]

Mr Deputy Speaker: No personal remarks please. It is not correct.

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: If I can just read out the rules. (Interruptions) Withyour permission, I may be allowed a point of order while I am speaking. Shri RamDhan saidthat it is a right of a Member to interrupt a speaker. May I read out Rule349 (2)?

[Translation]

An Hon. Member: It has been read.

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: I am saying this for Ram Dhanji. He may listen toit and understand it.

(Interruptions)

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Ruling has been given thrice but he is acting likejack in the box. It is a toy consisting of a box from which, upon release of its lid, thetoy figure springs up. (Interruptions)

[English]

The Rule says:

"Whilst the House is sitting, a Member shall not interrupt anyMember while speaking by disorderly expression or noises or in any other disorderlymanner."

[Translation]

Ram Dhanji, have you understood? (Interruptions) He should sitdown now as the point has been cleared.

[English]

Shri Vishwanath Pratap Singh: Allow the Leader of the Opposition tomake the speech. Iwill request not to make interruption. (Interruptions)

Mr Deputy Speaker: It is not correct, Mr. Chatterjee. You have been sittingin thisChair also.

(Interruptions)

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: The benefit from any such measure should not go to theprivileged. They should instead be going to the landless; they should be going tothelandless labour; they should be going to coolies rikshaw-wallas, to nais, todhobis, to these people who are definitely under-privileged in our society. And unless youtake...(Interruptions)

[Translation]

The Minister of Labour and Welfare (Shri Ram Paswan): You want reservation to be limitedto sweepers only(Interruptions)

[English]

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: One more point.(Interruptions)

Shri Ram Dhan: Dhobi (Washerman) is a Scheduled Caste and not abackward class.

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Ram Dhanji you may not be aware that there are dhobis(Washermen)among the Muslims also.(Interruptions)

[English ]

Sir, it should go not only to such underprivileged groups and many otherslike them,but to people from all religions who are under-privileged and this is where I have a gravedifference with what the Government is bringing in. They're looking almost entirely atcaste. (Interruptions) Not only that. They have not included very large sections ofthe minority who should be included. If you look at the Muslims, the vast majority of theMuslim community in India is backward educationally, socially, economically everywhere.

The same thing is true for Christians. The same thing is true even forSikhs who are by and large okay, but there are still groups who are not all right. It is truefor almost every religion as groups who are socially and educationally backward.Why shouldthey not be included? The Government must explain this; the country wants to know.

The second point which must be a part of the national goal is a castelesssociety. The Constitution very clearly differentiates between Scheduled Castes andbackward classes. Why did our Constitution makers make this distinction? They hadsomething in their minds. Why have we lost that distinction today?

I agree with you; the reality is that caste counts for a tremendousamount in this country. I don't disagree with that. But what is our goal? Is ourgoal a casteless society? If our goal is a casteless society, surely every step that wetake -- wemight have made mistakes in the past and I am including myself in that... (Interruptions)

Shri Nirmal Kanti Chatterjee: You are not sure, though.

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: I am trying to keep the debate at a high level and ona serious plane. I am not being frivolous on any count and I would appreciate it ifthe Members specially from the Left parties whom I thought -- well, before they gotinto this alliance -- were responsible members, who were principled members, whobelieved in certainthings. ..

Shri Somnath Chatterjee: (Bolpur): Because of our sense of responsibility wehave seen that you are there.

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Whatever we may see or we may not see, the question isthat you arealways there.

Shri Somnath Chatterjee: The Leader of the Opposition of course is aself confessed juvenile. He does not understand why he is there today, when in the earlier House he had450 Members.How the poor people were alienated from the Congress Party, why the people havelost faith inthem, he does not ask himself that. Whether I am here or not, whether I am thereor not, I amfor the ordinary people, the poor people, the struggling people of this country. Weshall fight them and fight them everywhere. (Interruptions)

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: The hon Member is a very old Member of the House and Idon't want to contradict him. But while we may have lost confidence of the people, we stillgot 42% confidence of the people in the country. At what point of time have you crossed5%or 6%?

Shri Somnath Chatterjee: But we have never let down the people.

(Interruptions)

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Sir our goal today must be a casteless society Let usbe very clear about that.

(Interruptions)

[Translation ]

There has been enough of fun. Now please keep quiet.

[English ]

Sir, do we still have that goal of a casteless society? I was a little worried when Iheard Shri Inderatit Gupta speaking because he drew a line. I think the line he drew wasperhaps very fine; or like my friend is saying, if was a dotted line. If you believe in acasteless society, every major step you take, must be such that you move towardsa castelesssociety And you must avoid taking any step which takes you towards a caste-riddensociety. Unfortunately the step that we are taking today, the manner in which it has been put, is acasteist formula. Whileaccepting that caste is a reality, we must dilute that formula and break that formula byadding something onto it. So that at least we start inching away from the casteistformula. This is where I feel that the leftists are not carrying out their responsibility.And you should do that. It is within your powers to do it. It is not within our powers to doit. With a little bit of pressure, with a little bit of wobbling of that crutch, it canall happen. Therefore you have to do it. (Interruptions)

Shri Nirmal Kanti Chatterjee: You are absolutely right. Whether the Lefthas influence onyou or not, the Left has influence on the present Government. You are absolutely right.(Interruptions)

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: This is exactly what I am trying to say. So, if thepresent Government goes in a casteist direction, you are partly responsible. You mustbear that cross. You cannot wish it away. Here, I would like to ask the PrimeMinister avery specific question. Does he believe in a casteless society? It is a specificquestion."Do you personally believe in a casteless society as the goal for adeveloping nationlike India?

(Interruptions)

Shri Vishwanath Pratap Singh: I am not going to reply now. I will replylater. You go on. (Interruptions)

Prof P.J. Kurien: Sir, it is a specific question, he can answer it.

(Interruptions)

[Translations]

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: When you have replied to other question in the middlewhy can't youreply to this specific question?

[English]

Sir, it is precisely what I feared. The Prime Minister does not have the guts tostand upand say whether he believes in a casteless society or does not believe in ..castelesssociety. It is very sad, Sir.

Sir, Raja Sahib is putting the caste in to our society, once again. He isensuring thatcaste does not go out by this action and by sticking to his guns on this issueof caste. (Interruptions)

Shri Ram Dhan (Lalganj): Which Raja Sahib? (Interruptions)

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Raja Vishwanath Pratap Singhji.

Sir, this Government is creating a vested interest in casteism and thecountry is going to pay a very heavy price for this, Sir. His definition ofcaste...(Interruptions)

19.00 hrs.

