'400 paar' a joke, '300 paar' impossible, '200 paar' challenge for BJP: Shashi Tharoor
New Delhi (PTI): The BJP's claim of '400 paar' is a joke, '300 paar' impossible and even '200 paar' may be a challenge in the Lok Sabha polls, Congress leader Shashi Tharoor has said, terming the ruling party’s loss a “foregone conclusion”.
In an interaction with PTI editors at the agency's headquarters here, Tharoor also claimed the BJP will draw a blank in Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh, and will do worse than its 2019 performance in the South.
Tharoor, who was locked in a three-way contest with Union minister Rajeev Chandrasekhar of the BJP and P Raveendran of the CPI in Thiruvananthapuram where polling took place on April 26, said he is looking at a "very comfortable win".
If he emerges victorious, it will be a fourth consecutive win for the author-politician from Thiruvananthapuram, who is the longest-serving MP from the constituency.
Back in Delhi after a nearly two month high voltage campaign in Thiruvananthapuram, the Congress Working Committee member will now canvass in other parts of the country, being a sought after campaigner due to his oratory skills and celebrity status.
Asked how it was looking for the Congress and the INDIA bloc after two phases of the polls, the former Union minister said, "190 seats have voted so far and what I am picking up from my sources, it is tremendously positive for our side. We are not suggesting that there is an overwhelming wave but there certainly isn't one for the government."
"In fact, many who have been following elections for some time say that the difference between this election and the ones in 2014 and 2019 is that the predominant emotion of the BJP voters appears to be indifference and lack of enthusiasm," Tharoor said during the freewheeling interaction.
In his view, Congress members are feeling "cautiously optimistic" about many places in Hindi-speaking states that have voted so far.
"So, I would say that on balance, we are far more ahead than we would have expected at this time. Of course, there are five more phases to go in this unnecessarily protracted election," Tharoor said.
Asked how many seats the Congress and the Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance (INDIA) would get in the polls, Tharoor said in a lighter vein that he does not predict scores even as a cricket fan but only predicts victories.
"I would say that right now it looks increasingly likely that the BJP-NDA government will lose its majority. The BJP losing its majority seems to be a foregone conclusion," Tharoor said.
In six states, he pointed out, the BJP won every seat, while in three states, it won all but one seat, and in two states, it won all but two seats. This, he said, is "simply not replicable".
"In Haryana, the Congress won no seats and the (opinion) polls are indicating five-seven seats for us this time. In Karnataka, we won one seat and this time polls are ranging from 10-17, some are even saying 20," he said.
In all the states that the BJP did so well, they are losing some seats even in a conservative analysis, he said.
"This 400 paar is a joke, 300 paar is impossible and (even) 200 paar may be a challenge for them (BJP) to get the way things are going."
In Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh, the BJP will get "zero" seats, he claimed. In Telangana, they got a handful of seats and would struggle to hold on to those, Tharoor said and added that the BJP would not be able to replicate its good show in Karnataka.
In 2019, the BJP won 25 out of 28 seats in Karnataka. In Telangana, it bagged four of 17 seats.
According to Tharoor, there is absolutely no doubt that the BJP is going to do worse than last time in the South.
"In the North, as I said, they did so well last time and it is impossible to replicate that. Both in the North and South they are coming down from where they were. How well we do and how well the INDIA bloc parties do is yet to be seen because after all 353 seats are yet to vote so there is still a big majority of the election yet to happen," he said.
But all indications are that this is really an uphill struggle for the BJP and things are not going the government's way, he added.
"I ask objectively, as an Indian citizen, why should a young man who voted for the BJP in 2014 because he was promised a job, still vote for the BJP 10 years later when he still does not have a job," Tharoor said.
When all the economists are saying 80 per cent of India's population have seen a decline in its income in the last 10 years, why should these 80 per cent want to vote for the BJP that has put them in that predicament, Tharoor argued.
He said that in 2014, the BJP ran on economics, but it was a disastrous government economically, and in 2019 it ran on national security with Pulwama and Balakot being the predominant theme across northern India.
"They (BJP) can't run on economy this time because they mishandled the economy and people don't have jobs and can't buy in the market what they could a few years ago.
“They can't run on national security because everyone knows that China has been nibbling away at our frontier and there are 26 out of 65 patrolling points that both armies used to patrol, which the Indian army no longer has access to now, and that is on Mr (Narendra) Modi's watch so how is he going to beat his chest about national security," he said.
