MP John Brittas Demands Parliamentary Oversight of PM CARES Fund, Rejects PMO's Stance
In a significant development, CPI(M) Rajya Sabha member John Brittas has formally written to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla and Rajya Sabha Chairman C P Radhakrishnan, strongly opposing any attempts to restrict parliamentary questions related to the PM CARES fund and similar entities. This action follows a report by The Indian Express, which revealed that the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) had communicated to the Lok Sabha Secretariat that questions concerning the PM CARES fund, the Prime Minister's National Relief Fund (PMNRF), and other such funds are not permissible under the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business.
Brittas's Argument for Transparency and Accountability
In his letters dated Tuesday, February 11, 2026, Brittas emphasized that any communication or demand from the central government seeking to disallow parliamentary scrutiny of these funds should be summarily rejected. He argued that the authority of Parliament to admit and consider such questions must be preserved at all costs. Brittas stated, "A fund that is recognised as having been set up by the Central Government for public relief, that is eligible to receive CSR contributions under the Companies Act, 2013, and that has accepted thousands of crores of rupees from public and corporate sources, cannot simultaneously be insulated from parliamentary scrutiny on the plea that it is 'not a concern of the Government of India'."
This statement underscores his core contention: funds that operate with government recognition and collect substantial public and corporate donations must be subject to democratic oversight. The letters were dispatched just one day after the media report highlighted the PMO's stance, adding urgency to the debate over transparency in government-affiliated funds.
Background and Implications of the PMO's Communication
The controversy stems from the PMO's directive to the Lok Sabha Secretariat, which cited procedural rules to bar questions on the PM CARES fund, PMNRF, and related funds. This move has sparked concerns among opposition MPs and transparency advocates about potential efforts to shield these entities from parliamentary inquiry. The PM CARES fund, established for public relief during emergencies, has been a topic of discussion due to its fundraising activities and utilization of resources.
Brittas's intervention highlights a broader political and legal debate over the accountability of such funds. By invoking the Companies Act, 2013, which allows corporate social responsibility (CSR) contributions to the PM CARES fund, he points to its quasi-governmental nature. His demand for parliamentary scrutiny aligns with calls for greater transparency in how public and corporate funds are managed and disbursed.
Political Reactions and Future Steps
As the budget session of Parliament continues, this issue is expected to garner further attention from lawmakers across party lines. Brittas's letters may prompt discussions in both houses about amending or clarifying the rules to ensure that funds like PM CARES remain open to parliamentary questions. The response from Speaker Om Birla and Chairman C P Radhakrishnan will be closely watched, as it could set a precedent for how similar cases are handled in the future.
In summary, John Brittas's proactive stance challenges the PMO's attempt to limit parliamentary oversight, advocating for a more transparent and accountable framework for government-related funds. This development underscores the ongoing tension between executive authority and legislative scrutiny in India's democratic processes.
