💥Mains Ready By December. Smash Mains & Smash PYQ Admissions Open
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: ParliamentXCommittees

  • PAC flags failure to transfer Rs 9,222 cr. in cess collections

    Why in the News

    The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has flagged the failure to transfer Rs 9,222 crore of cess and levy collections to their designated reserve funds. Members questioned the Union Finance Ministry’s explanation on the issue. The committee reiterated its earlier recommendation that such collections be used only for the purposes for which they were raised. It had made that recommendation once already, in its 69th report tabled in August 2023, and the stated position of the chairperson is that ignoring the directions of a parliamentary standing committee amounts to an insult to Parliament. The tension is that a cess is justified to the taxpayer by an earmarked purpose. Its proceeds can still remain unmoved and available for ordinary expenditure.

    What is the Public Accounts Committee?

    1. A parliamentary financial committee: The PAC examines the appropriation accounts and the finance accounts of the Union government, along with the audit reports of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG).
    2. Its composition: It has 22 members, 15 elected by the Lok Sabha and 7 by the Rajya Sabha, each serving a one-year term. Ministers cannot be members.
    3. Chaired from the Opposition: By convention followed since 1967, the chairperson is drawn from the Opposition benches.
    4. It works after the money is spent: The committee scrutinises expenditure already incurred, so its function is post-facto accountability rather than approval of spending.

    What did the audit find?

    1. Collections that never reached their funds: An audit examination for 2024-25 found that money collected through various cesses and levies was not transferred to four designated reserve funds during the year.
    2. Where the finding is recorded: The finding forms part of Paragraph 3.3.1 of the CAG’s Report No. 6 of 2026.
    3. The explanation was not accepted: Members of the committee questioned the Finance Ministry’s account of why the transfers did not happen.

    What had the committee already recommended?

    1. Assess the amount and the duration: The 69th report called for scientific assessments of how much a cess should raise and for how long it should run.
    2. Review whether the purpose was served: It called for periodic reviews to evaluate whether the objectives a cess was raised for had actually been achieved.
    3. Credit the proceeds regularly: It called for regular crediting of cess proceeds to the reserve funds created to hold them.

    Why does the non-transfer matter?

    1. Purpose is the entire justification: The committee’s position is that cess collections must go to the purposes for which they were raised, and not toward financing the government’s budgetary deficit.
    2. The burden falls on everyone: A cess is collected from the whole population, whether or not a person pays income tax, and reaches the middle class and the poor alike.
    3. An unfunded fund is a fund in name only: A reserve fund that exists on paper but is never credited cannot finance the programme it was created for, so the earmarking becomes a description rather than a constraint.

    Conclusion

    A cess earns its political acceptance from a named purpose, and that acceptance is spent at the moment of collection whether or not the money ever reaches the fund. The committee can record the lapse and can repeat itself, but it cannot compel a transfer, which is why the same paragraph returns to it audit cycle after audit cycle. The current status is a recommendation standing reiterated and unimplemented for a third year. The next test is whether the Finance Ministry files an action taken note committing to a crediting timetable, rather than one restating the accounting position that produced the audit finding.

    Back2Basics: Cess

    1. What it is: A cess is a tax imposed on top of an existing tax, levied for a specific stated purpose rather than for general revenue.
    2. It stays outside the divisible pool: Article 270 keeps cesses and surcharges out of the pool of central taxes shared with the States, so a State receives no share of the collections.
    3. How the earmarking is meant to work: Proceeds are credited to the Consolidated Fund of India and are then to be transferred to a designated reserve fund from which the stated purpose is financed.
    4. Examples in force: The Health and Education Cess, the Road and Infrastructure Cess and the Goods and Services Tax Compensation Cess.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2013] Consider the following statements : The Parliamentary Committe on Public Accounts 1. Consists of not more than 25 members of the Lok Sabha 2. Scrutinizes appropriation and finance accounts of the Government 3. examines the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India Which of the statements given above is/are correct? (a) 1 only (b) 2 and 3 only (c) 3 only (d) 1, 2 and 3 ANSWER: (b)”

