WHIPS IN THE INDIA PARLIAMENT
WHIPS IN THE INDIA PARLIAMENT
Ravindra Garimella is Joint
Secretary of the Lok Sabha Secretariat at the Parliament of India and a regular contributor to The Parliamentarian: Parliamentary Report.
Political parties have a significant role in the working of a democratic polity. Whips in turn have role cut out for them in smooth conduct of party affairs particularly in matters pertaining to House proceedings. The outcome of their endeavours and the efficacy of whips is manifest in the effective conduct of the passage of legislation and from a larger perspective, the House proceedings. Whips as an expression in its parliamentary context has its origins in hunting terminology. The Oxford English Dictionary defines the term ‘Whipper-in’ as “a huntsman’s assistant who keeps the hounds from straying by driving them back with the whip into the main body of the pack.” According to this dictionary, the first recorded use of the term ‘whipper-in’ in the parliamentary sense occurs in 1772.1 However P.D.G. Thomas in House of Commons in the Eighteenth Century cites examples of the use of the term that pre-date 1772. It was within the context of such summons to Members out of town that the first known Parliamentary instance of the use of the term ‘whip’ occurred in a debate on 8 May 1769 on petitions from some Middlesex freeholders against the seating of Henry Luttrell instead of John Wilkes. Edmund Burke who, in a debate in the House of Commons described how the King’s Ministers had made efforts to bring their followers together, how they had sent for their friends to the north and to Paris, whipping them in. The phrase adopted by Burke caught the public fancy and soon became popular.2 Coming to the very basic question, what are whips? A whip is a person, a crucial office bearer as also directives or directions issued by the whips. Simply put, whips are office bearers of political or legislative party offices with assigned tasks. Whips
are also the directives or voting instructions issued to Members by the party through their whips (here designated as the office bearer of the party). The operation and functionality of whips can be better appreciated through an illustration. It is a kind of triangle, where at the top we have the institution of Parliament or the Legislature and at the other two ends, we have the parliamentary party (which includes the party whips) and the Members of Parliament respectively. It is within this triangular space that the action takes place. Before Parliament, there is a question that a Bill be taken into consideration, clauses be adopted, the Bill be passed etc., or a motion be adopted. The party takes a position or a stand on which their Members need to vote. The party, therefore, enjoins their whips (the office holders) to ensure that their Members vote as per the party’s position on the Bill or motion. Accordingly, the whips (voting instructions) are issued by the whips (the office holders) for compliance, upon the Members who are at the other end of the triangle. It is through this relatively simple illustration I proceed to discuss the role of whips, their functions, responsibilities, consequences of violation of party whips, implications under the Anti-Defection Law and attendant legal issues. Political Parties Coming to define parties, it would be worthwhile to note the following observations and analysis by Stephen Ingle in his book ‘The British Party System: An Introduction’ - “In the newly established United States of America, Madison was not well disposed to parties, seeing them, as did Rousseau, as factions”
actuated by some common impulse of passion or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community...”3 Although each of these definitions adds something to our understanding of what political parties are, none captures the compelling simplicity of Burke’s classical, encompassing definition. “A party is a body of men united for promoting by their joint endeavours the national interest upon some particular principle in which they are all agreed.”4 For Burke, unlike Madison, there is no contradiction between the interests of the party and the state. Yet even Burke does not achieve the economy of Epstein’s disingenuous but realistic definition: “Almost everything that is called a party in any Western democratic nation can be so regarded.”5 A working definition culled (from aforementioned) might be as follows. “Parties are principally groups of people organized to seek to wield or influence political power through agreed constitutional means in the name of some organized opinion or ideology which binds them together and which distinguishes them from other groups...”6 Position of whips in the United Kingdom As per ‘Parliamentary Practice’ by Erskine May (24th edn): “Inside the House of Commons each party organisation is presided over by Members of the House and staffed by subordinate officials who are not Members. The officer or whips of the party in office consist of the Chief Whip who holds the official position of Parliamentary or patronage secretary to the Treasury, three officers of the Household and five lords of the
The Parliamentarian | 2018: Issue One | 57