Uproar in House as Sena (UBT) comes down heavily on Shinde for ‘corruption in BMC' remark
Replying to a debate under Rule 293 on urban development and housing, Shinde — who also holds the urban development portfolio — said the Mahayuti government had accelerated stalled redevelopment projects in Mumbai and promised that the 'Marathi manoos' who had left the city due to lack of affordable housing would now return. He announced the clearance of 21 cluster redevelopment schemes and assured completion of several long-pending projects in partnership with state-run utilities.
Referring to the Dharavi Redevelopment Project (DRP), Shinde rejected criticism about private control being given to Adani group, saying the state government was actively involved through the Slum Rehabilitation Authority and dismissed claims that the Adani Group had been handed the project without safeguards.
He also announced an online portal for pothole-related complaints and incentives for redevelopment in airport funnel zones.
However, his sharp remarks accusing the previous BMC administration — controlled by Uddhav Thackeray's Sena — of large-scale irregularities triggered a furore from the Opposition benches.
After Shinde's speech, Sena (UBT) MLA Bhaskar Jadhav rose to respond but was denied the opportunity by Speaker Rahul Narwekar, who maintained that only Aaditya Thackeray, who had initiated the debate, could exercise the right to reply — and he was not present in the House at the time.
The decision led to loud protests from the Opposition, with Sena (UBT) members accusing the Speaker of bias and siding with the ruling alliance. Amid the din, the Speaker adjourned the House for 10 minutes.
When proceedings resumed, Cabinet Minister Shambhuraj Desai (Shiv Sena) and Shinde objected to the alleged gestures made by Jadhav and Thackeray towards the Chair. Shinde also accused Jadhav of daring the Speaker to suspend him — calling it 'unacceptable conduct.'
Ajay Chaudhari, leader of the Sena (UBT) in the Assembly, defended his colleague, arguing that the right to reply was not restricted to a single member and that Thackeray had momentarily stepped out due to official commitments.
Outside the House, Jadhav accused the Speaker of acting like a government functionary. 'The Speaker has abandoned neutrality. He denied the Opposition the basic right to reply. Shinde's speech was full of falsehood, and we were not allowed to counter it,' he said, alleging that several critical issues, including civic concerns in Thane and other cities, education, anganwadis, and water supply, were ignored in Shinde's response.
Outside the house, Aaditya Thackeray further criticised Shinde and challenged him for a one-hour public debate on the working of the urban development department. 'I will ask pointed questions, and I expect straight answers,' he told reporters, calling Shinde 'ungrateful and shameless,' and accusing him of betraying the very party that gave him political space and position.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
9 minutes ago
- Hans India
Averted India, Pak war from taking a nuke turn: Trump
New York/Washington: US President Donald Trump on Tuesday claimed yet again that he stopped the recent "war" between India and Pakistan and that five planes were shot down in the conflict. He also claimed that the conflict between India and Pakistan "was probably going to end up in a nuclear war". "We stopped wars between India and Pakistan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda," he said at a reception in the White House with the Congress members. "They shot down five planes and it was back and forth, back and forth, back and forth. I called them and said, 'Listen, no more trade. If you do this, you're not going to be good…They're both powerful nuclear nations and that would have happened, and who knows where that would have ended up. And I stopped it'," he added. Trump claimed the US took out Iran's entire nuclear capability and also stopped the conflict between Kosovo and Serbia. "And a couple of others that we didn't stop a war, but we stopped what probably could have ended up in a war. We do that on the House as compliments of America. Okay, do you think (former US President Joe) Biden would do that? I don't think so. Do you think he ever heard of any of those countries? I don't think so,' Trump said. Trump, who has repeatedly said that he stopped the conflict between India and Pakistan through trade, last Friday said for the first time that 'five jets were shot down' during the fighting. 