  • Statistical Institute Bill referred to standing committee

    Why in the News

    The Lok Sabha Speaker has referred the Indian Statistical Institute Bill, 2026 to the Department-Related Standing Committee on Finance for examination. The Bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha during the Monsoon Session. It seeks to repeal the Indian Statistical Institute Act, 1959 and to incorporate the institute as a “body corporate” with a Board of Governors accountable to the Central government. The referral follows protests by the institute’s faculty and an Opposition demand that the Bill go to a standing committee. The tension is between a governance overhaul the government says the 1959 Act cannot deliver and a faculty that protested the Bill before it reached a committee.

    What does the Bill propose for the institute?

    1. Incorporation as a body corporate: The institute is to be incorporated to strengthen governance, promote academic excellence and research, and serve emerging needs in statistics and allied fields.
    2. The President as Visitor: The Bill makes the President the Visitor of the institute.
    3. A Board of Governors answerable to the Centre: The board is the principal policy executive body, headed by a chairperson drawn from academia, industry, education, public policy or statistical sciences. The Bill makes the board accountable to the Central government.
    4. An Academic Council under the director: The council is the principal academic body, headed by the institute’s director, with every full time professor and full time faculty member on it.
    5. A talent pipeline as the stated purpose: The Bill says the reform will build an ecosystem to train a new generation of high quality data scientists and statisticians and close the talent gap in India’s technology and financial sectors.

    Why does the government say the 1959 Act must go?

    1. The 1959 Act fixed status and one degree power: The Indian Statistical Institute Act, 1959 declared the institute an institution of national importance and let it grant degrees and diplomas in statistics.
    2. The 1995 amendment widened degrees, not governance: It added mathematics, quantitative economics, computer science and other subjects related to statistics as the institute determines from time to time.
    3. Five areas are called inadequate: The Bill says the Act has limited provisions on governance, administration, finance, accountability and functioning, and cannot respond to an evolving academic and research environment.
    4. Repeal rather than a second amendment: The government chose to repeal the 1959 Act and replace it with a comprehensive incorporation law.

    Challenges to the Indian Statistical Institute Bill, 2026

    1. A Centre accountable board reverses the founding design: The institute has run since 1932 as a registered society governed by its own council, and a statutory board answerable to the Central government moves the final say outside the institute. Eg. The Indian Institutes of Management (Amendment) Act, 2023 made the President the Visitor of the IIMs with power to appoint and remove directors, six years after the 2017 Act had handed those powers to their boards.
      The Fix: Write the board’s autonomy in academic and appointment matters into the Bill as a statutory guarantee, with the Centre’s role limited to audit and financial accountability.
    2. Statistical credibility rests on perceived independence: The institute’s faculty design methods used in national statistics, and executive control over its board invites doubt about the numbers at a time of live disputes over GDP methodology. Eg. In January 2019 two members of the National Statistical Commission, including its acting chairman, resigned after release of the Periodic Labour Force Survey for 2017-18 was withheld.
      The Fix: Fix the institute’s faculty and external statisticians as a majority on the board so the Centre’s nominees cannot outvote them.
    3. Faculty consent was not built into the process: The Bill reached introduction over faculty protest, and a governance law imposed on an academic community produces sustained non-cooperation. Eg. Delhi University’s Four Year Undergraduate Programme, introduced in 2013 without faculty consensus, was rolled back in 2014 on the University Grants Commission’s direction after sustained teacher opposition.
      The Fix: Have the standing committee take evidence from the faculty and the institute’s council before the Bill returns to the House.

    Conclusion

    The Bill’s stage is referral to the Department-Related Standing Committee on Finance after introduction in the Lok Sabha. The committee’s report is due within three months, and the Bill waits in the House until it comes. The committee’s treatment of the board’s accountability clause is what decides whether the faculty’s objection is answered or overridden.

