Naidu, in his letter, said it would be his commitment to allow any issue to be raised by anybody as per rules and procedures and nobody should have any misgivings about that.
The letter also clarifies Naidu's decision to adjourn the House for a longer period instead of frequent adjournments.
He also hinted at some sections of the House who are bent on not allowing smooth conduct of the house.
Here is the full text of Naidu's letter:
Hon'ble Members !
From the day I have assumed the office of Chairman of this august house, I have made it clear that any issue sought to be raised by any member of the House, will be allowed to be raised. I have reasons to believe that no hon'ble member would have any grouse in this regard.
I am deeply concerned with the negative public perception of this august House on account of forced adjournments and that too quite frequently over the years, which frequently follows a pattern. A pattern aimed at not allowing the House to function smoothly, come what may.
Ever since I started chairing the proceedings of this House, leaders of several parties have conveyed their anguish to me over how they are being deprived of their right to raise issue of concern to them as some parties strategise for disruptions leading to forced adjournments. I have shared this with floor leaders on more than one occasion.
Coming to the pattern of disruptions, I would like to share with hon'ble Members that I have admitted a total of 42 zero hour admissions during the last three working days i.e 2nd, 5th and 6th of this month. Only one could make the submission. Who is to be held responsible for denying 41 members of their right to bring their concerns to the notice of this august House and to the Government.
Another aspect of this pattern is that first Zero Hour is disrupted and then even question hour when the members get an opportunity to question the government is also disrupted. On many occasions over the years, house gets adjourned several times between 11 am and 1.00 pm. In this era of TV explosion, such frequent adjournments are adversely impacting the image and credibility of this house.
In this backdrop, I thought that it would be better to adjourn the House for a longer period instead of resorting to frequent adjournments. That too when it becomes evident that some sections of the house were bent on not allowing smooth conduct of the house.
I have discussed this concern of mine with Deputy Chairman first this morning and later with floor leaders. I have urged the leaders to ensure smooth conduct of proceedings. I also told leaders that if house proceedings were disrupted at the start, I would be left with no option but to adjourn the house till lunch.
My intention in doing so is to promote a sense of collective responsibility in minimizing or doing away with such forced frequent disruptions. When members and parties realise that they would ultimately be the losers of such disruptions and adjournments, they would talk to each other and enable better functioning of the house.
I realise some hon'ble Members have perhaps not properly understood my concern and anguish over the functioning of the house. I would like to reiterate again that it would be my commitment to allow any issue to be raised by anybody as per rules and procedures and nobody should have any misgivings about that. (ANI)