Have adjournment motions proved too costly for Satheesan and co in Assembly?

The LDF government seems to revel in the realisation that the adjournment motion moved by the Opposition is just the right legislative tool to politically dominate the movers of the motion. 

For the third consecutive day on Thursday, therefore, the government merrily accepted the UDF call for an Assembly debate on inflation. The discussion on inflation comes after the ones on custodial torture and amoebic meningoencephalitis. 

The advantage of accepting the challenge is that the government gets the last word in the debate. The last Speaker, the Chief Minister or minister, gets unlimited time, too. More than double that of even the Opposition Leader.

So even if the government is seemingly at a disadvantage, like during the discussion on custodial torture, the Chief Minister can still dig up incidents from history and whack the Opposition without fearing a counterattack. And when the government is in a superior position, the Opposition can suffer severe embarrassment. Like on September 17, when health minister Veena George meticulously demolished every charge levelled against her Department. Then, the UDF had no choice but to stage a walkout. Had the government refused to entertain the motion, the health minister would have been deprived of the chance to rebut the arguments of the Opposition Leader, the last speaker on such occasions. 

On Thursday, the UDF did better. They not just sat through food and civil supplies minister G R Anil's speech but also butted in occasionally to question his contentions. The UDF at least gave an impression of putting up a fight.

The UDF contention, based on the Consumer Price Index, was that Kerala held the dubious distinction of having the highest inflation in the country in the last nine months. Congress's P C Vishnunath, who moved the motion, said that inflation had shot up from 6.79 per cent in January this year to 9.4 per cent in August. He made a special mention of the soaring price of oil and, to demonstrate the plight, said that middle-class families would now have to dry-cook 'pappadams' rather than fry them in oil. Vishnunath also said that the government was not providing adequate money for the market intervention activities of Supplyco. He said Supplyco sought ₹420 crore but was given just ₹205 crore.

Opposition Leader V D Satheesan gave the issue a social context. He said that the prices were increasing at a time when people suffered from a liquidity crunch. "Inflation compromises quality of life. Those unwilling to let liquidity crunch affect their standard of life fall into debt," he said. As proof, Satheesan said that repayment had fallen for loans taken from cooperative banks. 

He said the liquidity crunch was the result of two phenomena: reverse migration, in which migrants are returning mostly after losing jobs, and reverse remittance, a situation where crores are siphoned out of Kerala by other-state migrants. The Opposition Leader, too, flagged the issue of weak market intervention by Supplyco.

Satheesan said that even Horticorp was sourcing vegetables from Tamil Nadu and not from domestic farmers. Agriculture minister P Prasad contested this, stating that Horticorp had procured from farmers this year like never before by paying them 10 per cent over the market price, but at the same time selling the fruits and vegetables 30 per cent below market price. 

Civil Supplies Minister G R Anil then dismissed all the UDF charges. He said there was no inflation in any of the essential commodities like rice, meat, eggs, sugar and milk. In the case of vegetables and spices, he said the prices had in fact fallen. "The price rise is only in the oils and fats category," he said. This he attributed to the fall in coconut production. "Besides oil, inflation had also been fuelled by the increase in the prices of gold, silver, diamond, and cigarettes," Anil said.

He also refuted the charge of weak market intervention. "Supplyco has received the entire budgeted amount of ₹250 crore for market intervention," the minister said. What's more, he said that even the Opposition Leader had lauded his Department's efforts. "While inaugurating the Onachantha in his constituency, he said in his speech that our stores were full and had words of praise for the government's market intervention. I thank him for that," the minister said. 

Satheesan got up right away. "The funny thing is, the minister has spoken a naked lie. I have not made a speech at that occasion." The minister said he would send the Opposition Leader the voice clip of his laudatory words.

After the minister's speech, the Opposition Leader staged a walkout, saying that none of the minister's contentions were based on facts.