Sir, I would request the 'Raja Sahib' not to latch on to caste this way but toexpand thedefinition of caste, first by including socially and educationally backward classes orbackward groups-whatever you want to call it-from other castes from within the Hindureligion and then expanding it to socially and economically backward groups fromother religions,viz., Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Buddhists, Parsis and others. All thoseclasses that aresocially and educationally backward should be first... (Interruptions)

[Translation]

Shri Madan Lal Khurana: Anglo-Indians have been left out.

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Yes. Anglo-Indian... (Interruptions)

[English]

Shri Vishwanath Pratap Singh: I was asked a specific question aboutcaste and I want toanswer it straight... (Interruptions). It is over... (Interruptions) ...Iwantto quote from Jawaharlal Nehru and I think, you may not hear me but hearJawaharlal Nehru.Please do not show disrespect for Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru. In one of his ParliamentaryPartymeetings, he talked about casteism as 'you' and he condemned it as he should as he had done but the factremains. That is what he says. He says that had a dozenor may be ten so-called superior castes dominate the Indian scene among theHindus... (Interruptions) ...There is no doubt about it. And of I talk about removal of casteism, donot understand that I want to perpetuate the present classification as some: people at thetop and other people at the bottom. So, this is what Jawaharlal Nehru hassaid. (Interruptions)

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Sir, I would like to convey to the hon. PrimeMinister that I am perhaps more knowledgeable about what Panditji has said than himself. (Interruptions)...Sir,the question was very specific. Does the Prime Minister believe in a castelesssociety ornot? I do not want to know what Panditji believed in. What does the PrimeMinister believe in?I appreciate that it took the Prime Minister ten or twelve minutes- I do notknow the exacttime- to think about this. But I wonder whether this timing was worked outastrologically by theCabinet Secretariat or not.. .(Interruptions) .I noticed that piece of paper that the hon.Prime Minister read was handed over to him from behind him, down the line. (Interruptions)

Shrimati Geeta Mukherjee: This quotation is from Mandal Commission'srecommendations itself.He read from that. (Interruptions)

Shri Syed Masudal Hossain: Have you read Mandal Commission Report?

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: I think I have read Mandal Commission Report betterthan you. (Interruptions)

[English ]

Sir, you will notice that the hon. Prime Minister has still not clarified as to whether hebelieves in a casteless society or not.

Shri Vishwanath Pratap Singh: I have clarified fully not only to yoursatisfaction but to thesatisfaction of the House. So, please move ahead. Do not move on like a record on the same lineand get stuck in this.

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: I had accepted this argument of the Prime Minister andwe had continued thedebate. But he, on his own initiative, wanted to clarify it now. So it is h who h as opened theissue and not me. While accepting what the Prime Minister has said we will wait for hisreply but I will also lea the option open. In case, another astrological moment comesduring this debate he is most welcome to get up and offer another answer which mightbe morecomplete than the one he has given so far Can I ask the Prime Minister a specificquestion?... (Interruptions)

Raja Saheb has refused to say whether he believes in caste or not. Can I ask himanother question?... (Interruptions) On many occasions, I believe, RajaSaheb has saidthat he is going to implement this Mandal Commission report in toto and it isonly going tohappen in a number of pieces but it is going to happen in tote. This is what he has sand ona number of occasions.

Let me read one sentence from here and again specifically ask Raja Saheb how hereacts to this... (Interruptions)

[Translation]

Mr Deputy Speaker: Please sit down. Let him express himself. (Interruptions)

[English]

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Mr. Mandal in, para 12.11 is talking about the Hinduconverts to otherreligions to Islam, Christianity and other religions. I read one part of thepara:

"This resulted in the Hindu converts inadvertently acting as Trojan horsesof castesystem amongst highly equalitarian religions such as Islam..."

Does the Prime Minister believe that the converts to Islam are Trojanhorses of Hinduism in Islam? I would like an answer to that.

For these measures to be truly beneficial to the socially and educationallyback ward, they must eliminate those among the socially and educationallybackward who do not need such assistance. This is very important.

A lot has been said in this House about why the Congress Government whenit was in power did not take action on the Mandal Commission report. We havebeen told: Forten years, the report was lying there, nothing happened; what was the Congress Party doing?

An Hon. Member: Sleeping.

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: No, we were not sleeping. Firstly, when implementingany such measure which has major social ramifications it is very important tolay the ground.

Shri Nirmal Kanti Chatterjee: You were digging the ground,

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Let me finish. You will understand it. Even youwill understand it. I will put it in such a simple language even you will not haveany difficulty to understand that.

All right, I will not say it. If you want me to quote Shri IndrajitGupta, he said exactly the same thing. "You need to lay the ground before taking anysuch measure." This Government has not laid the ground. We may have erred on thesoft side thinking we are taking too long to do it. We had a number of Cabinet meetingsand the Prime Minister was the part of the Cabinet then. I don't remember anyvociferouscomment an ah at that time.

Shri Vishwanath Pratap Singh: In laying the ground, you have lost theground.

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Now, I come to the second part of implementing thisReport, why wewere having problems was that we wanted to focus the assistance and help in every area tothose amongst SC/ST -- the weakest and the poorest of the SC/ST -- so that theycould get thebenefit. The third point is that there are many questions about the Mandal CommissionReport itself. There are many contradictions in the Mandal Commission Report and Iwould just like at random to point out some in this House.

Firstly, what is the scientific basis on which this Report is preparedbecause whenever you find out a task like this one expects that the Report that you set hasa very sound base? Let me give you some quotations. I am not going to quote fromoutside oranywhere else. I am only going to read out quotations from the Report itself.

Shri Nirmal Kanti Chatterjee: For misquoting.

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: No misquote. It shows that there are difficultiesin coming to answer. I am not saying that the Report is useless. There are tremendous meritsin the Report but there are problems in the Report also. We must understand that.Let mefirst go to what the Mandal Report says about the Kaka Sahib KalelkarCommission.

In Para 1.9, when the Kaka Sahib Kalelkar Report was presented to theGovernment, the Government said and I quote:

"In view of the above, the Government consider itnecessary "some positive and workable criteria should be devised for thespecificationof the socially and educationally backward classes."

That was the problem with Kaka Sahib Kalelkar's Report. And Mr. Mandal'sfirst task was to sort out this problem. What does Mr. Mandal do? He comments on thisin para 117 where he says: "Though the above failings areserious, yet the real weakness of the Report -- he is referring to the previous KalelkarReport -- lies in its internal contradiction."This is Mr. Mandal speaking about Mr. Kalelkar.Where does he go from there? Mr. Mandal was determined to do much better. In para3.1 herecalls the main failing of the Kalelkar Report and then asserts himself inPara3.2. Inpara 3.1 he said -- it is important to hear this because we are taking a very bigmeasure, weare taking a very big step. I think the House should understand the basis on which that stepwas taken. In para 3. 1, it says:

"One important reason as to why the Central Government could not acceptthe recommendation of the Kaka Sahib Kalelkar Commission was that it had not workedout objective tests and criteria for the proper classification of socially andeducationallybackward classes..."