'You had India, Pakistan, that was going… in fact, planes were being shot out of the air, five, five, four or five. But I think five jets were shot down actually…that was getting worse and worse, wasn't it? That was looking like it was going to go, these are two serious nuclear countries and they were hitting each other,' he had said at the White House in his remarks made during a dinner that he hosted for the Republican senators. Meanwhile, Acting US Representative Ambassador Dorothy Shea said at an open debate in the UN Security Council on Tuesday on 'Multilateralism and Peaceful Settlement of Disputes' held under Pakistan's presidency of the Council that across the globe, the United States continues to work with parties to disputes, wherever possible, to find peaceful solutions. With Pakistan Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar presiding over the Council meeting, Shea said that in the past three months alone, 'we have seen the US leadership deliver de-escalations between Israel and Iran, between the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda, and between India and Pakistan.' 'The United States, under President Trump's leadership, played an important role in encouraging the parties to reach these resolutions, which we applaud and support,' Shea said. Ambassador Parvathaneni Harish, India's Permanent Representative to the UN, in his statement in the UNSC chamber spoke about the Pahalgam terror attack for which The Resistance Front, a front for Pakistan-based terror organization Lashkar-e-Tayyiba had claimed responsibility. Harish emphasized that there should be a 'serious cost' to states who 'violate the spirit of good neighbourliness and international relations by fomenting cross-border terrorism.' He said that India launched Operation Sindoor targeting terrorist camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir consequent to the gruesome terrorist attack in Pahalgam on April 22 that led to the killing of 26 innocent tourists and based on the April 25 UNSC statement. In the UNSC statement, the Council members had underlined the need to hold perpetrators, organizers, financiers and sponsors of this reprehensible act of terrorism accountable and bring them to justice.
Hans India
9 minutes ago
- Hans India
Dhankhar's Successor: EC sets ball rolling for vice presidential poll
New Delhi: The Election Commission on Wednesday said it has begun the process of holding the vice presidential election, two days after Jagdeep Dhankhar's surprise resignation from the post. The poll authority said it has started constituting the electoral college comprising MPs of both Houses of Parliament. Both elected and nominated members are eligible to vote in the vice presidential election. It is also finalising the returning officer and assistant returning officers. "On completion of the preparatory activities, the announcement of the election schedule to the office of the Vice President of India will follow as soon as possible," the EC said. Dhankhar stepped down as vice president on Monday, citing health reasons. His term was to end on August 10, 2027. The Union home ministry on Tuesday formally notified the resignation of Dhankhar from the office of the vice president. According to Clause 2 of Article 68 of the Constitution, an election to fill a vacancy in the office of the vice president occurring due to his death, resignation or removal, or otherwise, will be held "as soon as possible" after it goes vacant. The person elected to fill the vacancy will be entitled to hold office "for the full term of five years from the date on which he enters upon his office". From the day the notification is issued, "calling the electoral college to vote", and till the day of the poll, a period of 30 days is stipulated. A person cannot be elected as the vice president unless he is a citizen of India, has completed 35 years of age and is qualified for election as a member of the Rajya Sabha. A person is also not eligible if he holds any office of profit under the government of India or a state government or any subordinate local authority. The ruling NDA has a comfortable edge in the vice presidential elections. The vice president is elected by the members of Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha, where nominated members of the Upper House are also eligible to cast their vote. The 543-member Lok Sabha has one vacant seat -- Basirhat in West Bengal -- while there are five vacancies in the 245-member Rajya Sabha. Of the five vacancies in the Rajya Sabha, four are from Jammu and Kashmir, and one from Punjab. The seat from Punjab was vacated after AAP leader Sanjeev Arora quit following his election to the state assembly in a bypoll last month. The effective strength of both the Houses together is 786 and the winning candidate will require 394 votes, considering that all eligible voters exercise their franchise. In the Lok Sabha, the BJP-led NDA enjoys the support of 293 of the 542 members. The ruling alliance has the support of 129 members in the Rajya Sabha, assuming that the nominated members vote in support of the NDA nominee, which has an effective strength of 240.