    Back2Basics: Department-Related Standing Committees

    1. Origin: Parliament set up 17 Department-Related Standing Committees in 1993 and expanded them to 24 in 2004, each covering a set of ministries.
    2. Composition: Each has 31 members, 21 from the Lok Sabha and 10 from the Rajya Sabha, nominated by the Speaker and the Chairman, and a minister cannot be a member.
    3. Control: Sixteen committees, including Finance, work under the Lok Sabha Speaker and eight under the Rajya Sabha Chairman.
    4. Output: Their reports on Bills, demands for grants and policy are recommendatory, and the government tables an action taken report on them.

    “[2026] Consider the following statements about the Committee on the Welfare of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes of the Parliament of India:

    1. Although members of this Committee are elected from both Houses of Parliament, the Chairperson of this Committee is appointed by the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha.

    2. Twenty members are elected by the Rajya Sabha and ten members by the Lok Sabha.

    3. No Minister, except for the Union Minister of Social Justice and Empowerment, is eligible to be a member of this Committee.

    4. Members are elected for a fixed term of two years from the date they enter their office.

    Which one of the following conclusions based on the above statements is correct?

    (a) There are four correct statements

    (b) There is only one correct statement, that is statement 2

    (c) There are two correct statements, that include statement 1

    (d) There is no correct statement

  • Modi-ism must evolve into institution-centred nation-building

    Modi-ism must evolve into institution-centred nation-building

    Why in the News

    The political and governing order built around the Prime Minister, given the name Modi-ism, is being tested against the constitutional settlement rather than only against its delivery record. The 2024 verdict returned the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) with 240 seats and made coalition partners necessary, which qualified a leader centred mandate without rejecting it.

    What is the governing order named Modi-ism?

    1. About: Modi-ism is the name given to the political and governing order built around the Prime Minister. It is a method of acquiring power, exercising authority and defining the nation.
    2. Named features: The order is built on eight elements: a commanding leader, a disciplined party organisation, civilisational assertion, centralised decision-making, technology-driven welfare, infrastructure-led development, high-energy national security and direct communication with citizens.
    3. Central promise: The promise is a strong leader, a purposeful state and a stronger India.

    What has the order actually delivered?

    1. Political transformation: The BJP moved from being a major national formation to the central axis of Indian politics. It expanded beyond its traditional geographical and social constituencies and made leadership itself the principal electoral proposition.
    2. The 2024 qualification: The BJP fell to 240 seats in 2024 and required its National Democratic Alliance (NDA) partners to form the government. The verdict chose continuity and restored the relevance of consultation, coalition and restraint.
    3. Delivery at scale: Infrastructure construction, digital public platforms, direct benefit transfers, financial inclusion, sanitation, housing, electrification and welfare delivery at scale strengthened the state’s capacity to reach citizens.
    4. Poverty measurement: NITI Aayog estimated multidimensional poverty at 11.28 per cent in 2022-23, against 29.17 per cent in 2013-14. The methodology is contested, the improvement in delivery is not.
    5. Political containment: The order contained the undue proliferation of regional politics to some degree.
    6. Source of appeal: The order speaks in the language of aspiration, national confidence and civilisational recovery. Citizens long frustrated by delay, indecision and fragmented authority respond to a government promising speed and scale.

    Why is effectiveness not a sufficient test of democratic government?

    1. The five charges: Critics allege that the order seeks to weaken pluralism, dilute socialism, replace rights with governmental charity, capture institutions and ultimately alter the Constitution.
    2. The counter position: Supporters dismiss these charges as partisan hostility or as resistance to India’s cultural resurgence. Both positions are too absolute, since constitutional character must be judged through the actual exercise of power rather than through slogans.
    3. Evidence against dismantling: Elections remain fiercely competitive, governments change in the States, Opposition parties govern substantial parts of the country, and courts continue to examine executive action and enforce fundamental rights.
    4. The Preamble ruling: In November 2024 the Supreme Court rejected petitions challenging the inclusion of the words socialist and secular in the Preamble.
    5. The real risk: A Constitution can be weakened without its words being formally deleted. Institutions may remain intact on paper as their independence, credibility and conventions erode.
    6. What sustains democracy: Democracy rests on five supports beyond periodic elections: restraints on power, respect for dissent, parliamentary accountability, federal balance and equal citizenship.