"That leaves what... the 'Hindu Hriday Samrat' message, Ram mandir, the kind of inflammatory language we have been seeing and hearing from the PM and others, fear mongering about one community and attempting to polarise the election on religion. That tactic has really been overused in the country and those voting along those lines are already voting for the BJP... it no longer appeals to neutral voters," Tharoor said.
He questioned the Election Commission for having the electoral process extend from March 16, when the schedule was announced, to counting day on June 4 and said it is "frankly preposterous".
"It does not make any sense. I think somebody must explain. It is not as if there has been an increase in violence in the country. It is very surprising that the Election Commission should organise itself in this way," Tharoor said, adding that many states could have had a single-phase election.
"We could have done and dusted this election much quicker, especially at a time when our PM is speaking about 'one nation, one election'. Does it make sense to show that it takes us so long to conduct an election for one Sabha and that too after we have had so much experience conducting elections," the 68-year-old leader said.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Single higher education regulator bill tabled in LS; Oppn flags ‘centralisation,' JPC likely
New Delhi: A bill to set up a 13-member body to regulate institutions of higher education was introduced in the Lok Sabha on Monday.
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan introduced the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, which seeks to establish an overarching higher education commission along with three councils for regulation, accreditation, and ensuring academic standards for universities and higher education institutions in India.
Meanwhile, the move drew strong opposition, with members warning that it could weaken institutional autonomy and result in excessive centralisation of higher education in India.
The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025, earlier known as the Higher Education Council of India (HECI) Bill, has been introduced in line with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
The proposed legislation seeks to merge three existing regulatory bodies, the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), into a single unified body called the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan.
At present, the UGC regulates non-technical higher education institutions, the AICTE oversees technical education, and the NCTE governs teacher education in India.
Under the proposed framework, the new commission will function through three separate councils responsible for regulation, accreditation, and the maintenance of academic standards across universities and higher education institutions in the country.
According to the Bill, the present challenges faced by higher educational institutions due to the multiplicity of regulators having non-harmonised regulatory approval protocols will be done away with.
The higher education commission, which will be headed by a chairperson appointed by the President of India, will cover all central universities and colleges under it, institutes of national importance functioning under the administrative purview of the Ministry of Education, including IITs, NITs, IISc, IISERs, IIMs, and IIITs.
At present, IITs and IIMs are not regulated by the University Grants Commission (UGC).
Government to refer bill to JPC; Oppn slams it
The government has expressed its willingness to refer it to a joint committee after several members of the Lok Sabha expressed strong opposition to the Bill, stating that they were not given time to study its provisions.
Responding to the opposition, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said the government intends to refer the Bill to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for detailed examination.
Congress Lok Sabha MP Manish Tewari warned that the Bill could result in “excessive centralisation” of higher education. He argued that the proposed law violates the constitutional division of legislative powers between the Union and the states.
According to him, the Bill goes beyond setting academic standards and intrudes into areas such as administration, affiliation, and the establishment and closure of university campuses. These matters, he said, fall under Entry 25 of the Concurrent List and Entry 32 of the State List, which cover the incorporation and regulation of state universities.
Tewari further stated that the Bill suffers from “excessive delegation of legislative power” to the proposed commission. He pointed out that crucial aspects such as accreditation frameworks, degree-granting powers, penalties, institutional autonomy, and even the supersession of institutions are left to be decided through rules, regulations, and executive directions. He argued that this amounts to a violation of established constitutional principles governing delegated legislation.
Under the Bill, the regulatory council will have the power to impose heavy penalties on higher education institutions for violating provisions of the Act or related rules. Penalties range from ₹10 lakh to ₹75 lakh for repeated violations, while establishing an institution without approval from the commission or the state government could attract a fine of up to ₹2 crore.
Concerns were also raised by members from southern states over the Hindi nomenclature of the Bill. N.K. Premachandran, an MP from the Revolutionary Socialist Party representing Kollam in Kerala, said even the name of the Bill was difficult to pronounce.
He pointed out that under Article 348 of the Constitution, the text of any Bill introduced in Parliament must be in English unless Parliament decides otherwise.
DMK MP T.M. Selvaganapathy also criticised the government for naming laws and schemes only in Hindi. He said the Constitution clearly mandates that the nomenclature of a Bill should be in English so that citizens across the country can understand its intent.
Congress MP S. Jothimani from Tamil Nadu’s Karur constituency described the Bill as another attempt to impose Hindi and termed it “an attack on federalism.”
_vb_22.jpeg)
