Returning to parliament

The AL has got things backwards if it believes that retaining parliament membership is more important than representing its constituents. This shows how the priorities of the party when it comes to the question of how to conduct itself in opposition are misplaced.

Even though their share of time and opportunity to speak in parliament might not meet their expectations, the very fact that they made their voice heard in the House of the people would have made a difference to the budget session.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

Parliament is in the middle of the budget session -- one of crucial importance to the people of the country. Important issues and provisions are still being discussed and debated, and the significance of the budget in the lives of the people of this country can hardly be overstated.

By not being a part of the discourse, the AL is letting down both its own constituents and the people of the country who expect the opposition party to speak for them. There are many arguments that can be made against the proposed budget in terms of agriculture subsidies not reaching many farmers or whitening of black money, or incidence of indirect tax rising or the tax imposed on sim-cards, to mention only a few, but the AL is abdicating its responsibility to do so.

In a sense the AL is giving the government a virtual walk-over. The AL argues that it does not want to legitimise the budget, but the more salient point remains that the budget will get passed and affect the lives of every one of us. Its legitimacy is not the issue -- the issue is making it as people-friendly and even-handed as possible.

By boycotting parliament the AL is also losing the chance to point out the shortcomings of government policies and performance and to create support for itself by showing what it would do differently.

Indeed we are a little mystified at why MPs feel the need to keep their House membership active if such membership is not utilised for the benefit of the people? It seems as though they want to enjoy the position, prestige, and entitlement of being members without the corresponding obligations. No one is well served by this inversion of priorities, least of all the party itself.