Delimitation row rocks Tamil Nadu assembly; TVK, DMK spar over ‘no delimitation’ stand | Chennai News
CHENNAI: A nearly 40-minute high-voltage exchange over delimitation kept the Tamil Nadu assembly on the edge on Friday, with the opposition putting chief minister C Joseph Vijay’s stand under the scanner and questioning whether the govt had moved from “no delimitation” to “fair delimitation”. The TVK maintained that Tamil Nadu’s 39 Lok Sabha seats must retain their present 7.18% share of parliamentary representation.Chief minister C Joseph Vijay’s delimitation stand triggered a political storm in the Tamil Nadu assembly on Friday, with the opposition questioning why his Southern Zonal Council speech did not reiterate the state’s demand to freeze Lok Sabha seats at 543. TVK insisted that Tamil Nadu’s 39 seats should retain their present 7.18% share of parliamentary representation.Leader of opposition Udhayanidhi Stalin flagged the issue, citing Vijay’s statement at Union home minister Amit Shah chaired SZC meet. He pointed to the assembly resolution passed on Aug 14, which sought to freeze the total number of Lok Sabha seats at 543, and questioned why the “demand was not mentioned anywhere” in the chief minister’s speech.Udhayanidhi asked whether the CM and his govt had shifted from the anti-delimitation resolution passed by the House.Leading the govt’s response, PWD minister Aadhav Arjuna said the state remained committed to freezing the total number of Lok Sabha seats at 543 for another 25 years through special legislation. He cited extensions made during the Indira Gandhi and Atal Bihari Vajpayee govts.Law minister R Nirmalkumar echoed the stand. He said, “I made the govt’s stand clear that we are against delimitation and want to maintain the existing Lok Sabha strength at 543.” He said the govt had clarified its position several times and dismissed reports suggesting otherwise as misleading.Udhayanidhi said the govt was firm on maintaining the present number of Lok Sabha seats. If there was any change, Tamil Nadu’s 7.18% share of parliamentary representation should not fall, he said.Aadhav intervened and questioned the DMK’s alleged “change of stand”. Recalling the state-wide protest led by DMK president M K Stalin, during which copies of the proposed delimitation bill were burnt, he asked whether the party would fully back the Aug 14 resolution to protect the state’s autonomy.Former ministers K N Nehru and S Regupathy responded and reiterated that the DMK would never compromise on state autonomy. “If the Act comes into play, we firmly want the state’s representation to be safeguarded at the present 7.18% ratio,” Nehru said.Nirmalkumar then questioned the DMK’s position. “Why are they not speaking plainly and saying that they will oppose delimitation?” he asked, triggering another brief commotion.Former CM Edappadi K Palaniswami joined the debate and backed “fair delimitation.” He said the constitutional freeze on the allocation of Lok Sabha seats among states is set to lapse after 2026, paving the way for a delimitation exercise under the law.“We should push for fair delimitation,” Palaniswami said. PMK MLA A Ganeshkumar also backed the demand.Ganeshkumar later locked horns with social justice minister Vanniarasu over his remark that PMK was more loyal to the BJP govt than its own leader Anbumani Ramadoss.Ganeshkumar hit back, saying it was VCK leader Thol Thirumavalavan who had changed his stand from “fair delimitation” to “no delimitation”. “Unlike PMK and its leader, Thirumavalavan will change his stand for political gains,” he said.Nehru targeted the Congress while responding to tourism minister Rajeshkumar. Citing Congress senior leader K C Venugopal’s statement in Parliament in favour of fair delimitation, Nehru questioned the party’s position and accused it of taking different stands on federal representation in Parliament and the state Assembly.Wrapping up the debate, Aadhav applauded DMK and AIADMK for their efforts to protect state autonomy. He urged all parties to stand united, cutting across political lines, on the issue of Tamil Nadu’s interests.
