Here find some statistical analysis for the last Parliament session:
-------- ------- ----------- ------------- (from in.yahoo.com 23 Feb 2010)
Parliament met for the Winter Session starting 19th November this year. Lok Sabha sat for 21 days and Rajya Sabha for 23. The session saw discussions on several major issues that included sugarcane pricing, climate change, price rise and the Liberhan report. We present some statistics from this recently concluded session.
On 6 out of 21 days, Lok Sabha met for less than 2 hrs
Several hours were lost to interruptions. Total productive time in Lok Sabha was 106 hours, 76% of scheduled time. Productive time in Rajya Sabha was 102 hours, 88% of scheduled time.
Attendance in the Lok Sabha varied between 56% and 75% with the average for the session at 66%. Rajya Sabha saw an average attendance of 68%.
30th Nov (the Monday following the long weekend) saw the lowest attendance. Issues taken up for discussion on this day included natural calamities in the country and law and order situation in West Bengal.
Of 26 Bills planned for passage, only 14 were actually passed
( The last session saw only 23% of the plan being achieved.)
In 34% cases, the inquiring MP was absent when the question was called in Lok Sabha
Total 440 starred questions admitted this session in the Lok Sabha, only 131 were called in the House. The remaining 309 questions could not be called due to paucity of time.
For 44 called questions, the respective MPs were not present in the House. Thus, only 87 were orally answered.
On 30 November, only 3 questions were orally answered in the Lok Sabha as MPs who had raised the other 17 were absent. The Question Hour was thus wound up in 25 minutes.
The situation was similar in Rajya Sabha - of the total 460 admitted questions, only 18% were orally answered. (Recently, the Rajya Sabha amended its rules to ensure that no starred question goes unanswered in the absence of the members who posed them.)
Several major issues were taken up for discussion this session. These included sugarcane pricing, climate change, price rise and the Liberhan report.
However, 48% of the members in Lok Sabha did not participate in any debate. Of those who spoke, 25% restricted themselves to 1-2 debates. Only 3% MPs participated in more than 10 debates. A similar pattern existed in Rajya Sabha. 50% MPs did not participate at all and only 1% spoke in more than 10 debates.
Friday, March 12, 2010
US woman facing assault charges for squirting cop with breast milk!
Tue, Mar 9, 2010 05:45 PM (in.news.yahoo.com)
London, March 9 (ANI): A boozy American woman has been charged with third-degree assault after she squirted breast milk in the face of a female police officer.
Toni Tramel, from Kentucky, had been arrested for public intoxication and was changing into her prison uniform when the incident allegedly occurred, reports the Sun.
She reportedly squirted milk straight from her breast into the face of the officer supervising her.
The female deputy had to be decontaminated due to the potential risk from what police called a "bio-hazard". (ANI)
London, March 9 (ANI): A boozy American woman has been charged with third-degree assault after she squirted breast milk in the face of a female police officer.
Toni Tramel, from Kentucky, had been arrested for public intoxication and was changing into her prison uniform when the incident allegedly occurred, reports the Sun.
She reportedly squirted milk straight from her breast into the face of the officer supervising her.
The female deputy had to be decontaminated due to the potential risk from what police called a "bio-hazard". (ANI)
Tuesday, March 09, 2010
Supreme Court appeals to itself on High Court's RTI verdict
Here goes an interesting news. It's like a judge filing petition in the same bench as he is sitting.
Guess, what could be the verdict ..... and watch out for the actual outcome ....