"...In several petitions filed against reservation orders issued by someState Governments, the Supreme Court and various High Courts have also emphasized theimperative need for an empirical approach to the defining of socially andeducationallybackwardness or identification of other Backward Classes.

In the next para, he talks about his own task.

3.2 'The commission has constantly kept the above requirements in view inplanning the scope of the activities."

That means, he really saw this as one of this major tasks. He set out tosort this out. The objective is very clear and it is laudable. But what happened? Didthe Mandal Commission give solid scientific foundations to the Commission'sfindings? It is abig question. Otherwise, where have all these numbers come from?

Sir, three important sociologists were involved with the MandalCommission, Prof. B.K. Roy Furman, Prof. Srinivas and Prof Jogendra Singh. They have beenthanked in the Preface of the Mandal Commission Report for the work they have done.But reading the newspapers recently, I found that they have declined the honourand they haveclearly said that they were denied any real opportunity to participate in the findings.(Interruptions)

The three important Sociologists that were involved with thisCommission have today said that they have not contributed to this Commission. Then, how didthis Commission get as information? There was a Research and Planning team whichmet for only three days.

I will read out Para t 1.3 where it says:

"To begin with, a Research Planning Team of sociologists met inDelhi from June 12th to 14th, 1979 to draw up a plan of studies and researcheswhich shouldbe undertaken by Backward Classes Commission for determining, in a scientificand objectivemanner the criteria for defining socially and educationally backward classes.

Then he says it is appended on the back...

(Interruptions)

Shri Lokanath Choudhury: What are the contradictions?

[Translation]

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Please listen, otherwise how will you understand.

[English]

Shri Chiranji Lal Sharma (Karnal): Sir, 90 percent of the Members have not read thisReportand they are making comments.

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: I will repeat. The task of this team was solely todraw up a plan of studies- not to do the studies only but to draw up a plan of studies. Theydid not do thestudies This group was never consulted again Then, the Srinivas Panel did meet only forfivedays. So, the Research team met for three days, the Srinivas Panel met for five days.

Para 11.4 "Subsequently, a Panel of Experts led by Prof. M.N. Srinivas,met in Delhi from July 16 to 20th,1979, i.e. for five days, and, a herd detailed deliberations,prepared a complete design of the survey along with a set of schedules, dummytables,instructions, etc."

So, these two Groups in a sense laid down, what the Commission could do. Now, what did the Commission actuallydo with it, because neither of these teams was constituted after this? This meansno specialist, no sociologist was involved with thisreport, apart from those eight days.

Shri Somnath Chatterjee: : One clarification. Now the Leader of theOpposition points out serious infirmities, according to him, and deficiencies inthe report. Why did not his Government reject this report? (Interruptions)

[Translation]

An Hon. Member: Yes, yes.

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: You were also a Minister, now you are saying Yes-yes.

Shri Syed Masudal Hossain: Everyday you used to change the Ministers,that is why you do not remembers. The faces of memory?

(Interruptions)

[English]

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Sir, we are taking a lot of time, with all thesedisturbances. ThisCommittee never met again, and was never consulted again. What I am trying topoint out isnot that this report is worthless, and should be thrown away. Like I said, there is a lotof substance in the report, but to say that you will just accept it like that, withoutdiscussing it or without debating it, is not adequate. It needs more looking into. (Interruptions)

Shri Nirmal Kanti Chatterjee: What did you do for ten years?

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Forget ten years We made a mistake. At least youshould have read this report before making this announcement.

Shri Nirmal Kanti Chatterjee: Now, are you sure about it?

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: The only expert advice that this committee has gotwas from the Technical Advisory Committee headed by a bureaucrat, the Director General of theCentral Statistical Organisation, a professional statistician (Interruptions)not asociologist or anybody who has got any knowledge of the problems in the society and howto rectify them.

Shri Nirmal Kanti Chatterjee: He knows how a statistician functions. (Interruptions)

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: This was the level, the intellectual level at whichthe data that has been received, has been processed. These are the intellectualinputs thathave gone into it, But what of the data; what is the quality of the data that was collected?I am not giving my comment, a subjective comment. I am going to give you quotations from Mr.Mandal himself on what he thinks about the data that he has collected and presented. Firstparagraph 3.15.

[Translation]

Shri Ramdhan: Congress Party may reject it.

[English]

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Paragraph 3.15says, on the basis of cost indexing 1891and 1931:

"On the basis of 1891 and 1931Census data wascollected and analysed with a view togetting a frame for the linkage of traditional occupations by caste."

Now, what are we talking about? We are talk rig about data which is 100 yearsold, or 60 years old. Is that valid today? Can we really interpolate form 1891and1931, to 1990; or does something better needs to be done?

From there, he goes on. The Commission thought it was inadequate; and hehimself said he relied on three methods, because this data collection was notgood enough.So, he himself rejected that at the beginning. The three methods he has takenare (1)questionnaires to various authorities; (2) socio-educational field survey (which we alreadytalked about, the quality of that survey) and then (3) tours and interaction with publicand experts The question is, they got very bad data backing. I quote from paragraph 9.4,onwhat Shri Mandal thought what the Commission thought about the quality of the data comingfrom the State Governments. (Interruptions)

[Translation]

You also see what are the problems.

[ Translation]

Shri Madan Lal Khurana: Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, you had told that theMandal Commission Report will be discussed at 7.00 p.m. and after that legislativebusiness will be taken up.If the leader of opposition party will continue to quote like this how the other subjectscan be taken up. You should follow the schedule. (Interruptions)

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: If you disturb less it can more fast. (Interruptions)

[English]

I am reading from para 9.4, where Shri Mandal is commenting on the quality of datahe gotfrom the State Governments. 3.4:

"It was rather disappointing to see that hardly anyState was able to gave the desired information".

And then, he goes on with this and again:

"Only one or two States, of them furnished the necessary details. Further, several Statesdid not choose to respond even to some simple and straight-forward questions on importantpolicy issues ."

