Simultaneous election took place in India till 1967 and there was no problem at the time in terms of federalism or any other factor, Union minister Chirag Paswan said today, questioning the Opposition’s resistance on the issue. Speaking at NDTV’s Yuva Conclave, Mr Paswan, one of the youngest Central ministers, enumerated the reasons why the country needs “One nation one election” now.
The frequent elections, he said, are not just a financial liability, they also are a drain on manpower needed for the country’s security system, he said. People from the army or paramilitary forces are constantly deployed to states where elections are due, all the year round.
Citing an example, he said this year, the country has witnessed the Lok Sabha and a string of state elections in May-June. “Now we are having the elections in Jammu and Kashmir and Haryana and after that it would be the turn of Maharashtra,’ he said.
Then there is the question of the Model Code of Conduct, declared before elections, which puts brakes on development work. That is why elections should be held at one go so that “once it is over, governments can focus on development and its other work,” said the minister, who has been present at the cabinet meeting where the Ram Nath Kovind panel’s proposal was adopted.
This multiple election also has its effect while drawing up the budget, “because somewhere at the back of your mind you know these many states will election this year and money has to be allotted to them,” he said.
But looking at the country’s history makes it clear that all elections were conducted together since the country got Independence in 1947.
“The system continued till 1967. If there was no ill effect on Federalism then, who should it happen now? Nehru-ji (Jawaharlal Nehru) was there then. Their party. On today’s date, the country needs “One nation one election”, he said.
The Opposition has contended that the “One nation one election” plan is not only anti-democratic and unconstitutional, it is also impractical. Congress chief Mallikarjun Kharge has called it “an attempt to divert the attention of the public”.
