Rahul Gandhi late in anti-graft drive: Bharatiya Janata Party

Written by Express news service | New Delhi | Updated: Feb 23 2014, 20:15pm hrs
Rejecting Congress vice-president Rahul Gandhis charge of stopping anti-corruption legislations as laughable, the Bharatiya Janata Party Saturday questioned the moral authority of the Congress leader to corner them on this issue.

Rahul Gandhis statement is laughable. His government has been steeped in corruption for last five years and then his party brings anti-corruption legislations on the last day of the last session. Sau chuhe kha ke billi Haj ko chali (the cat goes on a pilgrimage after eating 100 rats), Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha Sushma Swaraj said Saturday.

Arun Jaitley, her counterpart in Rajya Sabha, too questioned Rahuls grandstanding. He has not made a single remark over all the issues of corruption that shook the conscience of the country. He is a very late entrant in the anti-corruption bandwagon, Jaitley said, highlighting Rahuls silence on alleged scams in the 2G spectrum allocation, coal block allocation, Commonwealth Games, Adarsh Housing Society and VVIP chopper deal.

In this context, the Bharatiya Janata Party leaders sought to claim credit for pursuing the anti-corruption campaign launched by Anna Hazare to a logical conclusion by enactment of Lokpal. Referring to last five years of the outgoing Lok Sabha, both the leaders drew attention to erosion of institutions as the most challenging legacy being left behind by the Congress-led UPA regime.

The one concern that has arisen is the institutional erosion that happened during this Lok Sabha. It appeared part of governments mindset whether it was PAC, JPC, CVC, CAG or Parliament, Swaraj said, referring to Congress members alleged attempt to scuttle the PAC inquiry into 2G spectrum allocation and PMs rejection of her objections to CVC appointment.

Jaitley also charged the Congress of being arrogant in pushing issues like Telangana Bill and Land Bill through the Parliament.

The BJP also rejected the possibility of a Third Front, arguing that it has been a failed idea and the country cannot afford it in the prevailing situation.