So, from the States he has got almost no data. Then he goes to what hehas got from the general public, which is in 10.47 and t 0.48.(Interruptions) Para 10.47says, " Genenally speaking... " This is very important, you must listen to it. (Interruptions)

[Translation]

I am serious and you are taking it lightly (Interruptions) That is your problem butit is also important because this is dividing our society. (Interruptions)

[English]

Please listen to para 10.47. "Generallyspeaking...." I would like you to be quietbecause these two paragraphs, I think are very important. "Generally speaking... (Interruptions)

Mr Speaker: May I request the hon. Members to please help us tocomplete the debate? I would like to bring to your notice that the Hon. Prime Minister isalso, I am told, going to reply.

Shri Vishwanath Pratap Singh: I would, if I have time.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Well, this is a veryimportant discussion. Everybody is interested in knowing the point of view ofthe Opposition Party and the Leader of the Opposition, the biggest party who has beenthe former Prime Minister, speaking. It wouldbe in the interests of the House and the people outside to hear him. And the hon. PrimeMinister is here He is also going to reply and it would be necessary that thehon PrimeMinister's speech and that of the hon Leader of the Opposition should be heard withattention. If you have any points of view if you want to make thosepoints of view, youcan make them. But may I seek your cooperation in seeing that a very conducive atones phoneis maintained in the House? (Interrutions)

Mr Deputy Speaker: Please sit down.

Shri Nirmal Kanti Chatterjee: At least for some time, why do you not take itseriously?

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Para 10.47says,

"Generally speaking, it was seen that the views of every individual...

This is the response of individuals.

"...the views of every individual group and association were conditioned by their own class interestsand the question of giving concessions to OBCs was surcharged with emotion"

That means, the input that he has got from individuals and associations has been verybiased by the people who presented
them. He then goes on to say:

"It was but natural that most of the respondents appearing before the Commission belongedto the OBC."

That means, the inputs that he has got are not reliable as a cross section ofsociety.

Coming back to the socio-educational survey, he says:

"The results are exhaustively listed and reported in Chapter 11. But these surveys, thevillage surveys were only 810."

Only 810 villages out of over 5 lakh villages were surveyed as a sample. Now this couldhave been valid if he was to check the validity of a report. To do such a small sampling checkis a valid step when you are checking the validity of a report. But is it a valid step onwhich to base a complete report like this?

It is not only that. The Experts panel recommendation of the survey that was tobe done wasunilaterally rejected and changed, arbitrarily changed by the commission. He says thisinpara 11.10 and11.15. (Interruptions)

An Hon. Member: Will he read the whole report?... ( interruptions)

Shri Nirmal Kanti Chatterjee: They do not understand that youare readingit for the finst time...

(Interruptions)

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Sir, para 11.10 deals with the socio-educationalstudies that was done. It says:

"Experts panel had recommended "one per cent purposive sampleof villages at the district level to be able to identify a vast majority of backward classes

This was a specialist panel which sat only for a few days. Theyrecommended one percent sample. It further says:

"At a subsequent meeting of Technical AdvisoryCommittee presidedover by the Director-General of the Central Statistics Organisation...This formula was changed."

It says:

"... it was decided that for our purpose a sample of one per centof thecountry's population comprising 65 lakh persons may be too large..."

It says that they went on to arbitrarily selecttwo villages and one urban block from each district. That means, what the experts and sociologistshad suggested was randomly changed and a different parameter was put in. Now how canwe rely on theresults of such a survey?

Sir, the survey was conducted by junior Government officials withoutany supervision or checking or validation by any high ranking or knownsociologist. This is thebasis of the data we have got.

The Mandal Commission in fact itself confesses In para 11.27, whichsays:

"In the end, it may be emphasized that the survey has nopretensions to being a piece of academic research. It has been conducted by the administrative machinery ofthe Government...All these factors obviously militate against the requirements of atechnically sophisticated and academically satisfying operation."

He himself has said that this operations is not scientific, is not technicallysophisticated and it is not even academically satisfying. This is the Commissionspeaking itself on its own data collection. What has then Mandal gone onto say on Chapter3.9? One of the problems was that when the Commission itself wanted to go to the villages andsee the realities, while the survey covered 810 villages, the Commission itselfonly visited37 villages. I am sure, each one of us sitting in this House, has visited 100times morevillages than the Commission had visited. So the real data that the Commission has got isfrom the 37 villages out of 5.5 Iakh villages What is the basis of this data? Is thisadequate data to draw such conclusions from?

In Chapter 10 the Commission is unable to quote any expert orany academic opinion The point is that the Commission has not been scientific ortechnicallycorrect. The Commission has been impressionistic and non -scientific.

Then there is a question of the minority religions. How have theybeen included in this? (Interruptions) If you are not interested in minorities, sayso; otherwise keep quiet. What does he say about minorities ? He says in para 12.1:

'The population of Hindu OBCs could be derived by subtractingfrom the total populationof Hindus, the population of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and that ofthe forward Hindu castes and communities and it worked out to 52%

First, there is a problem even here. The problem is that many castes thatare listed in his list are forward castes and are Scheduled Castes. That means,52 percentas calculated by Mr. Mandal and his Commission includes Scheduled Castes and forward castes.The Chief Minister of Orissa has said that lots of Scheduled Castes were included.

Shri Indrajit Gupta: Only one Sahu.

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: I was told 14 or16. I have not checked that figuremyself. So I am not quoting that. I am just saying that many are included.

I know for a fact that Brahmins are included, Reddys are included,Vakkaligas are included, Kammas are included, Lingayats are included, Gounders areincluded, Chetiyars are included. Are these backward castes? Do they need thehelp? This ishow 52 percent has been derived. So there is even a question of 52. Then hearbitrarilytakes this figure of 52 and applies it to the minorities. He says that 52percent ofHindus are OBCs, then 52 percent of Muslims will be OBCs, 52 percent of Christians will beOBCs, 52 percent of Sikhs will be OBCs and 52 percent of everybody will be OBCs.Where isthe logic in this? I will read this out. But the same approach could not be adoptedin respect of non-Hindu OBCs Assuming that roughly the proportion of OBC amongst non-Hinduswas of the same order as amongst the Hindu population of non OBCs, it was also taken as 52percent. What is the basis of this? Do each one of us sitting in this House not know thatthe Muslim community as a whole is much more backward than the Hindu community? Theyare educationally backward. they are socially backward. Yet we apply the same formula on theMuslims. How can 'hat be done? How can we accept that? It must be changed.

