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.
It asks 3 things — 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 the 17th Lok Sabha (2019–24), 35% of Bills were passed with less than an hour of discussion in the House, and 58% within two weeks of introduction (PRS).
Cover
- Anti-defection: paragraph 2(1)(b) of the Tenth Schedule disqualifies members who vote or abstain against the party's direction.
- Executive dominance: 58% of Bills passed within two weeks of introduction in the 17th Lok Sabha; ordinances and Money Bills cut scrutiny.
- Committees bypassed: only 16% of Bills referred in the 17th Lok Sabha, lower than the previous three.
- Private members: only 14 private members' Bills ever enacted, none since 1970.
- Impact: 274 sittings, the fewest of any full-term Lok Sabha; 35% of Bills passed with under an hour's debate.
- Outcomes: party messaging replaces clause-by-clause scrutiny; drafting flaws surface later as amendments and litigation.
- Reforms: default committee referral, research support for MPs, protected private members' time, a whip limited to confidence and money votes.
Close with · The NCRWC's floor of 120 sitting days for the Lok Sabha and 100 for the Rajya Sabha, with default committee scrutiny and a narrower whip, would make the MP a law-maker again, not merely a vote.
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”
- In the 17th Lok Sabha (2019–24), 35% of Bills were passed with less than an hour of discussion in Lok Sabha, 58% within two weeks of introduction, and the House held 274 sittings, the fewest of any full-term Lok Sabha.PRS Legislative Research, Vital Stats: Functioning of the 17th Lok Sabha ↗“35% of Bills were passed with less than an hour of discussion in Lok Sabha.”
- The 17th Lok Sabha passed 58% of its Bills within two weeks of their introduction.PRS Legislative Research, Vital Stats: Functioning of the 17th Lok Sabha ↗“58% of the Bills were passed within two weeks of their introduction.”
- The NCRWC recommended a minimum of 120 sitting days a year for the Lok Sabha and 100 for the Rajya Sabha.PRS Legislative Research, Parliament logjam Part 2: examining legislative avenues ↗“The NCRWC has recommended fixing the minimum number of working days for Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha at 120 and 100 days respectively.”
Question: UPSC's CS (Main) 2019, GS Paper II — paper ↗. Approach: Minimalist IAS, checked 3 Oct 2026 (how we verify) — UPSC publishes no model answers. ·
Model answer· 318words · Minimalist IAS
In the 17th Lok Sabha (2019–24), 35% of Bills were passed with less than an hour of discussion in the House, and 58% within two weeks of introduction (PRS). Such numbers show how far the individual MP has receded as a law-maker.
Why the individual MP's law-making role has declined
- Anti-defection whip: paragraph 2(1)(b) of the Tenth Schedule disqualifies a member who votes or abstains against the party's direction, so debate cannot change votes.
- Executive dominance: ministries draft Bills with little consultation; ordinances and the Money Bill route bypass full scrutiny.
- Committees bypassed: only 16% of Bills went to committees in the 17th Lok Sabha, lower than in the previous three, removing the forum where MPs work across party lines.
- Private initiative sidelined: only 14 private members' Bills have ever been enacted, none since 1970.
- Thin capacity: limited research staff and heavy constituency demands leave MPs unprepared for technical Bills.
- Party whip binds votes
- Bills skip committees
- Debate time shrinks
- Flawed laws need later repair
Impact on the quality of debates and outcomes
- Fewer sittings: the 17th Lok Sabha held 274 sittings, the fewest of any full-term Lok Sabha, and disruptions cut debate time further.
- Messaging over scrutiny: speeches restate party lines; clause-by-clause examination and amendments from the floor are rare.
- Weaker laws: drafting flaws surface after enactment, inviting amending Bills, litigation and doubts about legitimacy.
Way forward
- Committee referral by default for every major Bill, with time-bound reports.
- A narrower whip, limited to confidence motions and money matters, so members can vote their judgement on other Bills.
- Research support for every MP, and protected time for private members' business.
The National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC) recommended a floor of 120 sitting days for the Lok Sabha and 100 for the Rajya Sabha. With it, default committee scrutiny and a narrower whip, the MP can again be a law-maker, not merely a vote.
Prepared by Minimalist IAS to the answer standard of Shivam Singh (mentor, 7 years) · facts checked against official sources (how we verify) · updated 3 Oct 2026. UPSC publishes no model answers: compare your structure and coverage with this, then write your own.
