Transcription
Thank you, Speaker Sir, for letting me speak on the subject of students, their exams, and the education system, and on your proposed bill. But before I start, I would like to say that I was very excited, and indeed, alarmed by what the future of this country did on our streets. This was not anger. This was not violence. This was not hatred. This was an expression, a deep expression of the youth of this country, of the future generation of this country. And I feel that all political parties must respect this expression, including, including my friends in the BJP. In fact, I am pretty certain, and I have seen examples of it. If my friends in the BJP were to go and ask their own children what they felt about what their brothers and sisters were doing, they would find agreement among their own children. There is nothing wrong with what happened, and every Indian should be proud.
Now, I thought I was going to be giving a speech about the next generation, and so I was thinking, how do I start this speech? What should be the starting point of this speech? And I thought a good starting point, Speaker Sir, would be a conversation I had with some students, young girls, which gave me a very interesting perspective. It was their perspective, but I think I agree with the perspective. I would like to lay this framework first on the table. The question I asked the girls was, "You said to me that you are a student. What does this mean? Does it mean that you study in a college? Does it mean that you study in a school? Does it mean you read books? What does it mean?"
She gave me the most beautiful answer. She said, "A student is someone who has an open mind, an open heart. A student is someone who, right from the beginning, accepts that they do not know everything. A student accepts that whatever he knows will be superseded later by new knowledge. A student understands that the universe is constantly changing, dynamic, in movement. And so, a student understands that knowledge is also constantly changing." "What is the most important value of a student?" she said to me. I asked, "I said, 'Yes, very good definition. What is the most important value of a student?'" She said, "In one second, humility." I said, "Why?" She said, "The student knows that they do not know the truth. The student respects the truth of all other living beings, all other human beings." Like Gandhiji said in his autobiography, "The Search for My Truth." Meaning, this is my truth, your truth might be different.
Then I asked the next question. I said, "You have defined the category very well, this category of student. Who else is there?" She says, "There is another group of people. They are not students." "Who are they?" She says, "They are absolutely convinced that they know everything. They believe that the universe is static, and they believe that knowledge emerges from inside them. They believe that they are God, that everything that is to be known is known to them. They are arrogant. They are arrogant. They don't listen. They don't respect other people's truth." So I said, "What do you call these people?" She said, "I call them idiots." [Laughter] So I said, "You are telling about what, sir?" I said, "No, sir, nothing."
So she said to me, she said to me, "There are two categories. There are two categories in this world. The student." She said, "A farmer can be a student. A lawyer can be a student. A doctor can be a student. An unemployed youth can be a student. It's the thirst to learn, thirst to understand, like a sponge. You want to take everything in. You want to understand. It's beautiful. It's even respecting the rest of the universe." "What about these idiots?" She says to me, "These idiots, they don't listen to anything anyone says."
Speaker Sir, what is going on? You, honorable, honorable member, honorable member, you are the leader of the opposition. One minute, one minute, one minute, one minute, one minute, one minute. Honorable member, please. One minute. Honorable member, I am not talking about you. Leader of the opposition. I urge you. Sir, I did not even take their name. Listen to me. One minute, one, one second, one minute, one minute, one minute. Honorable leader of the opposition, I urge you. You will say that we are discussing the bill. I am doing it, sir. I am defining a student, sir. It will be fine. Sir, I am defining a student, sir. I will, I will let me carry on. Sir.
So I said, so I said, "Sir, what is the goal of this student?" So she told me, "The student's goal is that they keep running after the truth. For them, truth is sweet. Truth is sweet." Like Gandhiji said, "The windows of his house are open to all winds." Then I said, "What about the Indian?" She said, "What is going on?" Okay, sir. I, sir, sir. So she said, so I said, "What about?" I said, "So, sir, I said, okay, what about this other type of person who is not a student?" So she said, so she said, "The hallmark, the hallmark," she said, "the student," she says, "the student wears the truth on his/her chest proudly. It's written here." And I said, "What about the other type?" She says, "The other, the type requires an image. It requires an image, and as that image is not true, because the idiot is trying to pretend that he is God." "I am not talking about that." As it is not true, and the idiot is trying to pretend he is God, he has to create this massive image.
