Lok Sabha Debates
Discussion On The Motion For Consideration Of The Cable Television Networks ... on 3 May, 2007
Title: Discussion on the motion for consideration of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Amendment Bill,2006 (Bill Passed).
MR. SPEKAER: Now, the House shall take up Item No. 11 - Shri Priyaranjan Dasmunsi SHRI P. CHIDAMBARAM: Sir, Item No. 11....
MR. SPEAKER: Item No. 11 is not related to you. It is related to Mr. Dasmunsi. Do you want some more work?
THE MINISTER OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND MINISTER OF INFORMATION AND BROADCASTING (SHRI PRIYA RANJAN DASMUNSI): Chidambaramji, your Finance Bill is passed.
MR. SPEAKER: Have some sympathy for the Chair! … (Interruptions)
SHRI PRIYA RANJAN DASMUNSI: Sir, I beg to move:
“That the Bill further to amend the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1955, be taken into consideration. ” Sir, as you know, in your own wisdom, and we congratulate you for that, you had introduced in the Lok Sabha Secretariat the Channel of Sansad. Now, the existing Act, which we have in our possession, gives a mandatory direction to the Cable Network to carry the DD Lok Sabha Channel and the DD Rajya Sabha Channel. Now, only DD Rajya Sabha Channel exists and no DD Lok Sabha Channel exists. DD Lok Sabha Channel has been converted into Sansad Channel.
So, we have to amend the Section 8 of the Act to facilitate the non-prime band channel, to transmit the proceedings of the Lok Sabha. This is a limited object of this Bill, and I hope, the House would accept it and pass it so that the the wisdom that you have shown to carry this Channel in the Lok Sabha Secretariat, it gets into the Act for the cable operators.
That is all I can submit.
MR. SPEAKER: Thank you.
Motion moved:
“That the Bill further to amend the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1955, be taken into consideration. ”[r51] श्रीमती सुमित्रा महाजन (इन्दौर) : अध्यक्ष महोदय, यहां जो केबल टेलीविजन नेटवक्र्स रेगुलेशन अमेंडमेंटबिल आया है, उसमें विरोध करने जैसी कोई बात नहीं हा, उसका समर्थन ही करना है। लेकिन दो बातें मेरे मन में आयी हैं। मैं चाहूंगी कि उसके लिए कोई किसी प्रकार का किंतु परंतु मन में नही रखें, चूंकि अब यह बात टेबल पर आई है, इसलिए कई दिनों से मन में एक बात आ रही थी कि यह जो लोक सभा का चैनल चलता है, इसके रेगुलेशंस क्या हैं, उसके नियम किस तरीके से बने हुए हैं, इसे संचालित करने वाली बॉडी क्या है, उसका बजट कहां से आता है और उसका संचालन किस तरीके से हो रहा है? इसका कभी कोई जिक्र यहां लोक सभा में नहीं हुआ। मैं चैनल की किसी तरह की आलोचना नहीं कर रही हूं, लेकिन उसके संचालन के बारे में मुझे लगता है कि यहां बैठे हुए किसी भी सदस्य को कोई जानकारी नहीं होगी।
चूंकि आज आपने इसे पार्लियामेंट में रखा है, एक अलग संदर्भ में इसे रखा है, इसलिए मैं जानना चाहूंगी कि जैसे हम डीडी-I और डीडी-II के बारे में जानते हैं, वैसे ही इस चैनल के बारे में भी अगर थोड़ी सी जानकारी लोक सभा सदस्यों को मिल जाए कि किस तरीके से इसका संचालन होता है तो वह ज्यादा ठीक रहेगा। एक ओपन बात हो जाएगी और अगर यह भी २४ घंटे चलता होगा तो क्या वास्तव में इसकी २४ घंटे के लिए आवश्यकता है? कई बार लोक सभा की पुरानी डिबेट और कई अच्छे कार्यक्रम इस चैनल पर दिखाते हैं, इसमें लोक सभा के बारे में जानकारी भी दिखाई जाती है, इससे कई पुरानी बातें जो जनता को मालूम नहीं है, वे जनता को मालूम होती हैं। इस द्ृष्टि से चैनल ठीक है लेकिन कई बार ऐसा होता है जो आजकल हम बाकी चैनल्स के लिए भी देखते हैं कि २४ घंटे चलाना हो तो फिर जो चाहे कुछ भी उसमें आ सकता है। एक सलेक्टिविटी नहीं बचती। इस द्ृष्टि से भी सोचा जाना चाहिए कि जब लोक सभा नहीं चलेगी तब क्या उसके कुछ टाइमिंग हो सकते हैं? इस बारे में अगर आप संसद में यहां बताएं तो अच्छा रहेगा। यह सब देखते समय मुझे केवल एक ही बात महसूस हुई कि जब आपका यह अमेंडमेंट बिल सामने आया तो बाईचांस मैंने वे सारे रूल्स देखने शुरु किये जो आपके केबल रेगुलेशंस एक्ट के अन्तर्गत आते हैं। तब मुझे लगा कि जो रुल्स आपने केबल ऑपरेटर्स के लिए बनाए हैं, वे किस प्रकार के चैनल्स दिखाएं औऱ किस प्रकार के नहीं दिखाएं, तो नियमों के अनुसार चलने से तो सभी चैनल्स बंद करने पड़ेंगे।...( व्यवधान)जो आपके रूल्स हैं, उनमें रुल ६ देखें। एक प्रोग्राम कोड़ है जो केबल वालों के लिए लगाया गया है औऱ उसमें इतना सारा लिखा है:-“No programme should be carried in the cable service which offends against good taste or decency.” कई सारी बातें उसमें हैं-जैसे मित्र देश के खिलाफ कुछ नहीं होना चाहिए। उसमें डीसेंसी और इंडीसेंसी की भी कुछ व्याख्या की गई है। उसमें डेनीग्रे वीमैन की भी कुछ व्याख्या की गई है। महिलाओं के बारे में भी कहा है। अगर ये सब चीजें सभी चैनल्स पढ़ें, अगर आप एकता कपूर के सीरियल्स देखें तो मुझे लगता है कि वे सारे बंद करने पडेंगे।...( व्यवधान)
अध्यक्ष महोदय :लोक सभा चैनल चलेगा। उसमें कुछ वॉयलेशन नहीं है।
