Congress MP Shashi Tharoor has voiced significant apprehension regarding the proposed expansion of the Lok Sabha, India's lower house of Parliament. The plan, which could see the number of seats increase to between 824 and 850 after the upcoming delimitation exercise, has drawn criticism from Tharoor, who warns it could severely undermine parliamentary debate and the role of individual lawmakers.
Concerns Over Parliamentary Functionality
In an opinion piece, Tharoor argued that a Parliament's effectiveness hinges on its ability to facilitate genuine legislative scrutiny, cohesive debate, and active participation from its members. He contended that an overly large legislature becomes unwieldy, making it difficult for most MPs to contribute meaningfully.
"Every mature democratic system recognises that a Parliament must be capped at a size that permits genuine legislative scrutiny, cohesive debate, and individual member participation," Tharoor wrote, emphasizing the importance of a manageable size for effective governance.
Debunking the Population Argument
Tharoor challenged the government's rationale that the Lok Sabha's current strength of 543 seats is insufficient given India's population growth since 1972. He pointed out that merely increasing numbers does not address the practical challenges of managing a much larger deliberative body.
He cited the example of the United States House of Representatives, which has maintained its 435-member cap since 1929, despite a substantial increase in the U.S. population. The U.S. manages representation through robust local offices, modern communication systems, and a well-structured committee system, rather than by continuously expanding its legislative body. Tharoor suggested India could adopt similar strategies.
Risk of Silenced Voices and Weakened Accountability
A larger Lok Sabha, Tharoor warned, would inevitably limit the time available for parliamentary discussions. He projected that in a four-hour debate, perhaps only 15-20 MPs out of 850 would get an opportunity to speak, effectively silencing backbenchers and members from smaller parties. Many MPs might complete their five-year term without ever having the chance to ask questions, introduce private member's bills, or engage in detailed legislative debates.
Tharoor also highlighted that Parliament's role has already seen a decline in recent years, marked by fewer sitting days and reduced scrutiny of bills. He cautioned that an "oversized legislature where the vast majority of members have no voice suits an executive that prefers compliance over scrutiny," potentially eroding the Parliament's crucial function of holding the government accountable.
Rethinking the Role of an MP
The Congress MP also rejected the notion that smaller constituencies are necessary for MPs to represent citizens effectively. He clarified that an MP's constitutional duty primarily involves national legislation, foreign policy, macroeconomic governance, and holding the Union executive accountable, rather than serving as municipal councillors or local administrators.
Instead of expanding Parliament, Tharoor advocated for strengthening local governance institutions like state governments, panchayats, and municipal bodies. This approach, he argued, would enhance grassroots representation without burdening the national legislature with an unmanageable number of members.
Quality Over Quantity
Ultimately, Tharoor concluded that merely increasing the number of MPs would not strengthen democracy. He stated that the proposed expansion would risk transforming the Lok Sabha from a vital forum for governance into an "echo chamber for the government." He urged a focus on improving the quality of parliamentary debates, bolstering committee functions, and empowering local governments to achieve genuine democratic strengthening.