What kind of agreement are we talking about here. Was this agreement made in court ? Does it have any LEGAL implications ?
This concept of Government sharing is uncomstitutional. I would like to see someone sue both the parties and the governor to allow such a ridiculous "AGREEMENT".
We vote for a candidate and I want that candidate to rule, not a "COALITION". Let me be clear, we did NOT vote for any COALITIONS.
There needs to be a LAW passed against POST-Election Alliances.
PLease do not support either parties in this case. It is just that one got more greedy than the other. Shamefull
RE:Cheaters Cheated by Cheaters...
by Kumar Kalyan on Oct 06, 2007 06:40 PM Permalink
Imraan Bhai, You wrote a lot. Leegal, Agreement, Coalition, Law, Post election, greedy, shamefull. Need to think of it.
RE:Cheaters Cheated by Cheaters...
by Vish on Oct 06, 2007 06:49 PM Permalink
I don't see anything bad if two largest parties come to an agreement in case of lack of absolute majority to provide a stable government. These parties represent the majority.
Here, issue is very basic. It's matter of principles and public conduct. If you agree to something, you cannot just run away. The bar should be exceptionally high for the leaders.
RE:Cheaters Cheated by Cheaters...
by imran patel on Oct 06, 2007 06:55 PM Permalink
Vish, Here is the problem.
Assume I vote for Party A because Party A has a certain vision for the country that I share. I dislike Party B as it is has different agenda.
I vote for party A for its principles. When this party A has an alliance with Party B, it will compromise its principles. Hence diluting my vote. I do not want that.
I am voting for a principle for necessaryly a stable government. I don't want a communist party that is stable (Based on coalitions).
Stabe governments that are moving the country in the wrong direction is not good for our nation. We need parties with good policies in power. Not parties who are ready to compromise principles to stay in power.
RE:Cheaters Cheated by Cheaters...
by Vish on Oct 06, 2007 07:00 PM Permalink
I think, political parties have a solution to this problem. They have used it in past with great success. They call it CMP ( common minimum platform ) or something similar.
Sure, coliations should be based upon agreed principles and programmes not based upon to just capture power. Opportunists should be punished by voters.
RE:Cheaters Cheated by Cheaters...
by imran patel on Oct 06, 2007 07:08 PM Permalink
CMP limits the governments ability to make decisions. Look how the congress is struggling w.r.t. the Nuclear Agreement because of the Communist Part. CMP Translates in to Minimum Progress.
There is no accountability left with the government. Party A says we could not do it because one of our coalition partners opposed it. We can do it only if we have full majority. The looser is the NATION and its citizens.
Coalition governments are like joint faimlies. They look good on paper, but end up in a disaster.
RE:Cheaters Cheated by Cheaters...
by Kumar Kalyan on Oct 06, 2007 06:59 PM Permalink
Imraan Bhai - Good thought, But our politians are under par and we need a big change in that.
RE:Cheaters Cheated by Cheaters...
by Raj Chaitanya on Oct 06, 2007 06:40 PM Permalink
I totally agree with you on this point that there needs to be some legislation on coalition otherwise it is a mockery of democracy.
RE:Cheaters Cheated by Cheaters...
by Prem Mohan on Oct 06, 2007 06:38 PM Permalink
Correct! We should support only the Congress Party headed by Mdm Sonia Gandhi and Mr Rahul Gandhi.
RE:Cheaters Cheated by Cheaters...
by siva kumar on Oct 06, 2007 07:06 PM Permalink
In the name of alliance so many unconstitutional things are going on in our country. As this suits every party at sometime or other nobody is really interested to stop this. But think for a moment Imran patel, BJP was voted by the people and emerged as the single largest party, But by the oppurtunistic alliance of JD(S) and Cong it was not allowed to come to power. Then they called BJP as a secular party,,,, but BJP is a party recognised by the election commission and the constitution to exist and contest elections. Not only that, it is a democratic set up and the very people of Karnataka have voted for BJP to be the single largest party. But BJP was not allowed to form a Govt and two parties with less number of MLAs than BJP formed the Govt and made the single largest party to sit outside as opposition. Is it constitutional or logical? Is it not fooling the voters and against democratic principles? There is no proof for any party to be truely secular. Because all of them have aligned with BJP when it suited them and called it a communal party when not required.For this there in enogh proof. Even VP Singh, Mulayam , Mayavati or Karunanidhi, all had an alliance whenever they required BJP.Now it is Deve Gowda and his son. Now the question is kumarasamy has enjoyed chief ministership with the support BJP by giving some promise and casting aspersions on BJP now is immoral, against human qualities. It is just that and otherwise no pfunction pure ethics now a daysarty can
