The Members of Parliament (MPs) from Kerala used debates as an effective tool in parliamentary discourse by recording the highest average participation State-wise in the 17th Lok Sabha.
The 20 MPs from the State along with their counterparts from Rajasthan participated in 77 debates on average between June 2019 and February 2024. They were followed by MPs from Uttar Pradesh (58 on average); Maharashtra (56) and Jharkhand (54), according to data compiled by the non-profit PRS Legislative Research.
The MPs from Kerala participated in a total of 1,566 debates on government Bills, Budget and various issues of public interest. N.K. Premachandran of the United Democratic Front (UDF) topped the list after he participated in 267 debates. Those who participated in more than 100 debates included MPs of the UDF, including Kodikunnil Suresh (124); E.T. Mohammed Basheer (102); and Shashi Tharoor (101). A.M Arif, the lone MP of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) from the State, participated in 113 debates.
On an average, MPs across the States participated in 45 debates in the 17th Lok Sabha.
The MPs from Kerala were placed fourth in the average number of questions asked in the Lok Sabha in the State-wise analysis.
They asked 268 questions on average. MPs from Maharashtra topped the list, with 370 questions on average followed by Andhra Pradesh (275) and Rajasthan (273). A total of about 5, 672 questions were asked by the MPs from Kerala.
Adoor Prakash of the UDF topped the list, with a total of 388 questions followed by Anto Antony (386); Benny Behanan (343); Ramya Haridas (321); and Hibi Eden (318).
Though the MPs from Kerala actively engaged in the process of legislation and formulation of policies, the 17th Lok Sabha held only 274 sittings, which was the lowest by a House that had completed a full-term.
On whether the performance of an MP influenced the electorate in his or her re-run, former Ernakulam MP Sebastian Paul said that a wrong perception about performance has creeped in to the minds of the elected representatives for some time.
“We often see reports in television news channels and newspapers that an MP has utilised 100% of the funds under the Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme (MPLADS). In fact, they have nothing much to do in its utilisation as the implementation of such projects is done by the District Collector concerned. With so much focus given on the MPLADS, the MPs are in a rush to project their achievements by setting up flex boards across their constituency,” he said.
Mr. Paul said that MPs are not mere representatives of their constituencies. “Once elected, they are representatives of the country. Their performance must not be evaluated on the basis of the bridges or other infra projects implemented in their constituency alone,” he said.
Senior Congress leader and former MP V.M. Sudheeran stated that an MP can effectively intervene in realising the aspirations of the electorate in his constituency. “But the erosion of democratic values and decline in parliamentary deliberations under the Modi regime has curtailed the scope of engagement. After getting elected as the MP from Alappuzha in 1977, I still recall the ease of access that I had with then Prime Minister Morarji Desai and Madhu Dandavate, Minister of Railways in the Janata government, while aggressively pursuing the demand for a coastal railway for Alappuzha. MPs used to have lot of prominence in those days,” he recalled.
