Chennai, Aug 21:
The delimitation issue triggered a heated debate in the Tamil Nadu Assembly on Friday, with the ruling Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK), DMK, AIADMK, BJP and PMK taking differing positions on the proposed changes in Lok Sabha representation.
Public Works Minister Aadhav Arjuna clarified that the government and Chief Minister C. Joseph Vijay remained committed to the delimitation resolution adopted by the Assembly. He said the TVK’s position was that the total number of Lok Sabha seats should remain at 543 for 25 years.
Aadhav also dismissed reports that delimitation was discussed at the Southern Zonal Council meeting held on Thursday, saying the government had not changed its position.
Opposition Leader Udhayanidhi Stalin, however, countered that Vijay had not stated at the Southern Zonal Council meeting that the 543-seat strength should remain unchanged.
Aadhav subsequently said the government’s position would reflect the position adopted by all parties.
AIADMK general secretary and Opposition leader Edappadi K. Palaniswami said his party’s position was that Tamil Nadu’s share of Lok Sabha seats should not be reduced from the existing 7.18%.
Aadhav accused the DMK of changing its stand after becoming the Opposition and demanded a special law to freeze the number of seats for another 25 years, similar to the measure introduced during the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government.
BJP MLA Bojarajan took a contrasting position, arguing that delimitation could benefit Tamil Nadu. He said if the number of Lok Sabha seats increased by 50%, Tamil Nadu’s representation could rise to around 59 seats, and the State should utilise the opportunity to increase its representation in Parliament.
PMK MLA Ganesh Kumar also said delimitation could result in additional seats for Tamil Nadu if its existing proportional share was protected. He questioned why Congress had shifted from demanding “fair delimitation” to opposing delimitation altogether.
VCK Minister Vanni Arasu criticised Union Home Minister Amit Shah over his statements on southern States’ representation, alleging that Shah had made different statements inside and outside Parliament.
He claimed that the number of MPs from the southern States could rise substantially and argued that such assurances were not reflected in the proposed delimitation framework.
The exchanges reflected the continuing political divide in Tamil Nadu over delimitation, with the parties debating whether the exercise should be opposed, postponed or used to secure greater parliamentary representation for the State.