Then I asked a question. Sir, I thought, "Oh, this, sorry, sir, I thought, this is a student, and then this is also an idiot." So I asked her, "Tell me one thing, where does this third category go? Where does this third category go?" She said, "Which third category?" I said, "Blind devotee." Where should this be placed? She says to me, "A blind devotee is a person who is absolutely convinced that the other idiot is gone." So these are the three categories: student, idiot, and blind devotee, who follows the idiot.
Now, [sound of encouragement] so Speaker Sir, honorable, honorable leader of the opposition, now, keeping the house in order, we will discuss the bill. I am moving forward, sir. So Speaker Sir, I found this to be a very nice framework. And this framework came to me from an 18-year-old girl, a lovely student, probably one of the protesters in the "Echo of Students" programs. Sir, superficially, sir, it seems, sir, superficially it seems that our students are talking about exams. They are talking about the education system. They are talking about the cost of education. And this is true. The education system is very expensive. More money is spent on one exam, on one, on one exam, than is spent by the government on our education budget. Sir, 8-10 hours students study, they study for years. Sir, please, sir. Sir, will not allow anybody. Kiran Rijiju ji, not allowed. What is [sound of encouragement]? If Rahul Gandhi ji does not use unparliamentary words, then there is no need to interrupt from here either. Sir, right now, the word I am using, I believe that Rahul Gandhi is using such words in many ways. He is using such words in the name of a student. He is using them, isn't he? Rahul Gandhi ji is using them. He is taking the name. He is not speaking the name of the student. But the word he has used in the name of the student is an unparliamentary word. And the unparliamentary word, he cannot use it, and it should be removed. And repeatedly using the same word in the name of a student, that should not happen. That is wrong. He has used the word. The rule book is there, sir. In this rule book, there is a book of unparliamentary expressions. And the word you have used is unparliamentary. I am not saying the expression. One should have information about it. That is why you have repeatedly used the word, not once, but repeatedly. That is why our people are objecting. The mistake is Rahul Gandhi ji's. Why did he use an unparliamentary word? Honorable member, Speaker Sir, from Parliament, sir, I am not telling anybody that you say such a word. I am not telling anybody that, sir. The government does not discuss. Sir, Speaker Sir, if they, if they do not like the word, I will give another word. I will give another, sir. That system has been provided. What is unparliamentary will be removed. We do not need to provide you with a system for the student. Sir, I will not use the word "idiot," sir. I will not use it now. Let me, sir. Let him speak, sir. If you want, I will give another word, its proxy word. No. Then I request you, sir, speak on the bill. I expect it from you, sir. But sir, you keep the house in order. Sir, I will keep the house in order. What is happening? What is happening?
So Speaker Sir, so I defined. This young lady gave me a beautiful framework. Three categories of people. I found this to be, Speaker Sir, bring order, sir. Why do you disturb? How was it said? Ram's politics on the shoulders of students. [Sound of encouragement] [Sound of encouragement] We respect Rahul ji. We want to say again with respect. You used an unparliamentary word. That is why our people got agitated. They did not get agitated on their own. And you know, we did not create this unparliamentary expression. All the words written here, which you cannot say in Parliament, this rule was not made by us. And according to this, if you have to speak keeping in mind parliamentary decorum, then we are all listening. We are listening to your speech. But the word you used repeatedly, we clarified it. We, we do not want to disturb your speech. But please do not use the word. That's all. We want to listen. I request Rahul Gandhi ji, you, you continue your speech. You continue your speech, but do not use that word. That is my only request. If you don't want to speak, we move on. You don't want to speak. Honorable. Yes, honorable Minister of Parliamentary Affairs has urged you not to use unparliamentary words. Speak in the house. There is no objection. Speak. Speak. Uncle's message. Uncle's message came. No, you don't want to speak. Shall I call the next speaker? House in order. You speak, honorable member. I have also seen many occasions in this house when you do not let the leader of the house speak. You come to the well. Now you are quiet. The house is not like this. Today you are doing it. I have seen such an atmosphere before. See, sir, sir, sir, is your, is your esteemed responsibility, sir? The moment I open my mouth, the entire opposition starts to shout. I say again, Rahul Gandhi ji, you are the leader of the opposition, and do not create such a situation. Speaker Sir also mentioned, when the Prime Minister, our initial, when speaking on the President's address, you people completely stopped him and came here, and you people many times did not let the Prime Minister speak. You people also created