The Hindu
9 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Damned if they do, or don't: The AIADMK's impossible choice
The AIADMK is in a classic Catch-22 situation in Tamil Nadu: the party is damned if it allies with the BJP, and damned if it does not. On the one hand, to consolidate the anti-DMK votes and remain electorally competitive, the AIADMK feels compelled to ally with the BJP. This pragmatic move will prevent a fatal split in the Opposition vote that would almost certainly benefit the ruling DMK-led coalition. On the other, aligning with the BJP to strengthen its electoral position simultaneously weakens the AIADMK'S core identity. This alienates a crucial segment of its traditional voter base, as long-time AIADMK supporters, particularly from minority communities as well as Dravidian adherents, view the BJP's Hindutva ideology as antithetical to the party's foundational principles. Meanwhile, the alliance, meant to bolster the AIADMK, provides the BJP with the platform and legitimacy it needs to grow in Tamil Nadu. This growth often comes from poaching voters directly from the AIADMK itself. Specifically, the BJP attracts those who have looser ties with the AIADMK's ideological past but have aligned with the party primarily because they oppose the DMK. And if the AIADMK were to break the alliance to protect its ideological core and win back disaffected voters, it would likely face a multi-cornered contest. This would splinter the anti-DMK vote, making a DMK victory mathematically much easier. The path that the AIADMK has chosen in an attempt to solve its short-term electoral problem — namely, allying with the BJP — deepens its long-term existential crisis of losing its unique identity and voter base. The path to electoral survival seemingly requires an act of political self-harm. This is the perfect definition of a Catch-22. The vote share data in Table 1 A and B from the past decade shows contested vote share from Assembly and Parliamentary elections. The numbers bear this out. While the votes shares of the AIADMK significantly dropped from 2011 to 2021, the party retained a strong core of close to 40% of votes in the seats it contested in 2021. This dropped dramatically to 23.5% in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, when the AIADMK opted to stay out of the BJP-led alliance. In an earlier Data Point titled 'AIADMK and BJP split: Diminishing electoral returns…' in October 2023, we had advanced the reasons for the regional party's decision to move away from the BJP because a significant core of its voters were uncomfortable with the alliance. Meanwhile, the BJP's performance in urban local body elections held closer to that time showed that the party improved its vote share largely at the expense of the AIADMK. The 2024 parliamentary elections — viewed with the caveat that these were held to decide equations in New Delhi rather than in Chennai — also showed that the BJP was capable of gaining ground at the expense of the AIADMK. Meanwhile, the DMK-led alliance — an ideologically coherent front bound by its opposition to the BJP — retained its vote share between 2021 and 2024, enhanced by around 2% points following the support of Kamal Haasan's party. Data in Tables 2A, B, and C, however, complicates the picture. While the AIADMK in its alliance with the BJP won close to 75 Assembly seats in 2021, the split between the two parties resulted in the DMK leading in 221 Assembly segments in the 2024 parliamentary elections. This left the AIADMK-led alliance and the BJP-led alliance to lead in just 10 and 3 segments, respectively. Hypothetically, if the alliance between the AIADMK, the BJP, and their respective partners had remained intact, they would have led in 84 segments. This would have placed the alliance's hypothetical 41% vote share just 6 points behind the ruling coalition's 47%, a gap that a 3-point swing could potentially bridge. A region-wise break-up (Table 3 A and B) gives a more granular picture. In the West, or the Kongu belt from where AIADMK chief Edappadi K. Palaniswami hails, the combined alliance had won 26 out of 42 seats in 2021. In the North-Central region, where the PMK is a strong party, they won 24 of the 55 seats. These numbers were reduced to just 2 (for AIADMK+) and 7 (four for AIADMK+ and three for BJP+) segments, respectively, in the 2024 elections. If these parties had maintained their 2021 alliance, they would have led in 22 segments in the West (as opposed to 20 for the DMK-led coalition) and 29 in the North-Central region (against 26 for the DMK+). The combined coalition would have also led the DMK+ 15-14 in the South. This explains why AIADMK leaders from the West and some in the South have given statements favouring an alliance with the BJP, while the PMK president stated his preference for an alliance with the AIADMK in 2024. The internecine strife within the PMK and the DMDK's new-found ambivalence are challenges for the AIADMK-BJP coalition too. A further complication for the 2026 Assembly elections is the entry of actor Vijay's TVK. An alliance with the TVK might seem a logical way for Mr. Palaniswami to consolidate anti-DMK votes, but two factors complicate this. First, the strength of the TVK's support base remains purely speculative. Second, the AIADMK's influential western leaders continue to push for closer ties with the BJP. Caught between these pressures, the beleaguered leader appears to have chosen to return to the BJP coalition even though it will likely hurt his party's identity in the long run.