Then in calculating OBCs for Hindus he has not included the ScheduledCastes and rightly so. But when you calculated OBCs for Christians, Muslims, Sikhs,etc. surely the Scheduled Castes percentage should have been included in that.Because theChristian Scheduled Caste, the converted scheduled caste into Christian, the convertedscheduled caste into Muslim, and into other religions do not get the benefit of anything. Heshould also be there. He is also backward ..(Interruptions) ...I would like to askthe Government, do they really believe that this formula of fifty percent Hindubackwards can be applied to fifty to fifty two percent for Muslim backwards. Ireally wantto know. Do you believe that only half the Muslim population is backward, socially andeconomically? I challenge you on that. I think we demand an answer for that...(Interruptions)

[Translation]

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Your members are saying that Muslims are backwardsbut they are notincluded in your list.

...Ramdhan ji, it is 7.45 now, it could have finished by time(Interruptions)

Minister of State in the ministry ofParliamentary Affairs and Ministry of Tourism, Shri Satya Pal Malik: Youplease wind up. We will inform you.

[English]

Shri Nani Bhattacharya (Berhampore): Sir, I have a point of order.Mr. Gandhi ismisleading the House and let me quote from the Report itself that he is giving awronginformation to the House regarding the Report of the Mandal Commission. MandalCommission clearly states that 52 per cent of the total population of India is constitutedof backwardclass of which there are both Hindus and non-Hindus.

Mr Deputy Speaker: This is not a point of order.

(Interruptions)

[Translation]

Shri Ram Naik: (Bombay North): Sir, my pointof order is that in thebeginning of this discussion, you had said that it would be over by 7.00 p.m. and next termwould be taken up thereafter. We can understand that you have given some time, butmy point of order is we are not going according to the programme fixed fortoday; we canunderstand if somebody quotes one or two paragraphs from the report but.

[English]

The Leader of the Opposition can quote a para or two from the Report. But, he is readingparagraphs after paragraphs. We have read the Report. We would like to know his comments.It appears to be filibustering tactics. We must also take care of the time. The debate wastobe completed by 7 o'clock. More than forty minutes have exceeded. Kindly take care of thetime.

Shri Anil Basu (Arambagh): Now, herealised the mistake he committed earlier.

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Sir, the fact of the makeris that minorities have not got their just due. The hon. Member, the Chairman of the SCST Commissionhas said categorically that all minorities have been counted as backwards. I do notthink that isfactual according to what the to paper that was placed on the Table of this House...(Interruptions) The fact of the matter is that by playing games [on] thisreservation, they have deliberately blocked the minorities from getting anybenefit. The Prime Minister should answer how he is going to help the sociallyand educationally backward minority communities.

The next very important point is: On what basis has the MandalCommission defined caste in its definition? How has the Mandal Commission reinterpreted theConstitution and changed backward classes to backward caste? In par 10.4... (Interruptions)

[Translation]

Please listen. It is worth listening (Interruptions) It will definitely hurt you(Interruptions)

[English]

Sir, this is Chapter-X. Evidence by the Public para 10.4 -

"Criteria for defining backwardness: Nearly 78 per cent of the respondents were of the view that caste should be accepted as a criterion. However, 28 per cent favoured the acceptance ofcaste as the sole criterion."

Only 28 per cent of the respondents favoured caste as the solecriterion. 78 percent said that caste can be one of the criteria, but not the solecriterion. And then he himself goes on to say:

"Nearly 70 percent were in favour ofevolving multiple criteria based on social status political influences, educational attainments, economic level, employment status. etc. Others favoured the including of place of habitation and financial position."

I would like to link this to an earlier quotationthat I made, where the Commission has said that most of the respondents wereOBCs. So, most of therespondents who were 0BCs.have said that they do not want caste as the single definer... (interruptions)

An Hon Member: We are glad that after so many years you are readingthe Commission's Report.

(Interruptions)

[Translation]

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: At least listen to me.

[English]

Sir, on what basis then has this Government and theMandal Commission accepted caste asthe sole definer?

Then again, there has been a methodology incollecting information. I won't go into thequotations because obviously they are going over their heads now. But again the same thing.He has used four sources. One in himself. He has quoted the socio-educational fieldsurvey What was the socio-educational field survey? Where was the scientificbasis for this? He himself has described. His second item is the Census Report1961. What has the Census Report given us? He himself says: "Census Report, particularly forthe identification ofprimitive tribes, aboriginal tribes, forest tribes and indigenous tribes".The third ishis personal knowledge after visiting 37 villages. Thirty-seven villages and his personalknowledge give us the information. The fourth source is list of OBCs as prepared by variousStates. I think it is important that I read out what Mandal himself says about the listof OBCs. prepared by other States. (Interruptions)

[Translation]

Prof. Vijay Kumar Malhotra: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, Congressmenshould not go out of theHouse, they should sit in the House and listen to the Prime Minister. Please takeup Delhistatehood Bill and get assurance from them that they would not leave the House. (Interruptions)

[English ]

Shri Vishwanath Pratap Singh: Sir, please protect us from the atrocitywhich is being madethrough the Mandal Commission Report which he is reading out. (Interruptions)

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Let me ask you a specific questionYou must haveread at least the Recommendations chapter, if not anything else. (Interruptions) Then, I ask you specific questions on the Recommendations. (Interruptions) Sir, a very important question which, I think, the Leftist party must listen to. Sir, theCommission hasrecommended specifically electorates based on caste. The Commission hasrecommended in para13.37.4 which says:

"With a view to giving betterrepresentation...(Interruptions) Don't take these thingslightly.(Interruptions)

[Transiation]

Why are you dividing this country?

[English]

Mr Deputy Speaker: Please sit down. This is an important topic whichwe are discussing.

[Transiation]

(Interruptions)

Mr Deputy Speaker: I would like to tell you that this is an important issue,like HinduCode Bill. We have been discussing it for the last 5-6 hours.... (Interruptions)...

[English ]

Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr. Kamal Nath, please take your seat. You will notspeak.

(Interruptions)

Mr Deputy Speaker: There is no point of order.

Shri Indrajit Gupta: There should be some time limit. What is this?

(Interruptions)

Mr Deputy Speaker: If there is adiscussion on an important matter likeHindu Code Bill,nobody should have any objection to it and if it is necessary to consult the ParliamentaryAffairs Minister regarding the solution of this problem, we will think over it. Buttheleader of the largest opposition party is speaking on some important issue and thatissue relates to the caste based electorate system and particularly the issuewhich MahatmaGandhi had opposed, and if a discussion is going on such an important issue, would you notlike to listen to him only because of the paucity of time?... (Interruptions) ...

[English]

Mr Deputy Speaker: In my authority I will give all of you time to speak onthis if youwant. But if they are important topics and if they are important for the entire country, Isay, Please don't do this thing. You have been cooperating, I expect you to cooperate nowalso.

(Interruptions)

[Translation]

Prof. Vijay Kumar Malhotra: We are not objecting, but the time should be fixed, let us sit up tothe midnight or the whole night. After that, you please take up Prasar Bharati Bill and DelhiBill.