SC appeals to itself on RTI verdict
TNN, Mar 8, 2010, 09.21pm IST
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court Secretary General on Monday moved the apex court seeking the setting aside of a Delhi High Court verdict bringing the Chief Justice of India's office under the ambit of RTI Act and said the judgment had the potential to destroy the constitutionally guarded independence of the judiciary. Filing the special leave petition just four days before the expiry of the March 12 deadline to appeal against the unanimous verdict of a three-judge Bench authored by former chief justice A P Shah, the secretary general of the apex court said the declaration of assets by judges to the CJI was voluntary and the information so held was purely in a fiduciary capacity in the absence of any law to that effect. The appeal, drafted by advocate Devdatt Kamat and settled by Attorney General G E Vahanvati, said though the initial RTI appeal by S C Agarwal before the single-judge Bench of the HC pertained only to declaration of assets by judges, the three-judge Bench unnecessarily forayed into virgin territory and made observations touching on sensitive areas of judicial administration. Since, judges have already posted their assets and liabilities on the official website of SC, the appeal did not seek stay of the HC judgment, but sought its setting aside on the ground that the observations in the verdict seriously compromised judicial independence. "The effect of the judgment of the HC would seriously impair the position of the judges and the doctrine of independence of judiciary. The framers of the Constitution had insulated the higher judiciary from any interference, pressure or scrutiny. Independence of judiciary also includes in its ambit the independence from any `pressures' or `prejudices'." The appeal complained: "The single judge made wide-ranging observations on the position of the CJI. This was specificaly put in issue before the Full Bench and it was contended that the observations were not only uncalled for but also wrong. These issues have not been dealt at all." If the RTI ambit was so expanded to mean that the consultation process for appointment of judges was also to be made public, then it would seriously impair a confidential constitutional process, it said. "The basic constitutional principle is that in a process of consultation, the consultor and the consultee must have the fullest assurance that the views expressed would be kept in confidence. Confidentiality is a requirement of the basis of consultation," the secretary general said. Right to information had to be interpreted within the meaning and scope of the 2005 legislation and was not to be construed as an "unbridled and unchecked right" as the HC had made it out to be, the appeal said.
Guess, what could be the verdict ..... and watch out for the actual outcome ....
SC appeals to itself on RTI verdict
TNN, Mar 8, 2010, 09.21pm IST
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court Secretary General on Monday moved the apex court seeking the setting aside of a Delhi High Court verdict bringing the Chief Justice of India's office under the ambit of RTI Act and said the judgment had the potential to destroy the constitutionally guarded independence of the judiciary. Filing the special leave petition just four days before the expiry of the March 12 deadline to appeal against the unanimous verdict of a three-judge Bench authored by former chief justice A P Shah, the secretary general of the apex court said the declaration of assets by judges to the CJI was voluntary and the information so held was purely in a fiduciary capacity in the absence of any law to that effect. The appeal, drafted by advocate Devdatt Kamat and settled by Attorney General G E Vahanvati, said though the initial RTI appeal by S C Agarwal before the single-judge Bench of the HC pertained only to declaration of assets by judges, the three-judge Bench unnecessarily forayed into virgin territory and made observations touching on sensitive areas of judicial administration. Since, judges have already posted their assets and liabilities on the official website of SC, the appeal did not seek stay of the HC judgment, but sought its setting aside on the ground that the observations in the verdict seriously compromised judicial independence. "The effect of the judgment of the HC would seriously impair the position of the judges and the doctrine of independence of judiciary. The framers of the Constitution had insulated the higher judiciary from any interference, pressure or scrutiny. Independence of judiciary also includes in its ambit the independence from any `pressures' or `prejudices'." The appeal complained: "The single judge made wide-ranging observations on the position of the CJI. This was specificaly put in issue before the Full Bench and it was contended that the observations were not only uncalled for but also wrong. These issues have not been dealt at all." If the RTI ambit was so expanded to mean that the consultation process for appointment of judges was also to be made public, then it would seriously impair a confidential constitutional process, it said. "The basic constitutional principle is that in a process of consultation, the consultor and the consultee must have the fullest assurance that the views expressed would be kept in confidence. Confidentiality is a requirement of the basis of consultation," the secretary general said. Right to information had to be interpreted within the meaning and scope of the 2005 legislation and was not to be construed as an "unbridled and unchecked right" as the HC had made it out to be, the appeal said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)