    What do the pluralism and socialism debates actually turn on?

    1. Pluralism: Religious freedom has not been legally abolished. Majoritarian mobilisation and inflammatory language make minorities feel conditionally accepted.
    2. The distinction drawn: Cultural nationalism is constitutionally legitimate. Cultural supremacy is not.
    3. Equal citizenship: The republic belongs without qualification to every citizen. Equal citizenship cannot depend on religion, political loyalty or conformity with a preferred account of national identity.
    4. What socialism does not mean: Constitutional socialism does not demand a return to the licence-permit raj, hostility to private enterprise or indiscriminate state ownership.
    5. What socialism does mean: It requires social and economic justice, equality of opportunity and protection against degrading deprivation.

    Why must welfare reach a citizen as a right rather than as a gift?

    1. The presentation problem: Statutory entitlements are politically presented as personal gifts from a leader. Food support, employment guarantees, housing, scholarships and social security are public obligations financed by citizens and delivered under law.
    2. The ordering principle: Rights-based governance must complement beneficiary politics rather than be displaced by it. A citizen must remain a rights-holder rather than a grateful beneficiary.
    3. What technology fixes: Technology reduces leakage and accelerates delivery.
    4. What technology creates: Citizens excluded by failed authentication, inaccurate databases or administrative discretion need accessible remedies.
    5. The four safeguards: Welfare requires enforceable standards, grievance redress, social audits and legislative scrutiny.

    What does the record on Parliament and appointments show?

    1. Speed of legislation: During the seventeenth Lok Sabha, 58 per cent of bills were passed within two weeks of introduction.
    2. Committee referral: Only 16 per cent of bills were referred to parliamentary committees.
    3. Budget scrutiny: Around 80 per cent of the Union Budget was voted without discussion between 2019 and 2023.
    4. Political funding: The Supreme Court decision striking down the electoral bond scheme established that secrecy in political funding had crossed a constitutional boundary.
    5. Election commissioner appointments: The law governing the appointment of election commissioners gives the executive a majority on the selection committee, which has raised concerns about perceived independence.
    6. The test for autonomy: Institutional autonomy depends on more than technical legality. It requires transparent appointments, procedural fairness and visible distance from partisan command, so independence is protected in public perception as well as in fact.

    What corrections would a shift to institution-centred nation-building require?

    1. Parliament: Parliament must recover serious deliberation, committee scrutiny and control over public expenditure.
    2. Federalism: Federal consultation must precede major decisions affecting the States.
    3. Appointments and agencies: Appointments to constitutional and regulatory bodies should command cross-party credibility. Investigative agencies must be demonstrably even-handed.
    4. Welfare and discourse: Welfare delivery must be joined to enforceable rights, and political discourse must replace habitual polarisation with constitutional fraternity.
    5. The next development phase: The eight stated goals are productive employment, competitive manufacturing, stronger small enterprises, higher farm incomes, quality public education, accessible healthcare, liveable cities and climate resilience.
    6. Party institutionalisation: No durable national party can remain indefinitely dependent on one personality. It needs empowered ministers, credible regional leaders, internal debate and an orderly culture of succession.

