The demand for complete autonomy for States would weaken the country and hence was not justified, not right and unacceptable, BJP legislator Nainar Nagenthran said in the Assembly on Tuesday.

He led his party MLAs to stage a walk out, opposing Chief Minister M.K. Stalin’s announcement in the Assembly of the formation of a high-level committee to study Centre – State relations. The AIADMK, BJP’s ally was not present in the House, as it had walked out over another issue.

During his speech, Mr. Nagenthran said the demand for complete autonomy for States would weaken the country and instead the issue could be resolved in platforms such as the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Council. Minister Palanivel Thiaga Rajan clarified on the percentage of devolution mentioned by the BJP legislator. The Minister also pointed out that the cess and surcharges remained outside the divisible pool.

Pointing out that the GST Council had one-third of the votes and all the States together had two-thirds of the votes and among themselves, they all have equal voting share irrespective of their population, Mr. Rajan contended that GST Council could not be taken for a classic example for federalism.

To Mr. Nagenthran’s contention that the idea of the GST Council was by the erstwhile Congress government, Congress leader K. Selvaperunthagai contended though his party was for rolling out GST but not in the present form, where equipment for the Intensive Care Unit and those used by disabled persons were also being levied the GST. Rejecting Mr. Nagenthran’s contention the NEET was rolled out during the Congress government, Mr. Selvaperunthagai said it was due to a Supreme Court judgment in a case moved by Sankalp Charitable Trust.

As for Mr. Nagenthran’s contention of late ‘Babasaheb’ B.R. Ambedkar’s comments against State autonomy, VCK MLA S.S. Balaji raised a point of order and clarified that the late leader supported State autonomy. “Mr. Nagenthran spoke as if late leader Ambedkar did not support the State autonomy. In fact, Annal Ambedkar had submitted a report to the Simon Commission on May 17, 1929 in which he supported State [then provincial] autonomy,” Mr. Balaji pointed out.

To another contention made by Mr. Nagenthran that late Ambedkar did not support the linguistic division of States, DMK MLA N. Ezhilan raised a point of order. Though late Ambedkar initially opposed the division of States along linguistic lines, he eventually changed his stand after reading the Report of the States Reorganisation Commission, Mr. Ezhilan said.

Thanking members those spoke following his announcement, Chief Minister M.K. Stalin accepted a request of Mr. Selvaperunthagai that the speech by former Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi over the State autonomy in 1974 be printed again and distributed to members. “My only regret is that the AIADMK, which is the principal opposition has not taken part in the proceedings and given its opinion. Be it AIADMK founder Makkal Thilagam [former CM] MGR or [former CM] Ammaiyar Jayalalithaa, despite their differences with the DMK, they extended their supported to protect the rights of Tamil Nadu.”

“But we don’t know what the situation is now. We can understand it. But they will say that their principles were different from their alliance. Is this your principle? That is the question that needs to be asked,” Mr. Stalin said. In view of the rights of Tamil Nadu, Mr. Stalin placed a demand before the AIADMK: “Let us all come together to protect the rights of Tamil Nadu by going beyond the political affiliations and work together as a team. I hope that they will do this.”

During his speech, Leader of the House and Minister Duraimurugan contended though the erstwhile Union governments sanctioned funds despite the demand for State autonomy and other stands to the States, the Union government was increasingly developing “imperialist” mindset and was not sanctioning funds if States had other views. The DMK that started advocating State autonomy was continuing to do so even after 50 years, he said.

EOM