At home in the House
- Media running 'false' news to tarnish Vasundhara Raje's image: CM office
- NIA says no 'issuance of inappropriate briefing by any officer'
- ‘Emergency one of India’s darkest periods,’ says PM Modi
- Lakhvi release: Pak says India politicising UNSC sanctions committee
- AAP unveils Rs.41,129 crore Delhi's 'Swaraj' budget
After being taken to the streets, rallies and TV studios, FDI in retail is finally being discussed in Parliament. This may be a debate forced upon the government with the threat of persistent parliamentary obstruction, and submitting executive policy to voting in the House may be an extraordinary step that could be routinised at the system's peril. But it is illuminating, nonetheless, to see the play of perspectives on the floor of the House. Parliament remains the ultimate aggregate of various interests, the only forum where it is possible to see the array of pressure groups and constituencies that are the stuff of politics in a diverse democracy like India.
At one level, this debate only compiles the standard arguments on every side. Small brave shopkeepers, predatory multinational corporations, prudent housewives and hopeful job-seekers figured in Sushma Swaraj's anti-FDI rhetoric. Kapil Sibal laid out the ways in which it would benefit consumers and farmers, shore up back-end infrastructure and reduce farm wastage, and argued that big-box retailers and small business can coexist, pointing to how KFC has not dislodged dhabas, as was once feared. He also said that the BJP's views flipped around, depending on its political stakes, on whether it was in government or opposition. That applies equally to the Congress, however, which had ferociously opposed the idea when the NDA proposed it.