LOK SABHA ___ SYNOPSIS of DEBATES (Proceedings Other Than Questions & Answers) ___Wednesday, July 3, 2019 / Ashadha
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
LOK SABHA ___ SYNOPSIS OF DEBATES* (Proceedings other than Questions & Answers) ______ Wednesday, July 3, 2019 / Ashadha 12, 1941 (Saka) ______ PANEL OF CHAIRPERSONS HON. SPEAKER: Hon. Members, I have to inform the House that under Rule 9 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha, I have nominated Shri N.K. Premachandran as a Member of the Panel of Chairpersons. ______ THE NEW DELHI INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION CENTRE BILL, 2019 THE MINISTER OF LAW AND JUSTICE; MINISTER OF COMMUNICATIONS AND MINISTER OF ELECTRONICS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (SHRI RAVI SHANKAR PRASAD) moved that leave be granted to introduce a Bill to provide for the establishment and incorporation of the New Delhi International Arbitration Centre for the * Hon. Members may kindly let us know immediately the choice of language (Hindi or English) for obtaining Synopsis of Lok Sabha Debates. purpose of creating an independent and autonomous regime for institutionalised arbitration and for acquisition and transfer of undertakings of the International Centre for Alternative Dispute Resolution and to vest such undertakings in the New Delhi International Arbitration Centre for the better management of arbitration so as to make it a hub for institutional arbitration and to declare the New Delhi International Arbitration Centre to be an institution of national importance and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. DR. SHASHI THAROOR opposing the motion for introduction of the Bill, said: We need an autonomous arbitration centre which is independent of the Government. The Bill vests the powers of direction and control with the Central Government in relation to the arbitration centre. The Bill specifies that every rule made under it, shall be placed before Parliament. Now we have to give enough elbow room to the Centre to change its arbitration rules. The relationship between the Centre and the parties are contractual in nature. Thus, the Centre must be held accountable and should work in a transparent manner. The Bill should adopt a more acceptable standard for the question of the Centre's liability. The transparency standards also need to be increased. We do need a robust International Arbitration Centre that can make India the hub of arbitration. Therefore, the hon. Minister should withdraw this Bill and come back with a Bill that can truly meet international standards. SHRI RAVI SHANKAR PRASAD: On the one hand, he is supportive of the idea that India must develop as a hub of domestic and international arbitration, but on the other hand, he comes with a 'however'. This Bill has been enacted pursuant to a recommendation of a Committee headed by Justice Srikrishna consisting of many eminent Jurists. We are keen as a Government that India must emerge as a big hub of arbitration. After introduction when we debate the Bill, you will have ample opportunity to raise queries and I will have some time to respond to your queries. The Bill was introduced. ______ SUBMISSION BY MEMBER Re: Alleged derogatory remarks made by Lt. Governor of Puducherry against Tamils. THE MINISTER OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS; MINISTER OF COAL AND MINISTER OF MINES (SHRI PRALHAD JOSHI) responding to the issue raised by an hon. Member, said: As per the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha, a Member while speaking, shall not reflect upon the conduct of persons in high authority unless the discussion is based on a substantive motion drawn in proper terms. They have not moved the motion. So, I appeal to them - let them give notice of the Motion and the Government will consider that. THE MINISTER OF DEFENCE (SHRI RAJNATH SINGH) also responding said: Rule 352 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha clearly says that a Member while speaking, shall not reflect upon the conduct of persons in high authority unless the discussion is based on a substantive motion drawn in proper terms. If they want to have discussion on the conduct of the Lt. Governor, let them move a substantive motion. ______ *MATTERS UNDER RULE 377 (1) SHRI ASHOK KUMAR RAWAT laid a statement regarding flood control measures in Misrikh Parliamentary Constituency, Uttar Pradesh. (2) DR. NISHIKANT DUBEY laid a statement regarding pending projects of Godda Parliamentary Constituency, Jharkhand. (3) SHRI BHAGIRATH CHAUDHARY laid a statement regarding need to establish a Kendriya Vidyalaya in Kekri in Ajmer Parliamentary Constituency, Rajasthan. * Laid on the Table as directed by the Chair. (4) SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR laid a statement regarding drinking water problem in Jhunjhunu Parliamentary Constituency, Rajasthan. (5) SHRI VINOD KUMAR SONKAR laid a statement regarding need to establish a head post office in Kaushambi district, Uttar Pradesh. (6) SHRI ANURAG SHARMA laid a statement regarding need to implement AMRUT scheme in Jhansi Parliamentary