    Challenges to Institution-Centred Nation-Building

    1. Executive control of the legislative calendar: A ruling coalition can clear the chamber of dissent before a contested bill is taken up. Eg. In December 2023, 146 members were suspended across both Houses, the largest mass suspension since Independence, and the Telecommunications Bill, 2023 was passed with the near entire opposition absent.
    2. A vacant Deputy Speaker’s chair: Article 93 mandates the election of a Deputy Speaker, and the post has been left unfilled for years. Eg. The post lay vacant through the entire seventeenth Lok Sabha and into the eighteenth, so a member from the Speaker’s own panel of chairpersons presided over the no-confidence motion against the Speaker in March 2026.
    3. Discretionary gatekeeping on removal motions: Section 3 of the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 uses the word may, so the presiding officer may refuse a removal motion even when the numerical threshold is met. Eg. In April 2026 a notice signed by 193 opposition members seeking removal of the Chief Election Commissioner was refused admission in both Houses without stated reasons.
    4. The Money Bill route: Certifying a bill as a Money Bill removes the Rajya Sabha’s power to amend it and places the certification beyond ordinary challenge. Eg. The Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016 was passed as a Money Bill, and the correctness of that certification remains before a larger bench of the Supreme Court.
    5. Bypassed pre-legislative consultation: Draft legislation is often introduced without the public comment period the executive’s own policy prescribes. Eg. The Pre-Legislative Consultation Policy of 2014 requires draft bills to be placed in the public domain for thirty days, and this step is routinely skipped.
    6. Federal consultation deficit: Consultative federal forums exist on paper and meet rarely. Eg. The Inter-State Council, constituted under Article 263, met only once between 2016 and 2024.

    Conclusion

    Effectiveness alone cannot settle the constitutional character of a government, and a Constitution can be hollowed out without a word of its text being altered. The productive core of the order, decisive leadership, infrastructure, digital innovation, credible defence capability and measurable delivery, should continue. What must change is the shift from leader-centred mobilisation to institution-centred nation-building, carried by parliamentary deliberation, federal consultation, cross-party credibility in appointments and welfare delivered as enforceable right. The choice is between an order disciplined by the Constitution and one that seeks to rise above it.

  • FCRA Bill goes to a Joint Parliamentary Committee

    Why in the News

    The Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2026 was referred to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC). The referral has renewed attention on how parliamentary committees shape legislation.

    What is a Joint Parliamentary Committee?

    1. Ad hoc committee: A JPC is set up for a specific bill or inquiry and dissolves after it reports.
    2. Composition: Members are drawn from both Houses, in proportion to party strength.
    3. Recommendations: Its recommendations are advisory, not binding on the government.

    Why does the committee route matter?

    1. Scrutiny space: Committees allow detailed, less partisan examination away from the floor.
    2. Declining use: Bills referred to committees fell from about 71% in the 15th Lok Sabha to about 16% in the 17th.
    3. Delay lever: Referral can also defer a contentious bill.

    What is contested in the FCRA amendment?

    1. Foreign funding control: The Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010 governs foreign donations to NGOs and associations.
    2. Civil society concern: Tighter rules are opposed as constraining non-governmental organisations and religious bodies.

    Conclusion

    The referral subjects a contested bill to committee scrutiny without settling it. The current status is examination by the JPC, with its report the next milestone.

    Back2Basics: Parliamentary Committees

    1. Standing committees: Permanent bodies such as the Public Accounts Committee and departmental committees.
    2. Ad hoc committees: Temporary bodies such as a JPC or a Select Committee.
    3. Financial committees: Public Accounts Committee, Estimates Committee, and Committee on Public Undertakings.

    “[2023, GS2, 15] Explain the structure of the Parliamentary Committee system. How far have the financial committees helped in the institutionalization of Indian Parliament?”

    [2018] With reference to the Parliament of India, which of the following Parliamentary Committees scrutinizes and reports to the House whether the powers to make regulations, rules, sub-rules, by-laws etc. conferred by the constitution of delegated by the Parliament are being properly exercised by the Executive within the scope of such delegation ?

    (a) Committee on Government Assurances

    (b) Committee on Subordinate Legislation

    (c) Rules Committee

    (d) Business Advisory Committee

  • Discuss the role of Public Accounts Committee in establishing accountability of the government to the people.

  • Why do you think the committees are considered to be useful for parliamentary work? Discuss, in this context, the role or the Estimates Committee.

    According to LS speaker Om Birla, Parliamentary Committees are the “backbone of parliamentary democracy.

