Q5 · UPSC Civil Services Mains 2020 · GS II · 10 marks · 2 min read

← Q4 Q6 →

"Once a speaker, Always a speaker'! Do you think the practice should be adopted to impart objectivity to the office of the Speaker of Lok Sabha? What could be its implications for the robust functioning of parliamentary business in India.

Topic: Parliament and State Legislatures. Syllabus: Parliament and State legislatures — structure, functioning, conduct of business, powers and privileges and issues arising out of these. Same official PYQ from year-wise 2020 and Parliament and State Legislatures.

Revision summary

The UK Speaker leaves party combat; India elects a majority Speaker who remains in the party stream. Tenth Schedule adjudication and Money Bill certification are where a partisan Chair most hurts the House. A neutrality convention plus no post-Chair ministry would aid objectivity. Defection petitions should leave the Speaker if the office is to be believed. Robust parliamentary business needs a trusted referee, not only a new slogan.

Model answer

Introduction

The British convention that a Speaker, once elected, leaves party combat and is often returned unopposed is a device for chair neutrality. India’s Lok Sabha Speaker is elected under Article 93 from the ruling majority and returns to party life after the Chair. Adopting ‘once a Speaker, always a Speaker’ would help objectivity, but it would not by itself fix anti-defection and House-management problems.

Body

Why the UK practice looks attractive

  • A Speaker who will not seek a ministerial future from the same party has less incentive to tilt Question Hour, gag debates, or rush money bills.
  • Unopposed return in the constituency, where it holds, reduces the need to please the party machine at the next election.
  • Objectivity of the Chair is a condition of robust parliamentary business: opposition time, adjournment motions, and committee referrals only work if the referee is believed.

Indian constraints

  • The Tenth Schedule makes the Speaker the first tribunal on defection; Kihoto Hollohan (1992) left that with judicial review only at the end. A party Speaker judging party splits is the structural wound, as Karnataka 2019 and earlier Assembly crises showed.
  • Money Bill certification (Aadhaar in Lok Sabha, later scrutinised in K.S. Puttaswamy / Roger Mathew debates) showed how a partisan Chair can shrink Rajya Sabha.
  • Coalition arithmetic and a hung House make a permanently non-party Speaker harder to elect without a cross-party deal that India has rarely institutionalised.

Should India adopt it — and implications

  • Yes, as a parliamentary convention plus a statute or rules amendment: Speaker resigns party membership; no ministerial office afterwards; defection petitions go to an independent tribunal.
  • Implications for robust business: more credible Question Hour, fewer walkouts over ‘bias’, and a cleaner separation of the Chair from the whip.
  • Risks: a lifetime-style Speaker in a young democracy could freeze a House culture; constituency unopposed returns need all-party honour, not a one-sided diktat.
  • Recommendation: import the neutrality ethic and remove defection adjudication from the Speaker; do not expect British social convention to transplant without rules.

Flow diagram

flowchart TD
  UK[UK Speaker convention] --> N[Party-neutral Chair]
  IN[Art 93 plus Tenth Schedule] --> P[Party Speaker]
  P --> D[Defection and Money Bill tilt]
  N --> R[Robust House business]

Conclusion

‘Once a Speaker, always a Speaker’ should be adopted in spirit because objectivity of the Lok Sabha Chair is a public good. Its implication for robust business is a trusted referee. Without taking defection cases off the Speaker’s table, the slogan alone will not de-party the office.

Quick related

Students also ask

PYQ trend

When UPSC asked this

Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.

  1. 2022 · Q11 · GS II · 15 marks

    Discuss the procedures to decide the disputes arising out of the election of a Member of the Parliament or State Legislature under The Representation of the People Act, 1951. What are the grounds on which the election of any returned candidate may be declared void? What remedy is available to the aggrieved party against the decision ? Refer to the case laws.

    View answer →

  2. 2021 · Q4 · GS II · 10 marks

    To what extent, in your view, the Parliament is able to ensure accountability of the executive in India?

    View answer →

  3. 2021 · Q15 · GS II · 15 marks

    Do Department -related Parliamentary Standing Committees keep the administration on its toes and inspire reverence for parliamentary control? Evaluate the working of such committees with suitable examples.

    View answer →

  4. 2019 · Q12 · GS II · 15 marks

    "Parliament's power to amend the Constitution is a limited power and it cannot be enlarged into absolute power." In the light of this statement explain whether Parliament under Article 368 of the Constitution can destroy the Basic Structure of the Constitution by expanding its amending power?(15).

    View answer →

  5. 2019 · Q15 · GS II · 15 marks

    Individual Parliamentarian's role as the national lawmaker is on a decline, which in turn, has adversely impacted the quality of debates and their outcome. Discuss.(15).

    View answer →

  6. 2018 · Q4 · GS II · 10 marks

    Why do you think the committees are considered to be useful for parliamentary work? Discuss, in this context, the role of the Estimates Committee.

    View answer →

  7. 2017 · Q3 · GS II · 10 marks

    'Simultaneous election to the Lok Sabha and the State Assemblies will limit the amount of time and money spent in electioneering but it will reduce the government's accountability to the people' Discuss.

    View answer →

  8. 2017 · Q13 · GS II · 15 marks

    The Indian Constitution has provisions for holding joint session of the two houses of the Parliament. Enumerate the occasions when this would normally happen and also the occasions when it cannot, with reasons thereof. (250 words).

    View answer →

More from this paper

Q1 · UPSC Mains 2020 · GS II · 10 marks

"There is a need for simplification of procedure for disqualification of persons found guilty of corrupt practices under the Representation of peoples Act" Comment.

Governance and Policy

Corrupt practices are listed in Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Election petitions in the High Court and Section 8A disqualification by the President after the Election Commission’s opinion are separate, slow tracks. A member can sit through much of a term while the petition and the 8A file move. Lily Thomas made conviction-based disqualification immediate; the corrupt-practice route was not similarly tightened. Time-bound petitions and a single visible disqualification consequence would match the Act’s purpose.

Q2 · UPSC Mains 2020 · GS II · 10 marks

"Recent amendments to the Right to information Act will have profound impact on the autonomy and independence of the Information Commission". Discuss.

Indian Constitution

The 2005 Act gave CIC and ICs a five-year term and CEC-equivalent salary as a tenure-and-status guarantee. The RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019, left term and pay to Central Government rules and dropped the no-disadvantage clause. State Commissioners’ conditions also sit with the Centre, which federalises control over a State appellate. Appointment collegium was not the main target; security of tenure after appointment was. Autonomy suffers when the executive that is a frequent respondent also writes the Commissioner’s service rules.

Q3 · UPSC Mains 2020 · GS II · 10 marks

How far do you think cooperation, competition and confrontation have shaped the nature of federation in India? Cite some recent examples to validate your answer.

Governance and Policy

Cooperation runs through the GST Council, All-India Services and disaster law. Competition appears in investment races and NITI-style indices after higher tax devolution. Confrontation shows in CBI consent withdrawals, GST compensation fights and 2020 farm-law resistance. Delhi’s LG–government dispute is executive confrontation inside a Union Territory with a legislature. Indian federalism is all three at once; no single word captures 2014–20 practice.

Toppers' copies

Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.