such a situation. And today, you used parliamentary language. A parliamentary system, we read out a rule for it. I mentioned this book as well, unparliamentary expressions. I mentioned this. And the rest of our colleagues have also said that you give your speech, but there is an objection to the word you used. That's all. Then you show such an emotional face, that is not right. You cannot mislead the house. Sir, it is, it is unparliamentary. Let us just be precise. It is unparliamentary for me to use that word against another member of Parliament. I have not used that word against anybody. I have just stated that this category exists, sir. Again, they are going. Speaker Sir, if you people, sir, if you people want that only BJP should speak in this country, then I will sit here quietly. I will sit down. No problem. Time has been taken so much. Honorable member, honorable leader of the opposition, I speak on this subject, sir. Rijiju ji stands up. I speak, he stands up. He interrupts. I did not yield to him. You are giving him space. No, Minister of Parliamentary Affairs, you have come again. [Sound of encouragement] Defense Minister ji, what to say? One minute, one minute, one minute. See, there have been good systems in the house, good decorum. And we should try to maintain good decorum. Whoever speaks with logic in the house, the country also listens and respects. My expectation is that the choice of words in the house should be in accordance with parliamentary decorum, and our discussion should be of high quality. This is my expectation. Now, honorable Minister of State for Defense, honorable Rajnath Singh ji, is the Deputy Leader of the House. Some consideration, sir. I did not yield. Did not yield to anyone. Did not yield. If something is said, I did not yield. My speech is going on, sir. I did not yield. Speak. No, one minute. Listen. One minute. Not by yielding to anyone. We also have a system that sometimes, no, I did not allow you either. We allow, we don't do that. We allow. We don't allow. Okay. We don't allow. But Defense Minister ji wants to say something, perhaps he will say it for a good atmosphere in the house. Mr. Speaker, I very humbly request that the unparliamentary word used by our leader of the opposition be removed from the proceedings, removed from the system. Okay, okay. Let it be removed. And I appeal to all of you from this side to remain silent now. Listen to them. You speak.
So there are three categories of people. I am not using the word. There is one category of people called students, vidyarthi, who searches for the meaning of knowledge. And then there are two other categories, which I will not name. But these categories have nature. So the student is never scared of the truth. He loves the truth, goes towards the truth. A student never uses force against somebody else because he knows that that person's truth is different from my truth. The other category, they do not like the truth. They need an image. They need force. They need violence. Superficially, it looks that our students were upset because of exams. They were upset because of the education system. They were upset because they have to study hours and hours and hours, and then paper leaks. Some rich boy or girl pays 30-40 lakhs, gets the paper, gets the job. And the middle-class, poor student, honest, gets bypassed. So they are upset because of these things. And our system is terrible. It's terrible. It's cruel. Lakhs and lakhs of rupees are taken from the poorest people. Everything has been privatized. Paper leaks in one exam, something happens in another exam, something else happens. Some people are allowed re-exams, some people are not allowed re-exams. Rampant privatization means private companies are checking exams, wrong papers are going. It's a brutal, terrible system. It's an extortion system. I said it in my meetings, and it's a system that has been captured. It's a system that has been captured. The soul of the system has been, has been captured [clears throat] by the RSS. The soul, sir. Rajnath Singh ji said, sir, please, sir. Sir, Rajnath Singh ji said, Rajnath Singh ji said that we are not the UPA. Our ministers never resign. He is right. What has happened here? The resignation of Mr. Dharmendra Pradhan, that's a superficial thing because Dharmendra Pradhan never ran the education ministry. Never. The man and the organization that runs the education ministry is called the RSS, and the man who runs it is an OSD sitting in the minister's office. So, what, what the, what the students are really is that they are not allowed to be students in India. They are not allowed to follow their passion. They are not allowed to say what they want. They are not allowed to ask the questions that they want. They have to buy this nonsensical history that the RSS fantasizes. They have to buy this structure. Every single university in India, the students should know this, and I am saying this for them. Every single university in India today has a Vice-Chancellor from the RSS. Yes, Dharmendra Pradhan is a symbol. Your real enemy is the RSS. Keep it in mind. They are the people who are not letting you be students. They are the people who want you to be blind devotees. And this is a reaction from the soul of India that is saying, under no circumstances are we going to become your blind