Constituency, Uttar Pradesh. (7) PROF. RITA BAHUGUNA JOSHI laid a statement regarding need to construct a pucca bridge on river Ganga between Prayagraj and Bhadohi districts in Uttar Pradesh. (8) SHRI BHAGWANTH KHUBA laid a statement regarding compensation to farmers. (9) SHRIMATI DIYA KUMARI laid a statement regarding drinking water problem in Rajsamand Parliamentary Constituency, Rajasthan. (10) DR. KIRIT P. SOLANKI laid a statement regarding tribal health care in the country. (11) SHRI SUDHAKAR TUKARAM SHRANGARE laid a statement regarding need to expedite construction of Gulbarga - Latur new railway line. (12) SHRI AJAY BHATT laid a statement regarding closure of HMT factory at Ranibagh in Nainital district of Uttarakhand. (13) SHRI RAJIV PRATAP RUDY laid a statement regarding construction of a railway line between Chhapra and Muzaffarpur, Bihar. (14) SHRI BIDYUT BARAN MAHATO laid a statement regarding need to construct an airport at Dhalbhugarh in Jamshedpur Parliamentary Constituency, Jharkhand. (15) SHRI MANOJ KOTAK laid a statement regarding shelter homes for homeless people in Mumbai. (16) DR. RAM SHANKAR KATHERIA laid a statement regarding construction of a dam under Pachnada project in Uttar Pradesh. (17) SHRIMATI APARAJITA SARANGI laid a statement regarding need to construct flyover at Hanspal on N.H. 16 in Bhubaneswar, Odisha. (18) SHRI ADHIR RANJAN CHOWDHURY laid a statement regarding formal border trade along the Indo-Bangladesh border. (19) DR. M. K. VISHNU PRASAD laid a statement regarding construction of railway line projects from Tindivanum to Nagari and Tindivanum to Thiruvannamalai in Tamil Nadu. (20) SHRI GAURAV GOGOI laid a statement regarding road connectivity in Bilgaon and Jamuguri in Nagaon, Assam. (21) SHRI A. GANESHAMURTHI laid a statement regarding need to construct lower under subway at Kodumudi Railway Station in Tamil Nadu. (22) SHRIMATI PRATIMA MONDAL laid a statement regarding need to complete one side Railway platform of Chandkhali Halt Station in West Bengal. (23) SHRI SRIDHAR KOTAGIRI laid a statement regarding special Economic Status to Andhra Pradesh. (24) SHRI KRUPAL BALAJI TUMANE laid a statement regarding setting up of National Investment Manufacturing Zone in Nagpur, Maharashtra. (25) SHRI SUNIL KUMAR PINTU laid a statement regarding need to develop N.H. 104 between Sitamarhi and Sursand in Bihar as per laid down norms. (26) SHRI K. SUBBARAYAN laid a statement regarding need to laying underground cables instead of erecting overhead high voltage power lines by Power Grid Corporation Ltd. in Tamil Nadu. ______ THE DENTISTS (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2019 THE MINISTER OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE; MINISTER OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, AND MINISTER OF EARTH SCIENCES (DR. HARSH VARDHAN) moving the motion for consideration of the Bill, said: The first Dental Council of India was established under the Dentists Act, 1948. This Council had prepared the Indian Dentists Register. There were only three dental colleges in the country at that time. There was a shortage of dentists. Some people practised dentistry to earn their livelihood, though they did not have any formal degree. Such practitioners having more than five years practice were put in Part-B of the said Register. There are about 2 lakh 70 thousand doctors in Part-A of the Register whereas only 979 doctors are there in Part-B. In order to rationalize the old law, amendments in three sections of the said Act are proposed in this Bill. This Bill was introduced in this Lok Sabha in December 2018 but due to some reasons it was not taken up at that time. So, Government has brought this Bill again after getting the Cabinet approval for it. I would like to request all the hon. Members to pass it unanimously. DR. M. K. VISHNU PRASAD initiating said: Government has to bring a comprehensive Bill because by passing this Bill is not going to solve the problem. The main point is that in 1948, the Dental Act envisaged the constitution of a Dentists Council of India. At that time, they also thought to have registry of dental practitioners also. But after 1972, this registration did not take place. So, that is why it has become redundant now. Now, the question is, in the Dentists Council of India two members are taking part from Part-B. They are dental practitioners. So, I want to know from the Government as to what will happen to these posts. Are they going to be vacant or are they going to be replaced by the members belonging to Part-A? Similarly, the State Dental Council and Joint Dental Council, who can be elected among themselves, should also be represented from Part-A. Otherwise, the bureaucratic nominee will outnumber the dental practitioners. So, this is my humble submission to revise this Bill and bring back a new Bill accommodating the members from Part-A and also increase the number from two in the MCI and four in the Dental Council of India. The Government must also take strict measures to ensure transparency and formulate and anti-corruption policy to deter any instances of corruption in future.