A Quarrel In The House

In fact, hopes that the 81st Constitution Amendment Bill would be introduced in Parliament by March 8 were dashed even before the Budget session started. Speaker P.A. Sangma frankly told women's groups that while all political parties officially supported the bill, individual members had informed him they would absent themselves if it was put to vote. At an earlier meeting, Prime Minister H.D. Deve Gowda, too, had pleaded helplessness.

A group of young MPs had decided before the session that even if party presidents kept their word to women's groups and issued three-line whips, a third of the members from each party would absent themselves, thus checkmating any attempt by the party chiefs to sack them. "It is obvious that the Prime Minister is not prepared to risk his Government in order to get the bill passed," said a member of the National Commission for Women (NCW).

Most women activists do not question Gowda's sincerity; after all, his prestige is at stake since he had personally announced his intention to table the bill in Parliament. On the other hand, he cannot afford to alienate his party members, the major

ity of whom are (privately) dead set against it. "He is caught between a rock and a hard place," observed MP Renuka Chowdhry.

In an effort at compromise, discussions on the Bill have now been reduced to endless rounds of bargaining. ("As if we were arguing over the price of vegetables," said an activist.) Around new year, the Government informally offered to scale the quantum of reserved seats for women down to 15 per cent, instead of 33 per cent. On February 24, women MPs and women's groups met at Parliament House annexe to discuss the offer. It was unequivocally rejected. "We will not compromise. We are not begging, we are demanding our due. In fact, it is less than our due, we should get 50 per cent," warned NCW Chairperson Mohini Giri.

Now, according to a Cabinet minister, the Government is prepared to offer up to 25 per cent seats for women, but no more. This has set the cat among the pigeons, because a section of women MPs and activists are in favour of accepting the offer, while others are firmly against it. "The issue is not the number of women in Parliament. There is no sanctity in the figure 33 per cent. We should take it as an entry point," said Chowdhry, who is in favour of a compromise. Mahila Congress chief Girija Vyas is also prepared to consider the offer favourably but says: "This should be communicated to us officially. So far, apart from a brief and inconclusive meeting with Geeta Mukherjee, there has been no discussion." There are differences even within the NCW. While member Padma Seth says the women's lobby should stick to 33 per cent, another member, Kokila Vyas, feels there is scope for compromise. Tensions within the lobby surfaced during the session, when women activists sent out a circular requesting women MPs to boycott the Budget session.

"This only goes to show that NGOs have no clue as to what it means to be in Parliament. It would be counterproductive to boycott when burning issues like Uttar Pradesh are being debated in the House," said an MP. As it is, women MPs are not taken seriously and boycotting would be seen as immature, she added.

Last week, when some women activists chained themselves to the gates of Parliament, Chandra Kala Pandey was the only woman MP to lend them support (she later stood bail for them). Given the differences, the meeting of women MPs and NGOs to be held on March 13 is likely to be stormy.

To the irritation of NGOs and MPs alike, new foes of the bill keep popping up from unexpected quarters. In the monsoon session, it was BJP MP Uma Bharati who threw a spanner in the works by demanding that the bill make separate provision for OBCs. Seizing on the argument with obvious relief, male members of both Houses managed to postpone the bill. Too late, Bharati clarified that she had not intended her demand to be used as a delaying tactic.

In the winter session, BJP MP Gangacharan Rajput mobilised more than 60 OBC MPs against the bill. At the same time, Gowda gave in to pressure from the male lobby and referred the bill to a joint select committee headed by CPI(M) MP Geeta Mukherjee. Although the committee gave a favourable report, the bill was not taken up. Reportedly ticked off by the BJP high command, Rajput subsided, but the damage had been done.

During the Budget session, an MP from Bihar, Bhagwati Devi, opposed the bill on the grounds that it did not make provision for Dalits. At a time when OBC MPs were in a majority, the bill was a conspiracy by Bra-hmins to recapture at least 33 per cent seats in the House, she maintained. "She really does not understand the absurdity of that argument. She has obviously been proppedup by somebody," said a colleague. In any case, women MPs point out, it is for party presidents to decide whether tickets should be given to Brahmin or OBC women.

Giri is confident that enough pressure can be built up to ensure that the bill is tabled in the Budget session. "We are trying our level best to persuade all parties to toe the line. Most likely, the bill will come in this session itself," Information and Broadcasting Minister C.M. Ibrahim said this fortnight, following the statement up with the promise of reserving jobs for women.

But Mahila Dakshita Samiti chief Pramila Dandavate is exasperated with "the so-called backwards in my party (Janata Dal) who are not willing to share power at home, forget about Parliament". She suggests a level playing field: "We should reserve one-third of the seats for women, another one-third for men and keep the remaining open". But for now, most activists would be content with having seats reserved for women.