Thank you very
much, Madam Speaker, for giving me this opportunity to speak on one of the
most important legislations relating to the rights of disabled persons, in
this august House. Madam, you know that from the day one onwards since 16th
of last month, we have been trying to discuss the issues relating to the
problems being faced by the common man in India
due to the demonetization issue. But anyway, the Government is not ready
to discuss that. Madam, although every piece of legislation is
important, yet this piece of legislation, which is dealing with the rights of
the disabled persons, is the most important legislation and needs a special
consideration. That is why, the entire Opposition also is agreeing with the
Government to pass this Bill. Madam, this Bill is being brought to comply with
the (140) UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities to
which India
became a signatory, which the hon. Minister has already mentioned. (160)
Actually, this Bill was brought by Shri Mallikarjun Kharge, the then Minister
of Social Justice and Empowerment in 2014, when it was introduced in
Rajya Sabha. Then, it went to the Standing Committee and the Standing
Committee, after thorough examination, gave its Report. Most of the suggestions
of that Standing Committee have been incorporated in the Bill also. This is
really one of the most important Bills. It also addresses most of the issues of
the disabled persons. But there are certain lacunae also. The hon. Minister
also recognized two other disabilities, which previously, were not considered
for which I really congratulate him. They are disabilities due to acid attacks
and Parkinson’s disease. These are new things and I am (280) really
appreciating that they should be accorded also. Persons with at least 40 per
cent of disability are eligible for reservations in education and employment,
and preference in Government schemes.
Madam, I am here
to speak on one of (320) the very significant Bills on social
inclusiveness and development. The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Bill,
2016 addresses the concerns of arguably the most marginalized section of the
Indian society. It covers as many as 19 conditions, which is nearly three times
the number of disabilities according to 1955 law. The previous Bill, as I
already said, was introduced by Shri Kharge, the then Minister concerned. The
current Bill had added some more conditions to that Bill, and I wholeheartedly
welcome this Bill and I would give some suggestions on this Bill. This Bill
will benefit a large (420) number of individuals with multiple
impairments, who are the most disadvantaged section of people amongst the
citizens. In addition, I have already given 12 amendments on this Bill. I
hope that the Government would consider those amendments. Regarding
reservation, the earlier Bill, which was introduced by Shri Mallikarajun Kharge
in 2014, had five per cent reservation. One can see that. (480) But the
present Government has reduced it from five per cent to four per cent. How can
it be justified? On the one hand, they have already widened the number of disabilities
from 19 to 21. The earlier Bill had only 19 disabilities, and now it has 21.
But the quota of reservation has been reduced (560) from five per cent
to four per cent. I would request that it should be increased. Madam, as per
the provisions of the Bill, what is the per centage of vacancies for
disabilities? They are: (a) one per cent is for blindness and low vision; (b)
one per cent is for deaf and hard of hearing; (c) one per cent is for locomotor
disability including cerebral palsy, leprosy, cured, dwarfism, acid attack
victims and muscular dystrophy; (d) one per cent is for autism, intellectual
disability, specific learning disability and mental illness; and (e) one per
cent is for multiple disabilities from amongst persons under (640)
clauses (a) to (d) including deaf-blindness in the posts identified for each
disabilities. Madam, there are five categories of disabilities here in this
Bill itself. But four per cent is there for five categories. At least, we
should provide one percentage for each category. It was already stated in the
earlier Bill. Why is the Government reducing it to four percentages? I would,
therefore, suggest that it should be made (700) as five per cent.
Madam, as far as the concession of education is concerned, the Bill says that
‘the appropriate Government and the local authorities shall endeavour that all
educational institutions funded or recognized by them provide inclusive
education to the children with disabilities.’
Madam, we all
know that now, large-scale educational institutions are in unaided sectors. But
here, the Bill only provides the institutions funded or recognized by the
Government, Government or Government-aided educational institutions. My point
is that why should they not include unaided institutions also? (800) I
am appealing the Government to incorporate the unaided institutions also in the
provision. Madam, many Government schemes have been stated in this Bill and I
welcome them. Under the Government schemes, the physically disabled persons
will get 25 per cent. (840) But I am arguing that it should be increased
from 25 per cent to 30 per cent. Regarding job reservation, four per cent has
been provided in the Bill. You have only given four per cent reservation. What
you have said is: “Within the limits of their economic capacity and
development”. A condition has been imposed for reservation in the private
sector. As far as the Government sector is concerned, it is okay but for
reservation in private sector, a condition has been imposed, ‘within the limits
of their economic capacity and development’. That is a real excuse for them.
Everybody will say that they are not economically viable and these old private
institutions will give statistics accordingly. Therefore, that condition should
be omitted. (960) That is my suggestion.
Nowadays, we are
giving two per cent reservation for physically handicapped persons. What is
happening? (980) All the private institutions are not taking care of
these things. It is implemented only in Government sector which is also not
happening usually. Every private institution or company should also come into
the purview of this Bill. Therefore, that economic condition or development
condition is not needed in this legislation. That is my suggestion. As far as
the provision of Commissioner is concerned, a lot of verdicts have come from
Supreme Court and various High Courts of the country that there is not much
mandatory power for the Commissioner. That was the lacuna in the last Bill.
Here also you are not giving sufficient powers to the Commissioner itself. The
same thing is repeated here. Therefore, I am suggesting that more powers should
be given to the Commissioners. As far as the committees are concerned, you have
(1120) the national level committees, the State level committees and the
district level committees for the redressal of grievances and discussing other
things. As far as the district level committees are concerned, there is no people’s
representative in these committees. In every committee, people’s
representative is there, then why are you avoiding MPs, MLAs and other
representatives of the people in these district level committees to sort out
the issues? There are physically handicapped persons. Their welfare schemes are
there. If there is any lacuna in their welfare schemes, we should have a
thorough discussion at the district level committees itself. Therefore,
people’s representatives should be there in these district level committees
also. There is no representation of Members of Parliament in the State
level committees also. Therefore, in the State level Committee, the
representation of Members of Parliament should also be there. (1260) That
is my suggestion. Madam, several favourable orders, given by the Chief
Commissioners, have been quashed by the (1280) courts on the grounds
that the Commissioners have no powers. This Bill is also dealing in the same
manner. It should be changed. Actually, this Bill is brought with some major
changes in the 1995 Act. I am totally agreeing with the view of the
Government that this Bill has been introduced without any political advantage.
This Bill was brought by UPA and you have made some more amendments. That is
why this Bill is introduced here. This Bill will create a remarkable change in
the lives of the disabled people of India .
Therefore, Madam, with these suggestions and amendments, I am expecting that
the hon. Minister will accept our humble amendments which will strengthen this
legislation. With these words, I am concluding my speech. I am
supporting this Bill. (1410)
