Governor’s policy address sparks face-off in Kerala Assembly

A controversy erupted in the Kerala Assembly after Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan accused Governor Rajendra Vishwanath Arlekar of omitting portions of the policy address. The Lok Bhavan rejected the charge, calling it baseless and citing factual inaccuracies

Thiruvananthapuram: The Kerala government’s policy address, delivered by the Governor in the State Assembly on Tuesday, sparked a row after Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan accused Governor Rajendra Vishwanath Arlekar of “omitting” portions of the speech.

In response, the Lok Bhavan claimed that the Governor’s suggestions had been excluded from the original draft.

---

After Arlekar concluded his two-hour-long policy address and left the House, Vijayan told the Assembly that the Governor omitted portions including sections criticising the BJP-ruled Centre’s fiscal policy and references to Bills pending approval from the Lok Bhavan.

Soon after the CM’s accusation, the Lok Bhavan termed the controversy over the Governor’s speech as “unnecessary and baseless” and claimed that Arlekar had asked the government to remove the “half-truths” from the draft of the policy address.

“The government had responded that the speech could be prepared and read with amendments that the Governor found appropriate. There was also an indication that the speech could be sent again with the suggested changes.

“However, the same speech was sent back to the Governor after midnight yesterday (Monday) without any amendments. The Governor, who returned late to Thiruvananthapuram from Kozhikode, read the speech in the Assembly this (Tuesday) morning,” it said.

According to the Lok Bhavan, the speech “was initially informed as being suggested by him and agreed upon by the government”. It said the draft had stated that the government had approached the Supreme Court because Bills passed by the legislature had not received approval for a long time, and that the apex court had referred them to a constitutional bench.

This is factually incorrect, noting that “the Supreme Court has not referred them to a constitutional bench,” the Lok Bhavan said.

The Governor had therefore asked that this reference be removed.

He had also suggested that the part stating the central government’s position violated the constitutional principles on economic federalism should be deleted, it said.

Instead, it was recommended that it be recorded that Kerala is facing severe financial difficulties due to the denial of advance funds, the Lok Bhavan added.

Earlier in the morning, Vijayan told the House that Arlekar did not read out the opening of paragraph 12 or the concluding portion of paragraph 15 of the document.

In addition, Arlekar made an insertion into paragraph 16 of the 157-paragraph, 72-page-long policy address, the Chief Minister informed the House.

The Chief Minister said one of the portions avoided by the Governor was — “Despite these social and institutional achievements, Kerala continues to face severe fiscal stress arising from a series of adverse Union government actions that undermine the constitutional principles of fiscal federalism.” The other was — “Bills passed by State legislatures have remained pending for prolonged periods. My government has approached the Supreme Court on these issues, which have been referred to a Constitution Bench”, Vijayan pointed out.

Regarding the addition made by Arlekar, Vijayan said that the Governor added “My government considers” to the second half of paragraph 16, which reads — “Tax devolution and Finance Commission grants are constitutional entitlements of States and not acts of charity, and any pressure on constitutional bodies entrusted with this task undermines federal principles”.

Vijayan urged the Speaker that the policy address approved by the State cabinet should be acknowledged as the official version without including the omissions and additions by the Governor.

Speaker AN Shamseer said that omissions or additions to the cabinet-approved address is not officially recognised as per the past precedents of the House and the same shall be applicable this time also.