devotees. Under no circumstances are you going to define our future. Under no circumstances are we going to live. And this is the beautiful expression, the amazing thing to me, the amazing, fascinating thing to me is that the parents of these children, the parents of these children did not have the courage to face the BJP. The parents of these children did not have the courage to face the RSS. And yet these children, brave, imaginative, powerful, stood there and faced whatever you could throw at them. I have got some experience about facing the RSS, about facing Mr. Narendra Modi, Modi, about facing this group. The game is not about facing them. There is nothing in them. There is nothing in the RSS. The game is about facing your own fear. And that is what the students did. The students overcame their fear. The students challenged the idea that you could destroy them. They challenged the idea that you could destroy their careers. They asked the question, "Why are you not allowing us to have jobs?" They asked the question, "Why can we not fall in love with somebody we like?" They asked the question, "Why do you attack different religions?" They asked all these questions, and they asked it in public. You could not do anything about it. And I am very happy today to see that the so-called Home Minister of this country does not have the courage to come and sit here. He does not have the courage to come and sit here. Sir, please. Today, the Home Ministry is not being discussed. Today, the bill being discussed, the honorable minister is sitting. I saw the Home Minister, sir. The motorcade, sir. I saw the motorcade, 30 cars with the Home Minister sitting inside the car like that, looking, shaking. What is this? Speaker Sir. Why is the Home Minister not here today? The Home Minister is not here today because he is not here today because he is scared. He is the Home Minister, sir. Everyone sit down. See, today the Home Ministry is not being discussed. Today, the bill being discussed, the minister is sitting. This is the system in the house. Sir, the Home Minister, sir, the Home Minister authorized the shooting of our students, sir. He put, he put pellets into the blood of our students. He ordered the students of India to be shot. What are you saying, sir? Think about it. How wrongly you are speaking. Can you imagine? You are using words without thinking. And who ordered the firing? What is going on? How can you say such a wrong thing? How wrongly you speak. Don't say that, Rahul Gandhi ji. You are the leader of the opposition. You should speak with seriousness. You speak like this with logic here. This is not right, sir. Right now, you, on what basis did you make this statement? On what basis did you make this statement? Tell me. Who told you, and with what logic did you make this statement? This is very wrong, Rahul Gandhi ji. Very wrong. I object to it. It should be removed from the proceedings. But Rahul Gandhi ji, you apologize. This is not right. You cannot say this. You have said something wrong. How can you make such a big accusation against the Home Minister? It is not right. You have said something very wrong. You are shooting, this is not a small thing. See how wrongly you have spoken, Mr. Speaker? You cannot say that. How can he say that someone is firing? [Sound of encouragement] You can make a statement outside, in the house? You cannot make that statement. It is a serious allegation. It is a breach of his own position and privilege. This is not proper. You cannot say that. How can you say that? [Sound of encouragement] [Sound of encouragement] [Sound of encouragement] [Sound of encouragement] [Sound of encouragement] [Sound of encouragement] [Sound of encouragement] Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, no, no, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, if the leader of the opposition has made a serious accusation against the government, then it is the responsibility of the government to say on whose order the police behaved in such a way with children, students, youth. No, Mr. Speaker, if the Home Minister ji is different, Akhilesh ji, what you are saying is different. Rahul ji did not say that. He directly named him. He did not ask for an inquiry. Rahul Gandhi ji did not talk about inquiry. He directly named him and talked about the firing order. How can you say that? Do you understand how serious an accusation this is? If you ask for an inquiry, then it is fine. We accept it. Akhilesh ji, oh Akhilesh ji, what you are saying is different. What Rahul Gandhi ji said is completely different. Isn't it? Isn't it? This is wrong. Rahul ji, you, see, this is very serious. You must apologize, or express regret and withdraw your words. You have made a very serious false accusation. This is very serious. Don't do this. Your words are very wrong. See, honorable leader of the opposition, my request to you. One minute. Speak on the bill. And if you say any fact, any matter, then you yourself should inquire and not be in a position to decide. You can specifically say that this lathi charge should be inquired into. But you cannot name someone. Akhilesh ji also said. You can talk about inquiry. But to name someone is not appropriate. It is not appropriate. It is not in accordance with the dignity of the house. Sir, sir, sir, when, sir, when terrorists are shot, we