Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
Legislative control over administration is a cornerstone of parliamentary democracy, ensuring accountability and preventing executive overreach. It refers to the mechanisms through which the legislature (Parliament in India) oversees the actions of the executive branch (government departments and agencies). While the Indian Constitution provides several tools for legislative oversight, including parliamentary committees, questions, debates, and budgetary control, their effectiveness has been a subject of ongoing debate. Recent concerns regarding the diminishing space for dissent and the increasing centralization of power raise questions about whether these mechanisms are functioning as intended, or if the executive is increasingly able to operate with limited scrutiny.
Mechanisms of Legislative Control
The Indian Parliament employs various mechanisms to control the administration:
- Parliamentary Committees: These committees (e.g., Public Accounts Committee, Estimates Committee, Standing Committees) scrutinize government expenditure, policies, and performance.
- Question Hour: MPs can question ministers about administrative matters, seeking clarifications and accountability.
- Debates: Discussions on government policies and actions provide a platform for critical assessment.
- Budgetary Control: Parliament’s power to approve or reject the budget is a significant check on executive spending.
- Resolution for Disapproval: Parliament can pass resolutions disapproving of government actions.
- Adjournment Motion: Used to draw attention to urgent matters of public importance.
Limitations of Legislative Control
Despite these mechanisms, legislative control over administration is often less effective than it ought to be due to several factors:
Political Polarization and Party Discipline
Increasing political polarization and strong party discipline often lead to voting along party lines, reducing the effectiveness of scrutiny. MPs may be reluctant to criticize the government, even when warranted, for fear of repercussions from their party. The 2023 report by PRS Legislative Research highlighted a decline in the time spent on substantive debates in Parliament.
Executive Dominance
The executive, with its vast resources and expertise, often dominates the legislative process. Ministers and bureaucrats are better equipped to handle complex issues and can often outmaneuver MPs during debates and committee meetings. The ‘Policy Paralysis’ experienced during the UPA-II government (2009-2014) demonstrated how executive inertia could stifle effective governance, despite parliamentary oversight.
Lack of Expertise and Time Constraints
Many MPs lack specialized knowledge in the areas they are expected to scrutinize. Furthermore, the heavy workload and limited time available to MPs often hinder their ability to conduct thorough investigations. A 2019 study by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) found that the average attendance of MPs in parliamentary committees was below 60%.
Weakening of Committee System
The committee system, once a robust mechanism for scrutiny, has been weakened in recent years. Changes in the rules regarding committee membership and the appointment of politically aligned individuals to key positions have compromised their independence and effectiveness. The trend of bypassing committees and directly introducing bills in Parliament further diminishes their role.
Influence of Bureaucracy
The bureaucracy often controls the flow of information to Parliament, potentially filtering or manipulating data to present a favorable picture. This makes it difficult for MPs to obtain accurate and unbiased information.
Comparative Perspective
Compared to countries like the United Kingdom and the United States, India’s legislative control over administration is arguably weaker. In the UK, the Select Committee system is highly regarded for its in-depth scrutiny of government policies. In the US, the Congressional Oversight Committees have significant powers to investigate and hold the executive accountable.
| Country | Legislative Control Mechanisms | Effectiveness |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | Select Committees, Question Time, Debates | High – Committees have significant investigative powers |
| United States | Congressional Oversight Committees, Impeachment Power, Budget Control | High – Strong tradition of checks and balances |
| India | Parliamentary Committees, Question Hour, Budgetary Control | Moderate – Often hampered by political polarization and executive dominance |
Strengthening Legislative Control
To enhance legislative control, several reforms are needed:
- Strengthening Parliamentary Committees: Ensuring adequate funding, staffing, and independence for committees.
- Enhancing MP Expertise: Providing training and resources to MPs to improve their understanding of complex issues.
- Promoting Transparency: Making government information more accessible to Parliament and the public.
- Strengthening the Library of Parliament: Investing in research and analytical capabilities to support MPs.
- Reforming the Rules of Procedure: Reviewing and updating parliamentary rules to enhance scrutiny and accountability.
Conclusion
In conclusion, while the Indian Parliament possesses several mechanisms for controlling the administration, their effectiveness is hampered by political polarization, executive dominance, and limitations in resources and expertise. Strengthening the committee system, enhancing MP capabilities, and promoting transparency are crucial steps towards ensuring more robust legislative oversight. A more assertive and informed legislature is essential for upholding democratic principles and ensuring good governance in India.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.