श्रीमती सुमित्रा महाजन :सर,मैं मानती हूं कि अगर किसी महिला को आप कम कपड़ों में दिखाएं तो इंडीसेंसी होती है। लेकिन विचारों की भी एक इंडीसेंसी होती है। उसमें जिस तरीके से महिलाएं लगातार २४ घंटे बड़े-बड़े अलंकार रात को सोते समय भी पहने हुए रखती हैं और एक महिला दूसरी महिला के खिलाफ कुछ-कुछ प्लानिंग करती रहती है कि इसे मैं नीचा कैसे दिखाऊं, ये सारी बातें देखने में इतनी गंदी, इतनी इंडीसेंट लगती हैं। इसलिए मुझे लगता है कि या तो आप रुल्स चेंज करिए क्योंकि बेचारे केबल ऑपरेटर्स क्या करेंगे? कल आप उन पर बंदिश लगाएंगे। उन पर फाइन करेंगे। आपने नियमों में उनके लिए दो-दो साल की कैद भी लिखी cè* [r52] उसके बाद कुछ बातें एडवरटाइजमेंट की आती है। केबल्स नीचे की लाइन की जो बातें दिखाते है, वे इन सब चीजों का उल्लंघन कर रहे हैं। आपने ऐसे नियम क्यों बनाये हैं? कभी कभी लगता है कि ऐसे बहुत से लम्बे-चौड़े नियम बनाये गये हैं। अभी यह बात चल रही है कि स्टेट कमेटी बने जो उसकी मौनिटरिंग करे। आपने बहुत सारे नियम तो बना दिये लेकिन हर स्टेट अपनी तरफ से बात निकालती है। मैं देख रही थी कि पश्चिम बंगाल की सरकार ने कहा कि वह एस्ट्रोलौजी चैनल बंद करायेगी, उसके लिये कमेटी बनेगी। मैं जानना चाहती हूं कि उन्हें भविष्य की बात जानना पसंद नहीं लेकिन मैं कहती हूं कि हमारा वर्तमान बिगड़ रहा है, यह पहले सोचना चाहिये। सरकार ने एफ.टीवी बंद कर दिया, बहुत अच्छा काम किया है। अध्यक्ष जी, आपने उस दिन कहा था कि यह मामला मत उठाइये, चैनल ने अपोलोजाइज़ किया है, ठीक है, इसलिये मैंने मामला नहीं उठाया। हर आदमी अपनी बात अपने तरीके से रखना चाहता है। इस बिल में भी कहा है - टू एक्सप्लायट नेशनल एम्बलम -। मगर यह क्यों हो रहा है? यहां मंदिरा बेदी की बात नहीं कि तिरंगे का अपमान किया गया लेकिन यह इन जनरल हो रहा है। आज के टी.वी. चैनल्स की जो पद्धति हो गई है, वह लोगों के सामने आई है। देश के लिये खेलना अलग बात है लेकिन खेल के लिये खेलना बचा नहीं है। हम लोग हर चीज को शो-बाजी की तरफ ले जाते रहे हैं। उसके पहले यह बात चली थी कि मंदिरा बेदी खेल में शामिल हो जायेंगी, कमेंटरी करेंगी और उसकी साड़ी का फैशन डिज़ाइन अलग रहेगा, वह बाजार में आयेगी, इस प्रकार का विज्ञापन आता रहा। मैं इस मानसिकता को उस दिन उठानी चाहती थी। यह केवल हमारे ध्वज के अपमान की बात नहीं है लेकिन हमारी जो मानसिकता हो रही है, उसमें कहीं न कहीं ऐसी सोच लानी पड़ेगी।
अध्यक्ष जी, आज विधायिका, न्यायपालिका और कार्यपालिका की चर्चा की जाती है, लेकिन उसके साथ प्रचारिका या प्रसारिका, जो भी कहें, इसकी भी अपनी जिम्मेदारी है, जिसके लिये आपने रूल्स बनाये हैं। अभी उस दिन शिल्पा शैट्टी वाला मामला न्यूज चैनल पर हर १५ मिनट के बाद लगातार दिखाया जाता रहा। बच्चे उस कार्यक्रम में नहीं गये और वे नहीं जानते थे कि वहां क्या हुआ होगा, लेकिन चैनल लगातार हर १५ मिनट के बाद उसे बार बार दिखा रहा है। इस प्रकार की बहुत सारी बातें मिलेगी। चैनल पर हौरर शो रात के बाद शुरु होता है, क्या उसे २४ घंटे दिखायेंगे?
अध्यक्ष जी, मैं कोई लम्बा-चौड़ा भाषण नहीं करना चाहती परन्तु इस विषय पर फिर बाद में कभी बोल लूंगी। अभी तो इस बिल पर लमिटेड बात कहना चाहूंगी। मैं दासमुंशी जी से जानना चाहती हूं कि आपने केबल नैटवर्क के लिये इतने सारे कानून बना दिये, लेकिन इन सब का क्या होगा? अगर इन नियमो को देखा जाये तो कोई भी चैनल अपना कार्यक्रम नहीं दिखा पाय़ेगा। आपने बिल पर १-२-३-४-५ नियम पूरे पन्ने पर लिखे हैं, इससे मुझे नहीं लगता कि एक भी केबल चैनल अपने कार्यक्रमों को दिखा पायेगा। आप इस पर पुनर्विचार करें या उन पर आप कैसे कंट्रोल कर सकते हैं, इस पर सोचें। मैं चाहती हूं कि लोकसभा टी.वी. के बारे में पूरी जानकारी माननीय सदस्यों को दे सकते हैं, तो अच्छा होगा ताकि वे अपने सुझाव दे सकेंगे।
MR. SPEAKER: May I take the liberty? As you know, all of us in this House had been thinking of it and ultimately, we decided about this Lok Sabha Channel. Hon. Leaders may recall, I believe, that at least two meetings were held if not more to discuss its structure. I am thankful to all for their kind encouragement given to having this Channel.
Secondly, so far we have formed an Advisory Committee, as you are aware. I am thankful to hon. Leaders. Some of the Members did participate in that meeting. Maybe it should be held more frequently. I am accepting that.[s53] Thirdly, a very pertinent point has been raised here. Why should this channel be a 24-hour channel? It has been made a 24-hour channel temporarily because no cable operator will otherwise show the channel for a certain number of hours as they would not like to interrupt the service. Hence, we have been requesting the hon. Minister to make it mandatory rather than reduce it to 8-hour or 10 hour channel. If this is done, then it is applicable to them and they cannot take the plea of interrupted transmission. This is one of the reasons for doing it. I am thankful to the hon. Minister for moving it, and for his generous support for it.
As far as the structure, rules, regulations, functioning, etc. are concerned, I shall wholeheartedly welcome your suggestions for the same. I will also see that the Secretariat makes a proper study for it. We will also consult all the hon. Leaders. It would be done in whatever way you all suggest it to be done. There is nothing to hide, and there is nothing to suppress from anybody. All the success that has been achieved so far is because of the kind support of all sections of the House. So many hon. Leaders and hon. Ministers have been attending its meetings, and I am thankful to all of them. Mistakes may be there, and certainly it is open to correction with your kind suggestions. We shall welcome all the suggestions from you.
PROF. VIJAY KUMAR MALHOTRA (SOUTH DELHI): Sir, thank you very much. Can there not be an Act for this too?