Shri Harin Pathank (Ahmedabad): You are reading the whole book.

Mr Deputy Speaker: It is not a book... (Interruptions) ...We are not sitting here only for Zero Hour.

[English]

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Sir, I feel this issue is an extremely important issue.I could cut short, but I don't think that would-be doing justice to this. I would requestthe Government not to curtail the time on this issue. Let us speak everything thatneeds to be said on thisissue. If you want to continue tomorrow, we are willing to continue tomorrow. (Interruptions) We will sit. Up to that, we will extend the House.

Mr Deputy Speaker: I don't think it would be possible to discuss thismatter tomorrow. Please continue now. You may take time. I am going to allow thePrime Minister also to speak. I would request all of you to be in the House. If the matteris important--for this side it is important and for that side also it is important-- my requestis that the Leader of the Opposition should have as much time as he wants andthe Leader ofthe House should have as much time as he wants.

(Interruptions)

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Sir, let me ask a specificquestion Paragraph 13.37(4) of the Report says:

"With a view to giving better representation to certain backward sections of OBCs, like the Gaddis in Himachal Pradesh, Neo Buddhists in Maharashtra, Fishermen in the coastal areas Gujjars in J&K., it is recommended thatareas of their concentration may be carved out into separate constituencies at the time of delimitation."

Does the Government subscribe to the Mandal Commission view thatpolitical consttuencies should be carved out on the caste basis? Are we goingback to the RoundTable Conference for having separate electorates? That was designed to break our county,Sir, when the Prime Minister says that he accepts this Report in toto.

And I am reading the recommendations at the end of theReport, not somewhere else.

20.00 hrs

Does the Prime Minister accept this? It is a very serious question and on this question Ido not think either the BJPor the Left parties can avoid an answer. They can affordto keep quiet.I do not mean politically because I know what is inside you and what you feel. I know thepatriotism that is there. Can you stand by idly and allow this gentleman sitting here to havecaste based electorates as Mr. Mandal recommends? There has been a promise thatthe report willbe implemented in toto. Let the PrimeMinister get up and say that he will notimplement thereport in toto. The point is, this report has not been gone into in detail by thisGovernment. because if they have read this, they would have known what to avoid. Even ifthey have not read and known what to avoid, at least the bureaucracy would havemade it known to them But they did not even given them that chance.

Sir, I am going back to the question of using caste as the sole identifier I willjust readfrom the what the public opinion was, where 70 per cent of the OBCs have saidthat casteshould not be the only identifier. Now, we go to what 10 States have said,Assam, AndhraPradesh, Bihar. Gujarat, Karnataka, Kerala, Maharashtra, Punjab, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh.I do not remember as to who was the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh at that time.

[Tnanslation]

An Hon. Member: It must have been the Chief Minister belonging to yourparty.

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Yes, definitely. But a number of our persons havegone over there.

[English]

All these States have recommended caste as one of the criteria for identifying backwardness andnot as the sole criterion. Then three States and two Union Territories -- Delhi,Dadra Nagar Haveli, Haryana, Himachat Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh -- havesaid that casteshould not be made as the criterion for backwardness. Then, seven States -- Bihar,Gujarat,Himathal Pradesh, Kerala, Punjab, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh -- have said"no income status as one of the significant tests". Then, one State and two UnionTerritories -- Haryana, Delhiand Dadra Nagar Haveli -- have desired that economic factor to be the soledeterminant of backwardness. Now, the individuals who responded, whointerlocuted with the Commission, the States who gave their reports, everybodyhad said that caste should not be the sole identifier. Then the Commission goesand has the caste as the sole identifier. Why arewe sitting here accepting caste as the sole identifier? Do we not have a responsibilityover and above what is written in this book? Do we not have to react? Is it not ourresponsibility sitting in this House to see that the nation is not divided,because somebodymight have made a slip-up? Why are we here? Otherwise, they could sit here andsuch reports could be mandatory. (Interruptions)

Sir in paragraph 9.16 on census data, he asked for information fromvarious States and he says:

"This section sought to collect information on variousdemographic aspects of Other Backward Classes, denotified tribes, advanced castes andto compare lists of Other Backward Classes prepared by Kaka Kalelkar Commissionwith thosenotified by various State Governments."

Then, the Commission says that the information supplied was veryincomplete. He goes on from these to say -- No State Government could furnishfigures regardingthe level of literacy and education among OBCs. Then, he goes on from there to say, No StateGovernment could furnish any precise information on this point. What sort of information isthis report based on? What is the substance of this?

And then, he himself goes on to say that the above information is too"sketchy and scrappy" -- these are his words -- to say -- for any meaningful inferencewhich maybe valid for the country as a whole.

(Interruptions)

After he himself accepts that the basis for his date is totallynon-scientific, nontechnical and the basis is really so diffuse that no substantial data hascome, he tries to cover all this in a veneer of scientific quality. Where do we getthe figures after getting inputs like that? How do we get percentages like 4.69-- two decimal places -- 10.63, 24. 04, 12.55? This is just a veneer which has nosubstance. We have to havemuch more to debate on this. How can we just accept this as a fact and just bull-doze itthrough the nation? We have to be much more responsible than that. We may have our politicalcompulsions. You have yours: we might have ours... (Interruptions)

Dr Biplab Dasgupta: (Calcutta South): The point I am making is, Iaccept that the Leaderof the Opposition should be given sufficient time to make his arguments. But my point is, heis repeating too much. (Interruptions)

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: To switch over from "class"as the definition to"caste" as the definition, the Commission quotes three Supreme Court judgements. But inthe very report itself, there are at least three more Supreme Court judgements which saythat you cannot define "class" only on the basis of "castes"In para 7.15,pare 7.24, para 7.40 -- I would not read them up to the House. But in these three pares, indetail, the Commission itself says that "caste" cannot be the only factor. TheSupreme Courtitself says that "caste" cannot be the only factor and if it is so, it will bestruck down. But here we are where "caste" is taken as the only factor. We arehappily sitting over here -- representatives of 500of us. We are happily saying that'Yes caste can be a factor and caste must be the only factor. It is incredible thatthe Government has no comment at all on this report other than saying "We willimplement it in toto"

Why has the Government not commented on all thesepoints that I have raised?

Why has the Government not thought about the lack of scientific input inthe data, about the lack of scientific analysis of that data because there wereno sociologists involved?

Why has the Government not spoken about the heavily conditioned inputsthat the Commission has got?

Why has the Government not commented on the speed andhurry with which thereport was completed?

(Interruptions)

[Translation]

One thing is worth reading. Okay, if you are annoyed, I would not read it out.

