Division in BJP on Bengal unity exposed in House

Assembly passes resolution against partition of state; Kurseong MLA seeks referendum in hills

Meghdeep Bhattacharyya And Arkamoy Datta Majumdar   |   TT  |  Calcutta   |   21.02.23 : The Assembly on Monday passed a resolution through a voice vote against any further division of Bengal, with the debate on the motion bringing out divergent views in the BJP on the emotive issue. 

The BJP’s Kurseong MLA Bishnu Prasad Sharma has said what his party or the Trinamul Congress wants on the issue of Gorkhaland are immaterial.

“You must ask the Election Commission to conduct a referendum in that area (the hills) to find out what they (the people) want,” Sharma said. “I want to put it clearly, I have been voted as an MLA over the issue of Gorkhaland. I am a representative of those votes.”

The motion was moved by Trinamul’s Hemtabad MLA Satyajit Barman and had been conceived by the party over a month ago. Several seniors in the Trinamul legislature party said on the condition of anonymity over the past few weeks that the principal purpose of the discussion was to “expose” the BJP by getting its MLAs to speak on the subject in the House.

Darjeeling BJP MLA Neeraj Tamang Zimba argued that the party had never demanded a division of Bengal. Instead, the Gorkhas want demerger of Darjeeling, he said, going on to give a long account of Gorkha history. Zimba said Darjeeling had been made a part of Bengal in 1947 after Independence and was officially incorporated into Bengal in 1956 under Schedule V of the Absorbed Areas (Laws) Act 1954.

“Whatever be the terminologies used, the fact of the matter is that as per the historical evidence, Darjeeling is clearly not a natural part of Bengal,” Zimba said.

“So, the demand for Gorkhaland state is not about division of Bengal territory, but seeking a rightful place for the region’s culture and history in India’s political map under the constitutional provision,” he added.

Overall, six  Trinamul MLAs and seven BJP MLAs took part in the discussion.

All the BJP speakers unanimously said the demand for separate states emerged out of people’s frustration since they were deprived of amenities for a long time.

Leader of the Opposition Suvendu Adhikari said separate departments were created to cater for the three most backward areas of the state — north Bengal, the western zone and the Sunderbans. He then listed the budget announcements and actual allocations for the three departments in the past three fiscal years. On every occasion, the actual allocation has been considerably lesser than the announcements, said Adhikari.

“Ek Paschim Banga, sreshth Paschim Banga. Ek Bharat, sreshth Bharat (One West Bengal, the greatest West Bengal. One India, the greatest India),” said Adhikari, asserting the party’s official stand against the division.

“We don’t want Bengal to be divided. However, we do want the deprivation to end,” he concluded.

A senior in the Trinamul legislature party said the BJP found itself in a corner by taking part in the discussion. He said chief minister Mamata Banerjee was “pleased” with the outcome.

“Rest assured, she  will optimally utilise this as a politico-electoral issue, starting tomorrow (Tuesday),” he said.

Although Mamata did not attend the discussion on Monday, senior ministers Firhad Hakim, Sobhandeb Chattopadhyay and Bratya Basu spoke in favour of the motion.

Summing it up in the House, parliamentary affairs minister Sobhandeb Chattopadhyay accused the BJP of political hypocrisy. 

“They do not have the courage to say this clearly as a party, that they are not in favour of further division of Bengal. Yet, those of their members who are voicing opinions in favour of the division, there is no attempt to rein them in... that is deliberate,” he said.

“This is with the sole objective of elections so that these things can be used to garner some votes, some electoral support. The party, as a whole, does not have the guts to come out and state it unequivocally that they do not want further division of Bengal,” he added.“A clear, indubitable case of political hypocrisy.”

Courtesy & source - The Telegraph