MR. SPEAKER: Yes, I have no objection to it at all. I am not the owner, and nobody is the owner of it. The Parliament of India is the owner of this channel. Thank you very much for your suggestion. We will discuss it very soon, but I thank you for your suggestion.
Next speaker is Shri K. S. Rao.
SHRI K.S. RAO (ELURU): Thank you very much, Sir. I am very happy that you have given me an opportunity to participate in the discussion on this Bill. I am of the opinion that the Lok Sabha channel has now become popular to the extent that even the villagers can see it. It is of common knowledge that cable TVs are more popular than national TVs in the villages, urban areas, smaller towns, etc. Naturally, this regulation will definitely make more number of people in this country to see the proceedings of Lok Sabha, and also the programmes offered by the Lok Sabha channel.
Sir, you have done a good thing by allowing the live transmission of the activities from the Lok Sabha. We were of the opinion that it will regulate the behaviour of the Members of Parliament to a certain extent. Though no substantial improvement is seen in the last couple of years after starting the channel was started, but I am very optimistic that over a period of time they will realize that people are watching our behaviour over the TV. People can always accept good discussion, and criticism and fault-finding of the ruling party, but it should not be in by wasting the time of the House, which is very valuable and which costs the public a lot of their money. Therefore, this Bill will make it mandatory even for the private operators to re-transmit it. I am of the opinion that by doing this it will reach more number of people and more number of people will be able to understand about all that is being done in Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha.
Secondly, some of the programmes that we are approving here -- like the National Insurance Programme for the poor people in the villages -- are not getting enough publicity. The Finance Minister had introduced this in his last Budget, but it has not reached as many people as it should really have. This Bill will also help the people in the villages to know about the kind of Bills that we are bringing in the House, and the kind of facilities that we are planning to give them. This would help them to avail those facilities, and better their lives.
Shrimati Sumitra Mahajan belongs to BJP, but she has also supported this Bill. I am very happy about it. She also suggested some points for improvement of this channel. I am also of the opinion that the contents of the Lok Sabha channel must be improved, and it must be competitive as compared with other channels. People must feel like seeing the Lok Sabha TV channel. They should not think that it is a routine thing, and that it is not so important to watch it. Therefore, while conveying about all that is happening in the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha, it must also be presented in a manner that attracts the attention of the people of this country.
Similarly, the time of transmission also must be suitable to the people of this country. Now, the channel is being run on 24-hour basis, but the programmes must be shown in a manner that suits the people in the villages as well as the poor people of this country.[r54] 17.00 hrs. It is mentioned that while doing it there should not be any alteration. Clause 2 says the channels referred in sub-section 1 shall be transmitted without any deletion or alteration of any programme. That is very important. If there were to be any change, that leads to a lot of complications and problems later. So, there should not be any deletion or alteration in the programmes that have come up.
In this context, I wish to mention a few words about the stand taken by our hon. Minister on the earlier occasions. When it was found that some programmes were detrimental to our culture, he immediately acted on it and banned the channels like AXN for Men’s World programme after 11 in the night and also Yoko Height Increase Device of 2005. The Minister should take severe action on those channels who broadcast obscene pictures, derogatory programmes about the women. Ads which encourage consumption of liquor, tobacco and other objectionable things also should be banned. If action were to be taken on those channels immediately without loss of time, others will realize that if they were to go against the regulation and rules provided in the Act, they will be punished very severely. While he gave an opportunity to them to rectify earlier by exonerating them by taking apologies from them, in future it should not be so. Punishment must be deterrent so that others will not repeat the same things.
I do not want to take much time of the House. While there is no pre-censorship on these programmes and self regulation is there, it is for them to regulate themselves. Otherwise, penalties will be levied in a huge way. That must go to their minds. With these words, I support this Bill and I support the time in which it is brought. I want the hon. Minister to make the channels more popular with the right content.
SHRI VARKALA RADHKRISHNAN (CHIRAYINKIL): Sir, I support this amendment Bill. It is after all a simple amendment for inserting Section 8 through which the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha Television Channels may get compulsory re-transmission. These two agencies are working independent of Doordarshan. There is already a provision in the statute making it compulsory for all Doordarshan programmes to be re-transmitted. There is no difficulty. We wanted statutory backing. For that purpose, this amendment is brought. So, the question of support is not the problem.
In Parliament, we function in many ways. We function by Committees and we function by assembling in the Lok Sabha Chamber and taking business. This is another form of functioning in the media, in the television. So, that also must have some regulation. We must frame rules for this particular functioning of this House. As I said, it is one form of functioning of this House. Here, we are functioning under the Rules of Procedure we have framed under the provisions of the Constitution. We have the overall statutory backing. So, we function on that principle. This is another form of functioning.
I fully appreciate this measure. It is only proper and just that we have entered into the visual media. It is quite correct. We are now a part and parcel of the modern tendencies and modern developments. Previously, Parliament did not have such a function. We were functioning in a separate way. Now we have entered into the visual media also appropriately at the appropriate time. Our purpose is to educate the people about how we function, the way in which we function, and the rules by which we are functioning. So, it must also be a model visual education. So, it must be run as a model thing.
TV nowadays has become a part of daily life. It is being misused for which I would like to request the hon. Members to make regulation, to put some control over cable media operators also. They are doing much mischief. They are showing certain programmes which are very injurious to public health and also to public opinion.[KMR55] So, we must have some regulations to control the media. We must have some regulations for the cable operators. It is not connected with this amending Bill and it has to be taken up separately by bringing in an amendment regulating all the cable operators. It will be the proper way of doing things. As food adulteration is a criminal act, so is the adulteration in public life. They can adulterate public life. Nobody is exempted from seeing the visual media. It is high time for us to have some criminal provisions to see that the private cable operators do not adulterate the public life. Taking adulterated food is highly injurious and so also is the misuse of cable operators. It is a dangerous aspect of human life and it must be controlled. As we have Acts to control food adulteration, we must also have an Act to control cable operators doing mischief and showing wrong publicity and making our public life highly adulterated. The Government is not the proper authority to take decisions in public life. Newspapers, nowadays, are not creating public opinion but television is creating the public opinion. That public opinion to some extent will be injurious. So, I request the hon. Minister to consider those aspects and bring in some regulation so that the public opinion is not adulterated. Television can do much mischief which we cannot even imagine. This is our experience in life.
Talking about Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha TV channel, we should be careful. We should have separate regulations to control this channel. We should make it a moral visual media so far as public life in India is concerned. We have a duty and I hope that the Minister will consider all these aspects. The hon. Speaker may also consider the aspect of brining in some rules so that it functions in a proper way. This channel must be there for 24 hours but under some control. For that purpose we must frame some rules. Some experts will have to come in and this must be done in a proper way. I support the Bill.