[English]

In three paragraphs in the Preface, the Commission itself has said that theyhave done the whole thing in a tremendous rush and hurry and, in that rush andhurry, there was Parliament election and there were the Assembly elections. So,they were not able to work properly during that period because the bureaucracy,the administration, and every one was involved in the election. So, in fact,although the time looked like a substantial time, the actual time spent is afraction of that time. It is written here in the Preface. This is the basis onwhich the report has been compiled.

As I said at the beginning, the Congress is forall types of action including reservation to help socially andeconomically backward classes. I went beyond that. I said in general everythingthat has been recommended by the Mandal Commission and by the Kaka SahebKalelkar Commission, should be implemented but we have serious problems withcertain definitions.

We have problems if the weakest amongst theclasses are not helped and if the weakest among the minority religions are nothelped.

We have problems if caste is defined to enshrinecasteism in our country.

We have problems if casteism is going to be madea factor for parliamentary and Assembly Constituencies.

The Congress cannot stand by and watch thisnation being divided for the political convenience of one individual.

[Translation]

Shri Madan Lal Khurana: What was in your manifesto?

[English]

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: I would also like to mention that the MandalCommission has specially mentioned Indiraji and thanked her. Because many of our friends opposite seem to think that during that period, the Congress did nothelp the Commission, here I would like to read out please "It may bementioned that although this Commission..."

[Translation]

Shri Ram Dhan: This Govt had set up Mandal Commission.

(Interruptions )

[English ]

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Sir, this from the letter that Shri Mandal wrote tothe President at the covering loner. He has stated: "It may be mentionedthat although this Commission was appointed by previous Janata Government...

(Interruptions )

[Translation]

Mr Deputy Speaker: Ram Dhanji, now let it be over. It would be better ifboth of you outside to discuss the matter.

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: The best is that theydo not discuss it at all.

Mr Deputy Speaker: That is best. (Interruptions )

[English]

Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr. Rakesh, please sit down.

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Sir, Shri S.P. Mandal has said:

"It may be mentioned that although this Commission was appointed by previous Janata Government, Shrimati Indira Gandhi's Government not only gave two extensions but extended all support and cooperation in the discharge of our work...

Then, he goes beyond that to say:

"This clearly shows her devotion and commitment to the cause of the suppressed depressed and the oppressed..."

He also mentioned that Indiraji gave thevaledictory Address to the Commission. But unfortunately what she said in thevaledictory address seems to have got missed. I will just read out threesentences from here (because the book looks frightening.)

I quote:

"This question of the backward classes is important not only for those who belong to those classes or castes or to the backward region, it is a national question. Article 46, Article 15(4) and Article 16(4) -- these provisions reflect the nation's understanding from the very beginning of the need for special treatment in favour such classes. Such treatment is not intended to create new disparities. It is to redress existing injustices. The aim is to overcome historical and geographical handicaps, not to create new vested interests. The categorization of backward classes has always been difficult. I should like only to point out that we shall have to devise a formula which commands wide public acceptance besides strengthening our national fabric..."

Don't forget our national fabric... (Interruptions) Before dividing on the action on a report which leaves so manyquestions...we may agree with many things, but there are things we disagreewith, it would have been prudent on the part of the Government if it had calledat least those friendly parties-- we would have liked if they had called usalso. At least if they had called their friendly parties and had a thoroughdiscussion, I am sure that such lacunas would have been closed. But,unfortunately, without thinking about it, without even perhaps looking at thereport, reading the report, you looked only at your manifesto which has 10 wordsabout it and dived into it. Why did the Government not go into all these thingsmuch more seriously? Was the unity and integrity of the nation not important tothis Government? Is it not important for you that children are getting killed inthe street? Is it not important that caste violence is breaking out all over thecountry?

Out of the report, out of a holistic picture that Mr Mandal has put, I havepicked up lots of holes in how he has come to the conclusion. But in hisconclusion, there are lots of things which are prudent, should be done. Thequestion is have you done what Mr. Mandal wanted you to do? Have you taken hisholistic picture? Or have you taken just one part of that for politicalconvenience? Does Mr. Mandal in his Report consider any one part of hisrecommendations more important than the other? Has he given a priority to it? Onwhat basis have you given a priority to it? In fact, if I can quote from fromMr. Mandal himself on what he thinks about his recommendations, he says thatreservations in Government employment -- which is the only thing that you havedone -- the reservations in Government employment and educational institutionsas also all possible financial assistance are needed He has listed three typesof assistance out of which you have done only one. All this question will remaina mere palliative.

[Translation]

Listen, what have you not done.

[English]

All this will remain palliative unless the problem of backwardness istackled at its root. And then he goes on at great length on what should be done.

But what did you do? You made it phase one, phasetwo phase three totally arbitrarily. You have not even put a time limit on thephases...

(Interruptions)

Shri Vishwanath Pratap Singh: Will you putsome time limit to the speech?

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: No, I will not. Because the manner in which you haveimplemented the Mandal Commission, to me, it is breaking up my country. Break-upof my country may not be important to you. (Interruptions)

Shri Nathu Singh (Dausa): This is not yourcountry. This is our country.

[Translation]

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: If you raise your voice against it. I will appreciate,but you are lending you support to him and thus dividing the country. Pleasespeak a bit loud. I know how you got trapped. But as you are in the the gripnow, you can neither free yourself nor move ahead. But at least, you can advisehim privately not to take this wrong step. (Interruptions )

[English]

The Prime Minister should explain on what basishe has broken the holistic view of the Mandal Commission's Report. On whatbasis, he has divided this Report into sections, into phases. And what timeframe he is going to complete these phases. And most important is that, he isdividing into these one by one without thinking through anything. I appreciatethat this is an issue-based Government. But at least think of the next issuewhich will come up 24 hours later. You announced reservations-- 27 per cent.Suddenly, you piloted that another five per cent, ten percent more must bethere. Now we know that you have promised to certain minority Members of yoursthat you will have a special sector for minorities. You have promised somethingto the ex-servicemen. You have promised something for somebody else. Now beforeyou take a decision, surely, the full picture should be before you. I would begto tell you that the issue is, reservations, and complete assistance for allsocially educationally backward. The issue is not how to keep one section ofyour party at bay. This is what you must make. If you start thinking of theissue like this, it will be more holistic attitude that you take.

