Individual Parliamentarian’s role as the national law maker is on a decline, which in turn, has adversely impacted the quality of debates and their outcome. Discuss.
Approach · directive: “discuss”
What it asks · Discuss why the individual MP's effective role in making laws has narrowed (party discipline, executive dominance, weak committees, disruptions) and how this has affected the quality of debate and outcomes.
The question has 3 parts — answer each
- Discuss why the individual MP's role as national law-maker has declined: structural and behavioural causes
- Discuss how this has affected the quality of debates and legislative outcomes
- Suggest reforms to restore the MP's role
Open with · In India's parliamentary system laws are mostly drafted by the Executive and passed on party lines, so an individual MP's scope to shape a bill has narrowed.
Cover
- Anti-defection law: the Tenth Schedule disqualifies a member who votes or abstains against the party's direction, so debate rarely changes votes.
- Executive dominance: most bills are drafted by ministries and passed with little time; ordinances and the Money Bill route reduce scrutiny.
- Weak committee scrutiny: PRS data show only about 16 per cent of bills were referred to committees in the 17th Lok Sabha (2019-24), below the previous three Lok Sabhas, so MPs get few chances to work across party lines.
- Disruptions and short sittings: frequent adjournments, protests in the well and fewer sitting days shrink debate time, and bills are sometimes passed amid din.
- Low-quality participation: uneven attendance, limited research support and preference for party messaging or constituency issues over policy depth weaken debate.
- Private members: private members' bills are rarely discussed and only 14 have ever become law, none passed by both Houses since 1970, so individual initiative has little outlet.
- Reforms: refer bills to committees by default, guarantee minimum sittings, provide research support to MPs, and consider limiting the whip to confidence and money votes.
Close with · Restoring the MP's role needs stronger committees, real time for debate and a narrower whip; better lawmaking would then follow.
Add value (verified)
- Paragraph 2(1)(b) of the Tenth Schedule disqualifies a member who votes or abstains contrary to the party's direction (without permission or condonation), the legal basis of whip-driven voting. The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2024), Tenth Schedule, paragraph 2(1)(b) - Legislative Department ↗“if he votes or abstains from voting in such House contrary to any direction issued by the political party to which he belongs or by any person or authority authorised by it in this behalf”
Question: UPSC's CS (Main) 2019, GS Paper II — paper ↗. Approach: Minimalist IAS, checked 30 Sept 2026 (how we verify) — UPSC publishes no model answers. ·
Model answer · 292 words (UPSC limit 250) · Minimalist IAS
In a parliamentary system the executive drafts laws and the House passes them on party lines, but the individual MP is meant to scrutinise, amend and debate; in India that space has narrowed.
Why the MP's role has declined
- Anti-defection law: paragraph 2(1)(b) of the Tenth Schedule disqualifies a member who votes or abstains against the party's direction, so persuasion in debate cannot change a vote.
- Executive dominance: bills come from ministries with little consultation and are pushed through in hours; ordinances and the Money Bill route bypass scrutiny in the Rajya Sabha.
- Weak committee stage: PRS data show only about 16 per cent of bills were referred to committees in the 17th Lok Sabha (2019–24), lower than in the previous three Lok Sabhas, so MPs lose the one forum where they work across party lines.
- Private initiative: only 14 private members' bills have ever been enacted, none since 1970; most lapse without discussion.
- Capacity: limited research support, uneven attendance and the pull of constituency work leave MPs unprepared for technical legislation.
Impact on debate and outcomes
- Fewer sitting days and frequent disruptions shrink debate time, and bills are sometimes passed amid din.
- Debates become party messaging rather than clause-by-clause scrutiny, so drafting errors and unintended effects surface only after enactment.
- Laws passed without committee review invite amendment and litigation later, weakening the quality and legitimacy of outcomes.
Reforms
- Refer bills to committees by default, guarantee a minimum number of sittings, give MPs professional research staff, protect time for private members' business, and limit the whip to confidence and money votes.
The MP's decline as law-maker is structural, not personal; stronger committees, guaranteed debate time and a narrower whip would restore the individual member's voice and, with it, the quality of law.
Written by Minimalist IAS from facts checked at source (how we verify) — a little fuller than exam length, so every part of the question is covered; in the hall, keep the structure and trim the detail. UPSC publishes no model answers: compare your structure and coverage with this, then write your own.