SHRI SURESH PRABHAKAR PRABHU (RAJAPUR): Sir, I welcome this Bill because for long time there was a thinking that we did not have our own channel unlike US where there is C-Span which works almost round the clock and keeps telecasting various programmes pertaining to the functioning of Senate and the House. So, I think this is something which is very welcome. I would like to make a few points.
I would like to know from the Minister, do you have the technology to ensure that what we make as a law can be enforced so that all the cable operators who are not showing it, for example, you will be able to track them and will be able to punish them because even today there are so many channels which are functioning, which are owned by Doordarshan, I am sure there is flouting of it with impunity. So, I would like to know whether that technology is available.
I would now like to make a few suggestions. Firstly, whether it should be a 24-hours channel or not, I am sure is a question which you will be able to address. My point is, if at all it is going to be a 24-hours channel then there are various possibilities. It should be a Members’ channel. There are 545 Members in this House. We can be used to actually take part in its programmes on an on-going basis. To decide what should be the content of these programmes, in addition to the professionals who will actually be involved, you can form subject-wise advisory committees of the Members of Parliament themselves. Some of us have got specific interests, we will be able to guide the content of the programme and we will be able to work on it. So, it will truly become the Members’ channel.
Secondly, positive contributions of Members of Parliament should also be highlighted. Nowadays, I think this is something which will really be helpful.[R56] MR. SPEAKER: It is very important.
SHRI SURESH PRABHAKAR PRABHU : Thirdly, the rules and responsibility of Members of Parliament vis-à-vis other functionaries in the Government whether it is a Member of the Legislative Assembly, and whether it is a corporator. There is a lot of confusion. I think this channel can be used with a very imaginative programmes for all the people of the country to know that this is what the Members of Parliament do and what they cannot do. Therefore, the Members of Parliament can be put in the right perspective and the expectation of them can also be properly decided. We can telecast the proceedings of the Standing Committees of Parliament as well as the Consultative Committees.
MR. SPEAKER: There is consensus on this. You try to persuade them.
SHRI SURESH PRABHAKAR PRABHU : Sir, I know that. But I am just suggesting if it is possible. More importantly the proceedings of the Public Accounts Committee of Parliament can be telecast which is, in fact, the most important arm to exercise control over the Executive.
As regards MPLAD Scheme, there are so many good things which several Members of Parliament have done in their constituencies but only bad things get highlighted. So, can we not pick and choose some of the good things that the Members of Parliament have done in their own Constituencies and they can be highlighted? So, there should be some specific programme.
MR. SPEAKER: Some of them have been shown.
SHRI SURESH PRABHAKAR PRABHU : In addition to that, some Members of Parliament have gone beyond MPLAD and have done something in their constituencies. I have also created Parivartan Kendras in which I involve people and there are 115 of those. Can we not highlight them and talk about them? Let there be a sort of healthy competition among the Members of Parliament. People want to have the channel for 24 hours and a number of channels which go beyond Parliament. But all of us are thinking that first of all we must have, at least, 150 days of Parliament so that we can actually have more time to debate on issues. If that happens, this problem will be solved partially. But even then we will have 200 days when there is no Parliament. In that period, some of these ideas can be used. Moreover, we can think of re-telecasting of something which has been discussed in Parliament because Lok Sabha functions normally from 11 a.m. to 6 p.m. but many people are working during that time. So, if we can tweak the time and re-telecast it and actually show it to people.
MR. SPEAKER: Probably, that is being shown. I thank you for your suggestion. There is always scope for improvement.
SHRI SURESH PRABHAKAR PRABHU: Sir, you can make some of the Advisory Committees of the Members of Parliament.
MR. SPEAKER: There is already one.
SHRI TATHAGATA SATPATHY (DHENKANAL): Sir, I thank you for giving me this opportunity. The Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha channels being independent and getting permission to uplink from December 2005 has been a good step and this Bill is welcomed by everybody in this House.
Sir, as all of us are aware, most of us, the legislators, are viewed as walky-talky Rs.2 crore. Due to the MPLAD fund, people are limiting us to that particular aspect of our responsibility. But it is very necessary that countrymen judge us, watch us and see how we perform. We are not iconoclastic and that we are not bourgeois. We are not people who are compartmentalized within this House and that we are actually expressing the opinions and the feelings that the common man expresses or feels. So, while welcoming this amendment which is obvious all of us welcome it, I would like to tell the hon. Minister and his Ministry that in this modern era, we must take care of not to become moral police. We have to give a lot of freedom to the media to ensure that a healthy growth of the media takes place in this country.
As you know, Gandhiji was probably the only person in this country who knew the very pulse of the Indians. He knew, as a race, we are an extremely disobedient race. Therefore, his major thrust and his major programme was on civil disobedience. He knew how to use our *……quirkiness, weakness or our strength, whatever you call it to achieve the glorious height to which he could take this country.[R57] Let us be aware that while we pass this Bill, let there be no loopholes. I would like to request the hon. Minister to thoroughly check the provisions of the Bill in order that there are no loopholes which would allow this characteristics of ours of being disobedient that we do such a thing which will neutralize the good work done and result eventually in depriving the people of this country from *Not recorded seeing how this august House functions, how the hon. Speaker quietens us and how many times he has to remind the hon. Members of the House about how to behave in the House since the entire country is watching us. Whether we demean ourselves or rise above our pettyselves whatever we are doing has to be constantly told to and seen by the people of this country so that they learn to view the legislators in a different light.
SHRI TAPIR GAO (ARUNACHAL EAST): Sir, first of all I would like to seek your permission for speaking from here.
MR. SPEAKER: I want all of you to come forward. But it should be in a manner that is appropriate.
SHRI TAPIR GAO : Sir, first of all, I rise to support this Bill. There is a need for the people of the country to see as to whom they are sending to Parliament. Through these channels of the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha the people at large are now able to identify us easily even in the streets, at the Railway Stations and at the airports. People tell us that they have seen me in the Lok Sabha TV channel. I have got a few points to make on this Bill.
Sir, in keeping with the requirements of the Cable Television Network Regulations Act, 1995 inter-Ministerial Committees have been constituted to monitor the functioning of the cable operators. What kind of functions are these Committees performing to control the activities of the private TV channels? Earlier, when television first came to India it was termed as the `idiot box’ but with passage of time it has not remained an idiot box any more. Television is being watched not only by children of all ages, but also by elderly people. Television is a medium now through which we get information and it has an influence in the minds of the children. Therefore, the programmes shown on TV have to be censored. I would like to say that the role of the inter-Ministerial Committee was to control the functioning of the cable operators and take care of the nature of concerns that are being expressed by the hon. Members here today.
