JD (U) president Sharad Yadav on Tuesday said the UPA-II Government has been the most inactive and corrupt to have led the country in last 65 years, giving clear indications that it would not be lured into the UPA fold by the Centre’s “move to grant special status to Bihar” before the next lok Sabha elections.
Talking to mediapersons here, the JD (U) president termed the UPA-II as the most inactive Government too. “First they don’t’ talk of issues and when the opposition and institutions like CAG raise it they offer just inaction and retaliation. The Oppositions can only raise issues but action remains due on the Government of the day,” he said.
Incidentally, the UPA-II completes fourth year in office on Wednesday.
On the massive allegation of corruption in two terms of UPA, he said, “The Union budget is pegged at `12 lakhs crores. And shockingly, when you add the amount that has been allegedly siphoned off in the entire nine years of Governance of UPA, it sums up to `5.5 lakh crore.” He also accused the Government of stalling Parliament proceedings.
“They don’t want discussion in Parliament to happen on the allegations of corruption made by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG). Rather Central ministers start questioning the amount of corruption stated by the CAG and brazenly invite the CAG for debates. These allegations should be discussed in Parliament. But they don’t allow it to function,” he said.
Yadav, however, took moderate view of the UPA-1. He said that the UPA-1 was comparatively “better” and indicated that the third front was not a remote possibility.
“The UPA-1 was better because left parties were with them,” he pointed out.
On the issue of prime ministerial candidature of Narendra Modi, he said that his name was not announced at the organisational level by NDA and the organization would decide on the same post elections.
On the issue of the party contesting on all 81 Assembly seats in Jharkhand, the JD (U) national president said that the party would decide after consulting the State workers and would take a “practical” decision.