have come to a very serious situation. We have said from the beginning, and our Defense Minister has also appealed. We want to listen. But you tell us, on what basis have you used the name of the Home Minister? On what basis have you made this statement? Show proof. You must apologize, sir. We cannot take this lightly. Otherwise, tomorrow any member can get up and say anything. Now, I will say that someone has murdered someone. Can I say that? No, sir, this is not right. How do you know, and on what basis are you saying this? You must provide details first. You must apologize. This will not work. This cannot work. This is a very serious matter. We cannot take this lightly. So, so, are we saying that Rahul Gandhi ji has murdered someone? Can we say that without reason? How can you say that? It doesn't work like that, sir. One has to speak with responsibility here and provide logic. You have made a statement. But you will have to tell on what basis you have made the statement. And if you apologize, then we will think. The house cannot run like this. This is a serious matter. This, this absolutely, you, Rahul Gandhi, apologize. Apologize, or tell us why you said it. How did you say it? How can you say that? Apologize. This cannot work. Mr. Speaker, the house can run. It cannot run like this. This will not happen. We, we cannot accept such an accusation against a responsible person of the country without reason, without logic, in this house. It will not happen. You must apologize, or else this debate cannot happen. This is not right, sir. He will apologize, or tell us why, how he came to know, and on what basis he said it. It will not work. Speak, sir. No, speak, sir. The use, I can speak, sir. Please. My belief is that until there is concrete evidence for the facts you have presented, until there is a report from an inquiry commission, such words should not go into the proceedings. Let him speak, sir. You speak, but let him speak, sir. Who is stopping you? But within speaking, if you say any fact, you are speaking in the house. Outside the house and inside the house. I can speak, sir. Yes, you can speak. Remove him, sir. You can speak. Speaker Sir. Speaker Sir, the use of force, the use of force can only be authorized by the Home Minister. It cannot be authorized either by the Home Minister or the Prime Minister. It cannot work like this, sir. You are disobeying the chair repeatedly even after we have said many times, after repeated requests. This is not appropriate. No, you are speaking the truth. [Sound of encouragement] [Sound of encouragement] [Sound of encouragement] Which order of the Home Minister? Bring the copy of that order and tell us. You said the Home Minister ordered firing. You bring the copy of that order. You tell us who told you? What is the order number? To whom was it said? Which officer? Bring the copy and keep it in the house. It cannot work like this. The discussion cannot work like this. You will say whatever comes to your mind and run away. It cannot be for headlines. This is the Parliament of India. One must speak with responsibility here. We cannot give permission for this at all. You don't want to speak, then don't speak, but you cannot say wrong things. [Sound of encouragement] I cannot give permission. You conclude. No. [Sound of encouragement] [Sound of encouragement] Honorable leader of the opposition, I have urged you not to say anything in the house without facts, without evidence, without conclusions. This does not work in the house. Speaking outside and inside the house, there are decorum, rules, and procedures of the house. This is my, no, there is a rule. If you make an accusation on any matter, give notice. You cannot make accusations without notice, without anyone. You cannot make accusations against anyone without inquiry, without any inquiry judgment. You cannot make it against anyone. You cannot make it against a member. You don't want to speak. I am speaking according to the rules. I am not going against the rules at all. The house runs on rules and procedures. Don't get so angry. The house runs on rules and procedures. I have urged you only under the rules that while making any accusation in the house, it should be based on complete facts, conclusions, or someone's report. It is not like that. He is not giving me the mic. Mic, mic, give it. Give the mic. Give the mic. But you will speak. There is no mic. There is no mic, sir. The mic is on. Honorable Speaker, but you will speak with the dignity of the house. I can speak, sir. Yes, you can speak, but you can speak according to the rules and procedures of the house. Make him sit down, sir. No. You don't want to speak. I will call the next speaker. Then, in the house, I have repeatedly urged you. I have never stopped you in the house. But as a Speaker, it is my responsibility that the dignity of the house remains, the prestige of the house remains, and whatever is said in the house always goes into the proceedings for years. Therefore, my expectation from you is, because you are the leader of the opposition, and not just an honorable member, you are the leader of the opposition, therefore, there is a special expectation from the leader of the opposition that you speak on facts, speak on this bill. You don't want to speak on the bill, you don't want to speak on facts. You, the house.