Sir, I have got a few suggestions to make. I have been a regular participant in the Lok Sabha channel. On last Saturday I had been invited to attend a programme on the channel. A gentleman from Kolkata called up to ask as to why the Chambers of the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha are mostly empty. My reply was that it was their duty to see as to whom they are sending as Members to the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha. This shows that the citizens of our country have become more aware by watching these dedicated channels. We have to give more importance to these channels in order that we are able to compete better with the private operators.
Sir, another suggestion that I would like to make is that if the channels could show some films on Saturdays and Sundays. It should not be those of vulgar nature, but films that has a patriotic character.
MR. SPEAKER: Award winning films are already being shown.
SHRI TAPIR GAO : Those films should be telecast on these dedicated channels either on Saturday or on Sunday.
MR. SPEAKER: I am thankful to the hon. Minister for Information and Broadcasting for making those films available.
SHRI TAPIR GAO: Sir, we have three Sessions, namely, the Budget, the Monsoon and the Winter Sessions. During the inter-Sessions the channels may think of telecasting the proceedings of the State Assemblies through recorded cassettes so that the people also can know better about what policies and programmes are being pursued by the State Governments.
Sir, with these few words, keeping in view the limitation of time, I conclude my speech.
MR. SPEAKER: I am not piloting the Bill but you know that I am somehow involved in this Bill. As regards the State Assemblies, I have requested all the hon. Speakers of the State Assemblies if they can send the footage because we cannot keep the cameras in all the Assemblies but we can happily show that here. One honourable Speaker of a State has also expressed his willingness to do that and therefore, the Lok Sabha TV is very keen to show those proceedings also if we can get the footage.
SHRI K. FRANCIS GEORGE (IDUKKI): This legislation is of a very vital importance in the sense that this will enable the people to watch how we, the elected representatives of the people, perform in the Lok Sabha.
MR. SPEAKER: If I may interrupt, it is believed that the purpose of having a channel is to show our Members’ conduct. That is not so. It is in recognition of the constitutional right of the people of this country as to what is happening in the highest elected forum. It is conceding their right to know. This is the main objective. We have got the Visitors Gallery of 500 people although we did not mention it. Now the entire country will seem to be the Visitors Gallery.
SHRI K. FRANCIS GEORGE : This is what I was actually referring to. This is a vast country and everybody cannot afford to come to the Visitors Gallery and see the proceedings of the House. In a democratic set-up, it is the right of the people to know it and with modern technology, we can make it readily available and that is being done. So, I welcome this step.
Several suggestions were made by other Members also. I would request that, whenever there is spare time, alongwith award winning films and patriotic songs, we can also show clips from international conferences on very serious subjects. If proceedings of other forums may be made available to us, that will help the general public. I would request that the content of the programmes should be made more serious and more beneficial to the Members and the general public. This is all that I want to say.
श्री संतोष गंगवार (बरेली): अध्यक्ष महोदय, वैसे इसमें कुछ विशेष कहने की आवश्यकता नहीं है लेकिन मैं इसलिए बोलने के लिए खड़ा हुआ हूं क्योंकि मैंने कम से कम तीन-चार पत्र मंत्री जी को लिखे होंगे कि यह हमारे क्षेत्र में नहीं दिखाया जाता। जब दिखाया जाना शुरू हुआ तो ६४, ६५ नम्बर पर हुआ जिसका कोई अर्थ नहीं था। आप इस बिल को लेकर आए हैं लेकिन दुर्भाग्य यह है कि इसे ऑपरेटर्स या मल्टी सर्विस ऑपरेटर्स अपने हिसाब से चलाते हैं और काफी कमियां करते हैं। अगर उनकी सरकार का जिला प्रशासन है या उनका परचित है, तब वे चाहे कितनी ही अनियमितताएं करते जाएं, उनकी ओर ध्यान नहीं दिया जाता। आपने जिले के अधिकारियों को इसकी मौनीटरिंग करने और देखने का इंचार्ज बनाया है। आजकल उत्तर प्रदेश में चुनाव हो रहे हैं तो कुछ चैनल इस तरह प्रचार कर रहे हैं जिससे लगता है कि यह सारे नियमों से अलग हटकर प्रचार कर रहे हैं। वहां पूरे दो महीने तक प्रचार हुए जिसमें ऐसे-ऐसे प्रचार हुए जिनका मैं यहां उल्लेख करना उचित नहीं समझता। मैं आभारी हूं कि माननीय अध्यक्ष जी के आशीर्वाद से, आपके प्रयासों से हमने एक नई व्यवस्था शुरु की। जैसे शुरू में कहा गया कि कोई एक्ट और नियम नहीं बनाएंगे, इसमें बहुत सी भर्तियां हुई हैं तथा दूसरे कार्य हुए हैं। मैं कहना चाहता हूं कि इसमें पारदर्शिता रहे और लोगों को समझ में आए कि हम इस ढंग के चैनल भी दिखा सकते हैं। इसके साथ ही मुझे एक बात कहनी है कि राज्य सभा चैनल के बारे में अभी तक राय नहीं बन पाई है। यह क्यों नहीं हुआ है। ...( व्यवधान)
MR. SPEAKER: You need not discuss this here. You know the history of it.
श्री संतोष गंगवार : हमारा कहना है कि इसमें एकरूपता होनी चाहिए। मुझे इस बारे में और कुछ नहीं कहना है।
मैं बरेली क्षेत्र से आता हूं। वहां एक मल्टी सर्विस ऑपरेटर सारे नियमों को वॉयलेट करके काम करता है। मेरा आग्रह है कि इस संदर्भ में आप कुछ स्थानों पर इसकी जांच करें और कार्यवाही करें। जब तक किसी को सजा नहीं मिलेगी, तब तक कुछ नहीं होगा। यहां आपने एफटीवी बंद करके अच्छा कार्य किया है।
आखिर में मेरी लोक सभा चैनल से शिकायत है कि वह हमारे क्षेत्र में छ: महीने पहले गए थे।[N58] वे वहां से पूरी फिल्म बनाकर लाये थे। छ: महीने हो गये लेकिन आज तक वह फिल्म दिखायी नहीं गयी। ...( व्यवधान)
MR. SPEAKER: It is very long.
