To what extent, in your view, the Parliament is able to ensure accountability of the executive in India?
Approach · directive: “to what extent”
What it asks · Assess the tools Parliament has to hold the executive to account and how effective they are today, reaching a reasoned view.
It asks 2 things — answer each
- Assess the instruments through which Parliament holds the executive accountable and how far they work in practice
- Take a clear position on the extent of accountability, with steps to strengthen it
Open with · Article 75(3) makes the Council of Ministers collectively responsible to the Lok Sabha; Ambedkar said Parliament makes a daily assessment of the executive through questions, resolutions and motions.
Cover
- Questions and debates: Question Hour, Zero Hour, calling-attention and adjournment motions; the 16th Lok Sabha spent 13% of its time on Question Hour.
- Financial control: Budget debate, cut motions, and the PAC, Estimates and Public Undertakings Committees; Article 151 lays CAG reports before Parliament.
- Committees and confidence: Standing Committees scrutinise in depth; a no-confidence motion can remove a government.
- Weakening scrutiny (PRS): Bills referred to committees fell from 71% (15th Lok Sabha) to 28% (16th); 331 sitting days against a 468 average.
- Executive dominance: party whips and the Tenth Schedule make defeat rare; disruptions and ordinances thin debate.
- Way forward: routine committee referral, more sitting days, time-bound replies to assurances and protected opposition time.
Close with · Parliament ensures accountability to a moderate extent; Ambedkar's choice of 'more responsibility to more stability' is honoured only when its daily assessment is real.
Add value (verified)
- Article 75(3) makes the Council of Ministers collectively responsible to the Lok Sabha, the constitutional root of parliamentary control over the executive.The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2024), Article 75(3) - Legislative Department ↗“The Council of Ministers shall be collectively responsible to the House of the People.”
- Ambedkar (4 November 1948): in a parliamentary system members of Parliament assess the executive daily through questions, resolutions, no-confidence motions, adjournment motions and debates on addresses.Constituent Assembly Debates, Volume VII, 4 November 1948 - Sansad ↗“The daily assessment is done by members of Parliament, through questions, Resolutions, No-confidence motions, Adjournment motions and Debates on Addresses.”
- Ambedkar explained that the Draft Constitution chose the parliamentary executive because it preferred responsibility to stability.Constituent Assembly Debates, Volume VII, 4 November 1948 - Sansad ↗“The Draft Constitution in recommending the Parliamentary system of Executive has preferred more responsibility to more stability.”
- PRS: the share of Bills referred to committees was 60% in the 14th Lok Sabha, 71% in the 15th, 28% in the 16th and 16% in the 17th.Functioning of the 17th Lok Sabha - PRS Legislative Research (February 2024) ↗“60% 71% 28% 16% 0% 50% 100% 14th 15th 16th 17th % Bills referred to Committees”
- PRS: the 16th Lok Sabha sat for 331 days against an average of 468 for full-term Lok Sabhas, and spent 13% of its time on Question Hour.Functioning of the 16th Lok Sabha (2014-2019) - PRS Legislative Research ↗“The 16 th Lok Sabha sat for 331 days. On average, full term Lok Sabhas sat for 468 days.”
- Article 151(1): CAG reports on the Union's accounts go to the President, who has them laid before each House of Parliament.The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2024) - Legislative Department ↗“relating to the accounts of the Union shall be submitted to the President, who shall cause them to be laid before each House of Parliament”
Question: UPSC's CS (Main) 2021, GS Paper II — paper ↗. Approach: Minimalist IAS, checked 3 Oct 2026 (how we verify) — UPSC publishes no model answers. ·
Model answer· 224words · Minimalist IAS
Article 75(3) makes the Council of Ministers collectively responsible to the Lok Sabha. Ambedkar told the Constituent Assembly that members make a 'daily assessment' of the executive through questions, resolutions and motions. How far that holds today is mixed.
How Parliament holds the executive to account
- Questions and debates: Question Hour, Zero Hour, calling-attention and adjournment motions; the 16th Lok Sabha spent 13% of its time on Question Hour.
- Financial control: Budget debate, cut motions and the PAC, Estimates and Public Undertakings Committees; Article 151 lays CAG audit reports before each House.
- Committees: Department-related Standing Committees and those on subordinate legislation and assurances scrutinise in depth, largely beyond party lines.
- Confidence: a no-confidence motion can remove a government.
Why accountability is only partial
| Indicator (PRS) | Earlier | 16th Lok Sabha |
|---|---|---|
| Bills sent to committees | 71% (15th) | 28% |
| Sitting days | 468 (average) | 331 |
- Executive dominance: party whips and the Tenth Schedule make defeat rare, so accountability works by exposure, not removal.
- Thin debate: disruptions, Bills passed with little discussion and frequent ordinances.
Verdict and way forward
- Verdict: accountability holds to a moderate extent: strong instruments, uneven use.
- Fixes: routine committee referral, more sitting days, time-bound replies to assurances and protected opposition time.
Ambedkar's Constitution 'preferred more responsibility to more stability'; that choice is honoured only when Parliament's daily assessment of the executive is real, not ritual.
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.
