Disjointed session
On the second day sadly, the Joint Session of the Parliament became disjointed
Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif addresses the joint session of Parliament on Wednesday. PHOTO: INP
It was meant to create the right optics. It started off well on the first day as the Prime Minister delivered a speech laced with some forceful one-liners. On the second day sadly, the Joint Session of the Parliament became disjointed. The embarrassing spectacle of empty seats was compounded by the honourable members’ vicious personal and partisan attacks on each other. The intended unity over the Kashmir cause began to crumble in the din of shouting, sloganeering and desk thumping even as the Speaker tried to bring back the focus on the main issue. The damage however was done.
This may have been just one episode of ill-timed partisanship, but it signifies something far graver: an acute inability of the elected leaders to rise above and beyond their petty political interests at a time when the situation — and the nation — expects a higher level of commitment. There is plenty of blame to go around: the Prime Minister should have ensured his party and allies maintained their presence on the floor. He did not. The members should have known better than to start hurling political grenades at each other on a day like this. They did not. Imran Khan and his party members should have attended the session. They did not. PTI leaders are wrong in boasting their boycott was justified after the fracas during the session; they contributed to the non-seriousness of the session by absenting themselves.
Yet despite all this, perhaps the most acute failure of the Parliament is its almost non-existent contribution to debating policy options at a time of heightened national security concerns. All we heard were hackneyed speeches laced with tired cliches and collegial bombast. The honourable members were expected to debate, discuss and dissect the situation with India and provide valuable input to the Executive. They should have utilised the platform of the joint session not just to present a united front, but also to provide a strategic direction to policy formulators. By doing neither they undermined not just themselves but the institution of Parliament itself.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 7th, 2016.
This may have been just one episode of ill-timed partisanship, but it signifies something far graver: an acute inability of the elected leaders to rise above and beyond their petty political interests at a time when the situation — and the nation — expects a higher level of commitment. There is plenty of blame to go around: the Prime Minister should have ensured his party and allies maintained their presence on the floor. He did not. The members should have known better than to start hurling political grenades at each other on a day like this. They did not. Imran Khan and his party members should have attended the session. They did not. PTI leaders are wrong in boasting their boycott was justified after the fracas during the session; they contributed to the non-seriousness of the session by absenting themselves.
Yet despite all this, perhaps the most acute failure of the Parliament is its almost non-existent contribution to debating policy options at a time of heightened national security concerns. All we heard were hackneyed speeches laced with tired cliches and collegial bombast. The honourable members were expected to debate, discuss and dissect the situation with India and provide valuable input to the Executive. They should have utilised the platform of the joint session not just to present a united front, but also to provide a strategic direction to policy formulators. By doing neither they undermined not just themselves but the institution of Parliament itself.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 7th, 2016.