श्री संतोष गंगवार :हमारा आग्रह है कि यदि वे किसी क्षेत्र में जायें, तो वहां के लोगों को रूचि रहती है कि आप जो देखकर आये, उसके लिए कोई शैडयूलिंग होनी चाहिए। अभी बताया गया कि यह चैनल २४ घंटे दिखाया जा रहा है। हमारे साथियों ने बताया कि सांसद कोष के बारे में बदनामी रहती है, लेकिन सांसद कोष से जो काम अच्छे होते हैं, वे भी लोगों की समझ में आना चाहिए कि एमपीलैड से ये काम भी हो सकते हैं। यह भी समझ में आना चाहिए कि हमारा सांसद किस प्रकार से काम करता है, किस प्रकार से लोगों से डील करता है। चूंकि मैं टेलीविजन अक्सर देखता हूं, मुझे लगता है कि ऐसी बहुत सी टॉक्स आती हैं जो हर चैनल पर आपको देखने को मिल जायेंगी। हम चाहते हैं कि लोगों को स्पेसीफिक लगे ताकि वे अपने सांसद के बारे सही ढंग से जान सकें और उससे बात कर सकें। अगर उनसे क्वेश्चन्स भी कर सकें, तो ज्यादा उचित रहेगा।
मैं आपके प्रति आभार व्यक्त करते हुए कहना चाहूंगा कि आपने अच्छी दिशा में काम किया है। लोक सभा चैनल प्रतिष्ठा पाये और अच्छे ढंग से काम करे, इस प्रकार की योजना बनायी जाये ताकि हम सही ढंग से इस काम में आगे बढ़ सकें।
SHRI M. SHIVANNA (CHAMRAJANAGAR): Thank you Sir, I would like to congratulate the Hon. Minister for having brought an historical Bill. There is nothing wrong in it, if I say it is a very important Bill. I wish to associate myself with my friends and the Hon. Members who have already discussed on this Bill. Ever since television broadcast has been introduced in the Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha we the Hon. Members of Parliament are being highly respected by the people, who are watching the business of Parliament. The people have been appreciating and they are very happy with those facilities. Many a times people are admiring us for participating in the business of the Parliament as representatives of people. It is the matter of great pleasure that the Government takes steps to prepare a documentary on the MPLAD funds and the spending of Rs. 2 crore. The public shall be privileged to know whether Members of Parliament are utilizing these funds in useful way. That is why I would like to suggest the Government to send a team of Officers to study the developmental work in the constituencies of the Members of Parliament and prepare a tele film on this developmental programmes and display it in the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha and also National channels. So that it may ensure proper utilization of the MPLADS funds. On the one hand it would be a caution for the members those who are misusing these funds of Rs. 2 crores. On the other hand it will also inspire the Hon. Members to start developmental work in their respective constituencies. Once again I support this Bill on behalf of Janata Dal (S) parliamentary party. I congratulate the Hon. Minister and also express my sincere thanks to Hon. Speaker for giving me an opportunity to participate in this discussion. With this I conclude.
*English translation of the speech originally delivered in Kannada.
SHRI B. MAHTAB (CUTTACK): Mr. Speaker, Sir, thank you. The amendment which has been moved by the Minister is a welcome one. The major purpose of amending Section (8) is to make this channel from a non-prime one to prime one. This is the major aspect of this Bill. It is a very welcome step.
My only concern before the House is this. Relating to the functioning of this House a message is going out that the whole country is in the Visitors’ Gallery. In the Parliament, not necessarily only in our country, in other democracies also, the Chair repeatedly says: “This will not go on record.” When the Chair rules that something will not go on record, during those times, say 100 or 200 years back, it meant that it was not to be printed. The print media should not disclose that or print that in future. All deliberations of the House are the property of the House. I would like the Minister and the House to consider this.[MSOffice59] Some utterances are being made and very rightly so that this will not go on record and it is being recorded and it is being telecast. So the electronic media is actually portraying everything that is on record and which is supposed to be not on record. … (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: The idea is that nobody should do something which has to be deleted.
SHRI B. MAHTAB : Sir, I think, some thinking has to be made in this regard. … (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: But Shri Mahtab, please excuse if I may interrupt you. Those who come and watch us from little higher physical positions are also hearing those.
SHRI B. MAHTAB : Sir, I would humbly submit here that the print media is being debarred to print it whereas electronic media by taking it from the Lok Sabha television or other electronic media goes on repeating those incidents either in the well or whatever is being deliberated. So some restrictions are necessary and some amendment in the rules has become necessary. … (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Let us hope the technology will come to deal with that situation.
SHRI B. MAHTAB : I just wanted to draw the attention of the hon. Minister.
Secondly, I will come to the MSO about which Shri Santosh Gangwar has mentioned. We have deliberated it five or six years back as to how to ensure the Act, especially the cable television operator or the server who is providing that, there is competition in different cities and different towns between MSO. But, at the same time, the client or the persons who have taken cables are being exploited. The Act is to be enforced by whom? It is to be enforced by the District Magistrate and by the Sub-Divisional Magistrates. I do not know whether the Ministry is monitoring it. How many such cases have actually been registered? Has some MSO operators been convicted till date after such a long time? I only hope that this Bill, after being enacted, the law will be enforced and all MSOs and cable television operators will abide by it.
SHRI KIREN RIJIJU (ARUNACHAL WEST): I rise to support the important (Amendment) Bill brought by the hon. Minister.
Sir, I have one important suggestion to make. Shrimati Sumitra Mahajan has mentioned about the 24-hour telecast. I feel that when the Session is on, it can be telecast on 24-hour basis, but when the Session is not there, it can be curtailed to some limitation. That is one important aspect.
Another is the quality of the Lok Sabha Television channel. I rise here to congratulate the entire team of the Lok Sabha Television Channel that within a very short time has come up with such a brilliant team work and quality. Sir, my congratulation goes to you and to the hon. Minister also because you are pioneering the whole thing and the House is supporting. The manner in which all the news reporters are working is absolutely professional and I congratulate the whole team.
Sir, on this occasion I want to make a remark on the recent decision of the hon. Minister to ban some of the channels. I rise here to support completely the stand taken by the hon. Minister. We believe in the freedom of the media, but that does not mean that the media will go on showing as if there is no law governing them. So, the hon. Minister, we are with you and those obscene telecasting in the television is affecting the moral of our society.
So, I stand here to support the Bill.
SHRI P.C. THOMAS (MUVATTUPUZHA): Sir, I also support the Bill. But for this opportunity I might not have got an opportunity to bring this aspect to the notice of the House. There was once in television channel information which was received by somebody under Right to Information Act (RTI).[a60] On that basis, a programme was shown as if some Members of Parliament were not fully present in the House for the whole Session, for the whole number of days as if that was a fault. It was also insinuating the Members who were attending the Committees as if attendance in Committees are not important.
This channel, I would submit, may not be able to take the proceedings of the Committees because the deliberations of the Committees are not supposed to be made public. But the work in the Committees, which are also very important, especially the Standing Committees which are very important, are also to get light in some way or the other.
MR. SPEAKER: Please persuade the hon. Chairmen of the Committees. I will be very happy to do it. They have not agreed so far. Many times, I tried.
SHRI P.C. THOMAS : I feel that there is some impression that Committees are not important. The Committees are very important. The work done in some Committees are so good that it actually reflects the will of the House, then it comes to the House and it is supported by us.
With these words, I conclude.
THE MINISTER OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND MINISTER OF INFORMATION AND BROADCASTING (SHRI PRIYA RANJAN DASMUNSI): Sir, I am thankful to all the hon. Members who took part in the discussion on this Bill.
