z:\ ambedkar\vol-02\vol2-08.indd MK SJ+YS 21-9-2013/YS-8-11-2013 622
622 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
Dr. Ambedkar: Certainly.
Mr. Gavin Jones: I will also say that Australia is one of the most democratic countries in the world.
Dr. Ambedkar: I quite agree.
Mr. Gavin Jones: If they found it necessary to have all these safeguards, I think that it is very advisable that we should have them in India.
Dr. Ambedkar: That is another matter. The point is whether Australia made the provision it did in this connection because it wanted a federal constitution. I say that they simply took their relations as they found them in England at the time that they drafted their constitution.
Twenty-eighth Sitting—23rd September 1931
HEAD 1
( Strength and Composition of the Federal Legislature )
*Dr. Ambedkar: I do not propose to say anything on sub-heads (i), (ii), (iii) and (v). I agree with what my friend, Mr. Joshi, said this morning upon all those points except in one respect. I am not wedded to any particular figure regarding the composition of the two Chambers. In my opinion, a given figure ought not to be our starting point. The figure ought to be the resultant of all relevant considerations. I may also say here that my sympathies are in favour of a larger Chamber, because I think that a Chamber, being a deliberative body, ought to be constituted in such a manner that all interests can find their place in it, without any particular interest having to be cramped into it.
There is one argument that has been brought forward against a large Chamber namely that our Chambers must be business-like. I think there is some force in that argument, but I do not quite understand how the strength of the Chamber has anything to do with its business character. I should have thought that the business character and despatch of a Chamber depended less upon the numbers of which it was composed, and more upon the Standing Orders and the rules of business that it had framed for itself. Consequently, I would not limit it by that consideration.
The point with regard to which I propose to speak in particular is subhead (iv). Taking part ( b ) of sub-head (iv) first, it reads thus—
“To what minimum extent must the adherence of Indian States be secured in order to justify the initiation of proceeding of the Federal Structure Committee a Federal Constitution ?”
It seems to me, with all respect, that that is a question which ought to be addressed to His Majesty’s Government It is they who ought to tell us what number was, in their opinion, necessary before the Federation could be initiated.
*Proceedings of the Federal Structure Committee and Minorities Committee, Vol. I, pp. 344-46.