Debates that happened in the Winter Session of the Lok Sabha, with most disruptions wasting time in parliamentary sessions. Such official figures were massive; an example was the third sitting which wasted 65 hours and 15 minutes.
The abrupt premature sine die was noticed when continuous opposition protests marked the session, which began writing on November the 25th and stopped on December 19 due to an encounter.
The first session lost five hours and 37 minutes in wastage; the second sat for one hour and 53 minutes.
However, none compared with the third, which disrupted the House by losing over 65 hours from its scheduled proceedings. In vain are those efforts made by MPs who work hard toward piling up backlogs of unattended business.
Disruptions did not stop specifically at any point; they continued during the session, showing a persistent form of disruptions, especially during debates. During the first phase in all its history, the Lok Sabha had an average discussion time of only 34.16 hours.
To compare, the following number jumped to an average of 115.21 hours in the second sitting. The figures fell sharply again in the third, where only 62 hours were consumed in debate, underlining how again substantially disruptive the previous two sittings would prove.
The winter session, though limited in sittings, included 42 sittings across three phases. Between the first and last phases, the session witnessed seven sittings and then the next phase holding 15 before rounding it up with 20 sittings on the final leg.
While these had been difficult, it saw MPs extend sittings to finish crucial agendas. Worked out extra hours in the first session were seven, followed by 33 hours in the second session.
The third session, in turn, saw the House extending the period of proceedings by hours 21.7 to make good the lost time during the protests and adjournments.
For lawmaking both will bring their different side of progress but also their setbacks, such as this session, in which no Bills were introduced in the first session, while there were 12 Bills in the second session.
Of these, four were passed in the Lok Sabha. The third session saw the introduction of five Bills, with four of them successfully cleared.
These Bills included the Coastal Shipping Bill, the Merchant Shipping Bill, the Constitution (One Hundred and Twenty-Ninth Amendment) Bill, the Union Territories Laws (Amendment) Bill, and the Appropriation (No. 3) Bill.
Beside the bills, many matters were raised by the MPs, and the third session saw the raising of very many matters under Rule 377. 397 matters were raised in all as against 358 in the second session and just 41 in the first.
Rule 377 permits raising matters concerning the public before the House after prior notice having been taken and with the Speaker's authorization to bring the issue in question to the House.
This will allow parliamentary procedures in addressing public concerns not directly under the formal business of the House.
Winter session delays could not stop MPs from doing what they came to do. Continually emplaced adjournments and protests render impossible perfection of the full agenda, but the fact that sitting extensions are being made speak well of determination to go on with the parliamentary process, notwithstanding those challenging circumstances.
Members of the ruling government stood under so much pressure from the opposition's continuous protest activities which became the hallmark of the free-range skirmishes of political indignation during the session.
Now the Winter Session has rolled on: and here is another familiar feature to the increasing noise by which parliamentarians gain industrial status; lost hours sorely test the output and production level of failing Lok Sabha.
These hours are lost turning into very fundamental questions about the very functioning mechanism of a parliamentary system in the increasingly intense divisions and protests in Indian polity. Priorities would be inclusive of managing noise by converting it to participatory forms of legislative work.
Follow us