It is a very small amendment having very wider impact on the country. If the House could pass this Bill today and transmit it to the Rajya Sabha, it would be good.
First of all, I would like to congratulate you on behalf of my Ministry for your wisdom in having an independent channel of Lok Sabha free from the domain of Prasar Bharati. All the parties stood by you. I was also present on all the occasions whenever you called the meeting. In a short spell of time, the kind of team work done in this channel deserves wholehearted appreciation of entire Parliament. They have done a wonderful thing. If they get encouragement, they will produce better productions for the Parliament channel. I can say this on my behalf and on behalf of my Ministry and Government.
Besides the proceedings of Parliament, I have myself watched the way they presented the Satyagraha clippings of Mahatma Gandhi, Pandit Nehru’s speeches in Parliament and a few of the comments made in public as also his journey, Tryst with Destiny speech, etc. It was a wonderful document. I assure you and the Channel, Sir, that whenever the channel needs all the archival materials of Prasar Bharat, Films Division, we shall support it and we shall support it totally and fully.
MR. SPEAKER: Thank you very much.
SHRI PRIYA RANJAN DASMUNSI: I think that Independent India’s pride is our democratic functioning. In democratic functioning, one of the very important milestones is this Parliament. Therefore, the Parliament cannot be ignored, under-estimated. They present Parliament’s views and expressions objectively. They way the channel is doing the work is really a commendable thing. Cutting across all party lines, we appreciate it.
In regard to the suggestion of the Members for a future framework of running the channel, I would submit that you were kind enough to have accepted the suggestions in the past. You have said today that you would do it in future. I will not deal with those aspects. Whenever such meetings are called, we will attend. I feel you will give appropriate guidance. If you feel about appropriate legislation, code of conduct and guidelines, we shall stand by you. Whatever manner you feel it required, we do stand by you.
Today, the limited objective is to give direction to the cable operators because the cable operators, under the law, are not bound in any manner whatsoever to carry the Lok Sabha channel. The law says that DD Rajya Sabha and DD Lok Sabha is to be uplinked. DD Rajya Sabha is on. There is no problem. But we have taken out DD Lok Sabha because a new, independent channel of Lok Sabha, the Sansad Channel, has been introduced. That will come within the legal parameter of the direction to the cable operators. That is why, if you look at the Bill, we have amended the provision and we said:
“Every cable operator shall re-transmit channels operated by or on behalf of Parliament in the manner and name as may be specified by the Central Government by notification in the Official Gazette;.. ” We used the words “in the manner.”[R61] Today, the Lok Sabha TV Channel is called Sansad Channel. Tomorrow, if the other House thinks of a different channel, which is free from the domain of Prasar Bharati, the same Act could give the direction without bringing any amendment for that purpose or in future, if the Lok Sabha thinks of having some other channel in the manner that they feel fit, that could also be covered under this amendment. So, this amendment is not limited to the cable operators for the time being, but there will be no bar on having a new channel or renaming the existing channel. That is why, we made this amendment a little flexible.
Sir, I fully agree with the suggestions made by Shrimati Sumitra Mahajan and many other hon. Members. In 1995, the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act was passed. In those days, the number of channels was very limited. Now, in my Ministry, we are monitoring almost, and taking care of, 340 channels, including Doordarshan channels. As per my information, by early 2008 the number of channels will exceed 400 and by the end of the 11th Plan, going by the boom, we can surpass all the records of Europe and Asia. That is the position now so far as the number of channels is concerned. That is why, the UPA Government took a right decision to come out with a comprehensive legislation on the regulation of content as has been mentioned by Shri Varkala Radhakrishnan. I am doing a lot of homework now, talking to the stakeholders twice, putting the whole thing on the website, inviting their further opinion and in the early part of the next Session, I think I will be able to come to Parliament and introduce that Bill, which would be very media-friendly and upholding the freedom of the Press. There will be direct regulation of the Government or the bureaucracy. It will have a very interesting self-regulating mechanism like the Press Council where the responsibility will be on the stakeholders and we will be playing only a secondary role, not a dominating role. That is the kind of approach we are adopting.
SHRI BRAJA KISHORE TRIPATHY (PURI): At present, the Parliament news is not covered by the media, only the corporate news is covered. That is the position now. You should do something for that also because this is also necessary for the people.
SHRI PRIYA RANJAN DASMUNSI: I am coming to it. If the Parliament passes a law saying that all the media in the country will have to cover the speeches made by all hon. Members in Parliament, I think that law would be struck down by the court. Therefore, in a democracy which part of the speech of which MP will be covered by which media, I cannot compel. I can only say that our channel, that is, the Lok Sabha Television Channel should be telecast in a non-prime band by cable operators throughout the country. This was lacking in the law and today I have brought an amendment for that.
MR. SPEAKER: Thank you.
SHRI PRIYA RANJAN DASMUNSI: Sir, I am coming to the monitoring part now. I absolutely agree that after being the Minister in this Ministry, I felt a little hopeless in the sense that in such a huge country with more than one billion population, when the SP and the DM of each district are busy with their local developments, how they can really monitor this. They rely on the complaints made by the viewers, NGOs, social activists, headmasters and principals of schools and colleges. If something goes wrong, on the basis of complaint, they just convey to the cable operators to behave and issue a warning and if something goes beyond their limit, it comes to us. What do we do in that case? We also do not act in a hurry. If we get a complaint, first we get the complaint substantiated by the cassette. If the cassette is not supplied, we collect the cassette. Then, we send it to the Inter-Ministerial Committee consisting of officers from the Ministries Defence, External Affairs, Women and Child Development and Human Resource Development. If they collectively feel that something is done which is totally bad, they recommend the measure and on that measure the Minister has to act. It is not that I do something arbitrarily, not at all.
Sir, I can tell you – I am not talking politics here – that we have issued 75 to 80 Show Cause Notices during the tenure of the UPA Government and in most of the cases, the matter had been disposed of across the table because we found that broadcasters are very responsible. They are not only apologizing for their mistake, but they are also changing the whole thing and they are behaving in a proper manner.[R62] Only in two cases, I have to take stern line and two of the foreign channels were issued Show Cause Notices. Of those two foreign channels, one admitted its fault, apologized and we resumed them. But the other did not bother at all about our show cause or warning or whatever it is, so they have to be banned for two months.
I just tell you the kind of things that are going on in this media that the Government is doing too much of moral policing, often I face it. I prefer to be accused as a moral police officer than to be immoral police officer. But the question is that we are not doing any policing in the TV. The law is passed by the Parliament, that what is wrong you get, you scan in this manner and then go ahead. Out of 340 channels, more than 1,20,000 transmissions are there in a year and if at the end of the day, two channels are caught to be doing wrong and doing wrong beyond any limit and they are dealt firmly, the whole nation is being told by the media that moral policing is going on, interference is there. This is not correct.