What do we need? We need a complete picture of what the Government wants to do.Do you want reservations? For how many sections do you want reservations? Arereservations going to be proportional to the population as Mr. Mandal hasrecommended? He has said 52% reservation must be for the backward classbecause 52% are backward. But because the Supreme Court has said 50% is thelimit, he has recommended 27%. But you have said 50% limit does not exist, youhave said you will amend the Constitution, you have said you will bring in lawsto change that limit, you have brought in, suggested reservation to break thatlimit even when your own Law Minister has said that it may not be upheld incourt. At the all party meeting it was the Law Minister who said that over 50%may not be upheld, he can only guarantee below 50%.

If we break the 50% barrier, then the MandalCommissions' recommendation of 27% which is linked or limited by the 50% barrierset by the Supreme Court is not limited any more. Why will you not give the OBCs52% if you can cross 50%? Why will you not take the reservation to 22-1/2% plus52%? On what rationale? Will it be purely arbitrary like you have taken steps sofar or will there be a logic in limiting the reservation to 27%?

(Interruptions)

Let him propose it, I will answer it. But hear methrough on this one point first. (Interruptions )

Mr Deputy Speaker: This will not form partof the record.

[Interruptions]

[Translation]

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: If I am wrong. I take my words back.

[English]

Mr Deputy Speaker: He has withdrawn it and it is not going on recordalso.

(Interruptions )

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Sir, I am on avery serious point, please listen to it. An issue like reservation cannot betreated in a piecemeal manner. We must look at the whole picture. You must see,the Government must decide how many sections must get reservation, whether thosesections are going to be part of the backward, the SEBCs or whether thoseSections are going to be apart from SEBCs. We must know clearly whatproportion of seats is going to be kept open. Otherwise we will not know whatthe final picture is going to become.

We would like the Government to present a WhitePaper to this House, a White Paper which will suggest, first, the Government'sattitude towards the many incongruities in this report and how to correct them.Secondly, how the implementation is to be done and how the recommendations areto be implemented. Third, what is the total picture of reservations that theywant and what proportion are they willing to leave open? (Interruptions )This is also important so that the complete picture is in front of the nationwhen such a decision can be taken. We will participate fully in any such debateand I can assure you that such a national dialogue will reduce the tension thatis taking place right across the country today.

Sir, that brings me to why all this is happening.If I can quote from an article in the 'Independent' , it says, justfive months ago...",

(Interruptions )

[Translation]

Please listen, sometimes good things appear in Newspapers too.

[English]

Sir, this Newspaper is dated the First of September 1990. It is six days oldonly. Five months ago when some Editors had warned him-- 'him' is the 'PrimeMinister' of the direct consequences of the implementation of the MandalCommission Report, in the form of caste wars, Shri V.P. Singh had said that theReport was purely a political strategy and that he was not foolish. This is,Shri V.P. Singh talking to Editors five months ago.

Now, what has happened in those five months?Nothing happened for a couple of months! Nothing very much happened for a coupleof months. But then suddenly all sorts of things have been happening,:

(Interruptions )

Mr Deputy Speaker: That is not going onrecord.

(Interruptions )

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: If I may quote from theNewspaper, in the last sentence, he says, "it was purely a politicalstrategy". He had to use that political strategy. And in the last part ofthe sentence, he says, "he was not foolish." Perhaps, it got cancelledby implementing the first part of that sentence. Why was this thing brought inin such a rush? I do not know because we are not privy to certain things. But, Ibelieve that the implementation of the Mandal Commission Report was not evenpart of the Cabinet Agenda on the day it was brought in. It was put on the Tableand it was passed in hurry, because something was happening outside, that neededthis thing to be done. What was happening outside? There was a rally takingplace in Delhi. (Interruptions ) Why was it necessary to rush into thisReport? Because if that rally got the support of certain Chief Ministers, then,there would be tremendous problems inside this House. So, to protect himselfagainst internal party wranglings-- and I charge you with this--you have takenthe country to the edge of caste wars. (Interruptions)

Sir, Raja Sahib's policies are not very differentfrom what the Britishers were doing. It was the British who tried to divide ourcountry on caste and religion and today it is the Raja Sahib, sitting there, whois trying to divide our country on caste and religion. (Interruptions) Alreadyyou are taking this country towards religions electorates; first you aredividing into reservation in jobs. This Government is taking this country in thedirection...

[Translation ]

Shri Vishwanath Pratap Singh: What was your Government doing in AndhraPradesh. Now you are delivering such a long speech.

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: I will reply only whenthe you deliver your speech ...(Interruptions) .. I am am merelyreminding my colleagues belonging to leftist parties that Raja Sahib issitting...

(Interruptions)...

Shri Shopat Singh Makkasar: Raja Sahib waswith you earlier. Why it is only now that he is spoilt... (Interruptions)...

[English]

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Sir, even at this late hour, there is time to pullthe country back from this caste division. Even at this point of time, you cancorrect this path that you have taken. And I wish that you will look at thesepoints which I have raised seriously. Sir, the Raja Sahib's statement donot commend wide acceptance in the country. They have weakened our nationalfabric and to add to that, the Central Government, the Ministers havedeliberately provoked the caste confrontation and caste wars...(Interruptions)...Evenafter the Minister have provoked wars... (Interruptions)

[Translation]

Shri Ram Vilas Paswan: It is wrong. 'When a big tree falls the earthshakes'. This is what the Prime Minister had said. What happened whenHindu-Sikh riots took place? When a big tree falls, the ground beneath shakes.

[English]

It was the version of Mr. Rajiv Gandhi, the then Prime Minister of India.

[Translation]

The country was destroyed. When a big tree falls the leaves also fall.. (Interruptions)...

Shri Somnath Chatterjee: Paswan, you areright. Let him conclude...(Interruptions) ...

[English]

Shri Rajiv Gandhi: Ministers are provoking caste wars and the Raja Sahibis quiet. Why is he not speaking now? Why is he not telling his Ministersto control themselves? If he cannot do this, is he part of the provocation thatis killing people outside? Sir, socially and socially and educationally backwardclasses need all the help they can get including reservation and the Congresswill support you in that. We would like that to be targeted to the poorest andthe weakest in the socially and educationally backward classes this the CongressParty has outlined in the Working Committee's Resolution on the30th August thisyear.

I would like to appeal to this House, let us nothave one man's obstinacy holding India to hostage, let that man's obstinacy notlead to children getting killed, our children, Indian children getting killed onthe streets. Let that man's obstinacy not lead to caste war...(Interruptions)Violence must end. I appeal to the whole House, I appeal to the patriotismand patriotic feelings of every member in the House not to remain idle,not to remain quiet and save this nation from the obstinacy of one person. Thankyou.

[V.P. Singh's reply to Rajiv Gandhi's speechon the same day would be carried on the website next week.]

Show comments

Business

Sports

Travel

Others

'Breaking Up My Country'

Tags