In a notable incident highlighting the clash between legislative duties and social commitments, over a dozen Members of the Legislative Assembly (MLAs) in Madhya Pradesh were absent during a crucial Question Hour session. The event, which took place on December 5, 2025, saw a significant number of elected representatives failing to attend the period dedicated to questioning the government.
Minister Cites Social Calendar for Absences
Responding to the conspicuous absence of lawmakers, Legislative Affairs Minister Kailash Vijayvargiya addressed the assembly. He attributed the low attendance to the ongoing wedding season, a period packed with social and familial obligations across India. Vijayvargiya did not stop at merely providing a reason; he put forward a formal suggestion to reconfigure the legislative calendar itself.
The minister proposed that in the future, the assembly's schedule should be drafted while keeping the traditional wedding season in mind. This suggestion aims to prevent such conflicts between the constitutional responsibilities of the MLAs and important personal social events, ensuring better participation in key legislative business like the Question Hour.
Question Hour's Critical Role Undermined
The Question Hour is a fundamental pillar of democratic accountability in India's parliamentary system. It is a dedicated time when members can pose questions to ministers regarding the administration and governance of their respective departments. The absence of a large group of MLAs during this hour undermines its purpose, as it reduces the scope of scrutiny and denies constituents the representation they were promised.
While the specific queries prepared by the absent MLAs were not detailed, their non-attendance meant those questions went unasked. This incident raises pertinent questions about prioritization and the mechanisms in place to ensure the smooth functioning of legislative duties without compromising on essential democratic processes.
A Precedent for Scheduling or a Cause for Concern?
Minister Vijayvargiya's suggestion to align the Madhya Pradesh assembly calendar with the wedding season is unprecedented. It opens a debate on whether legislative schedules should accommodate widespread social customs or if the demands of public office should take unequivocal precedence.
Proponents might argue that such accommodation shows respect for cultural traditions and can lead to more focused sessions with full attendance. Critics, however, may view it as setting a concerning precedent where core legislative functions are adjusted for non-official reasons, potentially diluting the seriousness of state governance.
The incident on December 5 serves as a clear indicator of the ongoing tension between personal life and public duty in Indian politics. How the assembly secretariat and political parties respond to the minister's suggestion will be closely watched, as it could influence legislative planning in Madhya Pradesh and potentially other states in the future.