I am not a judge of obscenity, culture and other things or a wise person to discuss this. One performing stage artist, Shilpa Shetty’s, kissing element was confined in our monitor for only 16.5 seconds. This 16.5 second scene has been repeatedly played in the TV the whole day, making it 120 times, to make it an issue and they say this is TRP. This is a mad race. What do we do? The law does not permit me to interfere. I only appeal to them, in a friendly manner, not to repeat it 100 times for your commercial purpose, to get more viewers and to drag the whole thing to the court. The poor lady is suffering. I am not saying what is right, you should not show and what is wrong, you should show, but what I am talking about is that in a democratic country, the Government and the media should be partners, not a fighting, quarrelling group between them. We do not like that.
We do not believe that Government should control media, we do not believe Government should control TV, we do not believe Government should interfere into TV, but we do believe certain kinds of arrangements, certain kinds of code, be it in advertisement, be it in content, have to be adhered to in every democratic country, be it Europe or India. Whenever you do anything in India, they will abuse us, but whereas I see the laws of the other parts of the world, then they keep quiet.
India’s liberalization does not mean that it is a free and empty ground to destroy any heritage, any law, any culture, any tradition of this country. That we cannot accept and there I object. We have banned showing liquor, we have banned showing cigarettes. Step by step, we are doing and against only two channels, we took stern action. That too, why? Because in school time, parents complained that they have only two rooms. In one room, the parents stay and in the other room, the children study and sleep. They say their exams are going on. We cannot prevent them, because we are middleclass people and we have got only one TV. The children come and sit before the TV, peep in and go and all this rubbish was shown in those times on a particular channel.
Not only principals, the NGOs, the women activists rang me up 100 times. Then we made a process. We asked these channels to come and cooperate. They did not. We issued letters, they did not reply. We appealed them to stop it, they did not bother because they are foreign channels. That is why, I have to act very firmly with the international decision and to ban it.
Now, the banning itself has become a topic that the Government is interfering. Why am I interfering? I would like to inform the House, you take stock of the news channels – I am not talking much before – just two years before the news channels were registered in the country to show news and current affairs. They used to show news 24 hours a day, right or wrong, whatever it is. Now, for the last two years, you will find that those news channels and current affairs channels are converting their 60 per cent as entertainment channels in the name of entertainment news and ignoring other prime news of the country, news of development and matters of great importance and all these things.[r63] I am having a meeting next month informally with Editors that if you feel the Bollywood shooting should be a part of the news channel, let us define and come with a code. News channels ignore the Parliament; news channels ignore the development of the country; news channels ignore the impact of a communal harmony message in a particular part of India. At that time they deduct the time and show something else which is a part of entertainment channel. There are different reasons. Then it is a problem for the country. That is why we are addressing it afresh next month. I am confident they will cooperate. I should tell again, Sir, that Indian print media and Indian television channels at the time of crisis of the nation, at the hour of call of the nation, always stand by the nation. Be it the case of Samjhouta Express blast, be it the case of Bombay serial blasts, be it the case of anything, they are second to none to defend the country and to avoid any kind of massacre in the society. They did exemplary work.
So I have faith in them. I do not like to teach them a lesson type of language; I do not like to interfere with them; I still have a hope. Hopefully when the Bill will come in the next Session, all these suggestions which you said could be accommodated in a manner by which the governance in this country, so far as the broadcasting channels are concerned, would be done absolutely in good faith with the media owners, with the television owners and the Government. The Government should not be a party to use stick every time to them; that is bad for any democratic country. That is how I am preparing the Bill. I claim, Sir, today when the Bill will come, it will be one and the last one in the whole world; the way we are preparing the Bill in this country. That is what I can say.
If you want to get rid of cable, we have to expand the CAS everywhere. The UPA Government is absolutely successful to implement the CAS free from all hindrances in the limited time that we have got by the Court, in Chennai, in Kolkata, in Delhi and in Mumbai. Our next course is to complete the four metropolitan cities and to spread it to other cities. DTH and CAS can make you free. At the same time, I do not want that cable operators should lose their jobs; lot of workers are there. We are also disciplining them; we are appealing them not to pirate a cassette. It is because piracy of the cassettes of good films is destroying our film industry also. Disastrous effect is coming. I have taken a decision; I have formed a Committee. The Committee’s recommendations came to me. Shrimati Shabana Azmi led the Committee. We are implementing it by another two months. I am absolutely clear that the atmosphere will be clean and transparent. So far as this particular amendment is concerned, it will be put into effect immediately after passing by the other House, and Lok Sabha channel will get a prominent and dominant role in the cable network. This, Sir, I can convey through you to the House.
MR. SPEAKER: Thank you, very much. Once again I wish to convey my sincere appreciation of the views that have been expressed, for gratefulness and for the very good suggestions that have come from the hon. Members and also appreciation. We must remember that for for only eight months, this channel is functioning. Thank you for your kind encouragement.
The question is:
“That the Bill further to amend the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act 1995, be taken into consideration.” The motion was adopted.
MR. SPEAKER: The House will now take up clause-by-clause consideration of the Bill.
The question is:
“That clause 2 stand part of the Bill.” The motion was adopted.
Clause 2 was added to the Bill.
Short Title and Commencement Clause 1 Amendment made:
Page 1, line 4,— for“2006”, substitute “2007”. (2) (Shri Priya Ranjan Dasmunsi) MR. SPEAKER: The question is: “That clause 1, as amended, stand part of the Bill.” The motion was adopted. Clause 1, as amended, was added to the Bi[r64] ll. Enacting Formula Amendment made: Page 1, line 1,— for“Fifty-seventh”, substitute “Fifty-eighth”. (1) (Shri Priya Ranjan Dasmunsi) MR. SPEAKER: The question is: “That the Enacting Formula, as amended, stand part of the Bill.” The motion was adopted. The Enacting Formula, as amended, was added to the Bill. The Long Title was added to the Bill.
MR. SPEAKER: Now, the hon. Minister may move that the Bill, as amended, be passed.
SHRI PRIYA RANJAN DASMUNSI: I beg to move:
“That the Bill, as amended, be passed.” MR. SPEAKER: The question is:
“That the Bill, as amended, be passed.”[r65] The motion was adopted.
----------
MR. SPEAKER: I am thankful to everybody and particularly to the hon. Minister for his very positive support throughout.
MR. SPEAKER: Now, the House is to be adjourned.
… (Interruptions)
श्री वीरेन्द्र कुमार (सागर) : सर, जीरो ऑवर ले लीजिए।
श्रीमती जयाबहन बी. ठक्कर (वडोदरा) : सर, अभी जीरो ऑवर लीजिए।
MR. SPEAKER: Okay. Shri B. Mahtab.