    Parliamentary committees

    Standing Committees – PAC, Estimate committee, Committee on public undertaking

    Ad-Hoc Committees – Eg- JPC

    Importance of Parliamentary Committees

    Checks and Balances – Eg- PAC examined CAG’s 2G spectrum report for irregularities.

    In-Depth Policy Analysis – Enable clause-by-clause scrutiny of Bills, which is not possible in open House debates. Eg- JPC on Data Protection Bill (2019) proposed over 90 amendments

    Reducing Legislative Workload – Committees share Parliament’s burden, ensuring thorough scrutiny without delaying legislation.

    Expert Consultation – Committees invite experts, industry, and civil society to promote evidence-based policymaking.

    Budgetary Oversight – Departmentally Related Standing Committees (DRSCs) analyse ministry budgets to ensure fiscal prudence.

    Consensus Building – Committees promote bipartisan dialogue, e.g., IT Committee built consensus on the Personal Data Protection Bill (2019).

    Public Engagement – Committees seek public and expert inputs, e.g., Standing Committee on Environment reviewed the EIA Draft Notification (2020).

    Continuity in Oversight – Committees function year-round, ensuring continuous policy review beyond parliamentary sessions.

    Bridging Knowledge Gaps – Committees enhance MPs’ expertise through research support and technical briefings.

    Role of the Estimates Committee

    Established under Rule 310 of the Lok Sabha, it has 30 Lok Sabha members and is chaired by a ruling party MP.

    Examines budget estimates to ensure efficiency, economy, and effectiveness.

    Suggests alternative policies for better fiscal management and administrative reform.

    Monitors implementation of government schemes and performance of ministries.

    Eg- Under Murli Manohar Joshi (2018), it reviewed PSU disinvestment and defence procurement, highlighting fiscal prudence.

    In the words of Woodrow Wilson, “Congress in session is Congress on public exhibition, while Congress in its committee rooms is Congress at work.”

  • Do Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committees keep the administration on its toes and inspire reverence for parliamentary control? Evaluate the working of such committees with suitable examples.

    According to LS speaker Om Birla, Parliamentary Committees are the “backbone of parliamentary democracy. The DRSCs, introduced in 1993, are vital to ensure continuous and informed Parliamentary control over executive.

    Composition

    Total 24 DRSCs- 16 under LS and 8 under RS.

    31 Members – 21 from Lok Sabha and 10 from Rajya Sabha

    Chairperson- Appointed by the Speaker of the Lok Sabha

    Tenure- nominated annually

    Role and Contribution of DRSCs

    Detailed Legislative Scrutiny – examine Bills clause by clause, preventing hasty or poorly drafted laws. Eg The IT Committee (2019) proposed key revisions to the Personal Data Protection Bill.

    Financial Oversight – scrutinise Demands for Grants and expenditure trends of ministries, ensuring fiscal prudence.

    Policy Review and Evaluation – Assess the performance of ministries and flagship schemes, suggesting reforms for better outcomes.

    Expert Consultation – Invite domain experts, civil society, and industry to facilitate evidence-based policymaking.

    Non-Partisan Deliberation – Function as bipartisan forums that foster cooperation beyond party lines.

    Continuous Oversight – Operate throughout the year, ensuring sustained monitoring even when Parliament is not in session.

    Transparency and Accountability – Their reports promote executive accountability and strengthen parliamentary control over administration.

    Knowledge Enhancement – Equip MPs with technical and subject expertise, improving legislative quality and policy insight.

    Issues-

    Transparency Concerns- Meetings held behind closed doors, with no published minutes.

    Non-binding Recommendations allow bypassing of detailed bill scrutiny.

    Limited Research Support limits committee’s ability to conduct thorough analysis and research.

    Selective Referral of Bills- During the term of 17th Lok Sabha, 19% of reports by DRSCs were on subjects other than Bills and budgets.

    One-year tenure provides limited time for members to specialize in specific areas, impacting scrutiny depth.

    Weak attendance of MPs and handling multiple ministries burdens the committee, hindering effective scrutiny and functioning.

    Way Forward-

    The National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (2002) recommended providing dedicated research support to committees.

    Establish a dedicated research cell for each DRSC, similar to the Congressional Research Service (CRS) in the US.

    Mandatory Response from Government within a fixed timeline (e.g., 3 months) to DRSC recommendations.

    Ensure Transparency- A “Committee Action Report” should be tabled in Parliament detailing the status of recommendations.

    The DRSCs remain crucial instruments of accountability, ensuring executive discipline and informed lawmaking.

  • Explain the structure of the Parliamentary Committee system. How far have the financial committees helped in the institutionalization of Indian Parliament?

    According to LS speaker Om Birla, Parliamentary Committees are the “backbone of parliamentary democracy. It is an essential mechanism of legislative oversight, promoting informed, bipartisan, and continuous accountability.

    Structure of the Parliamentary Committee System

    Standing Committees (Permanent in Nature)-

    Department-related Standing Committees (DRSCs) – 24 in number; examine Bills, budgets, and policies of ministries.

    Financial Committees – Public Accounts Committee (PAC), Estimates Committee, and Committee on Public Undertakings (COPU).

    Housekeeping Committees – e.g., Business Advisory Committee, Committee on Subordinate Legislation, etc.

    Ad hoc Committees (Temporary in Nature)- Constituted for specific purposes – e.g., Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) on the 2G Spectrum Scam (2011) and Waqf Amendment Bill.

    Importance of Parliamentary Committees

    Ensuring Fiscal Accountability – Committees like PAC scrutinize CAG reports, ensuring that public funds are used efficiently and lawfully.

    Continuous Executive Oversight – They enable ongoing parliamentary supervision over expenditure, even when Parliament is not in session.

    Strengthening Audit Mechanism – The PAC’s linkage with CAG institutionalizes the audit process, reinforcing transparency in governance.

    Promoting Rational Budgeting – The Estimates Committee evaluates expenditure patterns and recommends economy and efficiency in public spending.

    Enhancing PSU Accountability – The Committee on Public Undertakings (COPU) monitors performance and financial health of PSUs, promoting corporate discipline.

    Institutional Continuity – These committees function annually, ensuring regular scrutiny beyond political cycles.

    Evidence-Based Decision Making – Reports are based on expert testimony and data, improving quality of legislative oversight.

    Non-Partisan Deliberation – Work in committees is largely bipartisan, reducing political confrontation seen in the House.

    Public Transparency – Publication of reports increases citizen awareness and reinforces Parliament’s role as a watchdog of the executive.

    Institutional Memory Building – The accumulated reports and recommendations create a repository of fiscal best practices for future governance.

    Challenges-

    Non-binding recommendations and lack of discussion on parliamentary reports

    Fewer bills referred- In the 15th Lok Sabha -71%, 16th Lok Sabha -27% and in 17th Lok Sabha -16% of the bills introduced were referred to the committees.

    Lack of specialised knowledge among members in financial and economic matters leads to superficial scrutiny.

    Bulky CAG and budgetary reports result in inadequate time for detailed examination.

    Post mortem analysis- This lowers the quality of oversight and recommendations.

    Political influence often causes biased decision-making and undermines objectivity.

    Lack of Public Awareness and Transparency- Committee proceedings are held behind closed doors.

    Way Forward

    Implement ARC & NCRWC suggestions for expert support units and public disclosure of reports.

    Enhance capacity-building of MPs on financial management.

    Make committee recommendations time-bound and mandatory for government response.

    In the words of Woodrow Wilson, “Congress in session is Congress on public exhibition, while Congress in its committee rooms is Congress at work.”

  • Consider the following statements : The Parliamentary Committe on Public Accounts

    Consider the following statements : The Parliamentary Committe on Public Accounts
    1. Consists of not more than 25 members of the Lok Sabha
    2. Scrutinizes appropriation and finance accounts of the Government
    3. examines the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

  • Which one of the following is the largest Committee of the Parliament

    Which one of the following is the largest Committee of the Parliament?