The topic for next week's forum which is to appear on Saturday is:

Submit your reply in 100 words: editor@centralchronicle.com

Greeshma Gopal: India is the largest democracy in the world. Though it's a third world country it prides itself for being a successful democracy and is marching ahead towards becoming a developed country soon. But it has to fight heavy odds in its march and for that it needs better governance. A two-party system is good option for better governance. Of course for better governance a good leadership is also required. Like in the US, we should try to implement some reforms in our electoral system.

A two-party system will not only assure good governance but also reduce the load of Election Commission to a great extent. Crores of money can also be saved in the process. There will be a lot more transparency and accountability of the leaders towards the public. In the two-party system our nation's economy will grow multifold, corruption in politics will decrease and governance will be much better.

Madhu Agrawal: Definitely yes! But how is it practically possible without making drastic reforms in the poll-system? And selfish political bosses of small or regional parties running politics like their family-shop will never like to clip their own wings by voting for such reforms. Can't we have a system where main national parties (Congress and BJP) ally to form government like is in Austria and Germany? Such a system can even undo ill-effects of regional parties mainly created for self-interest of leaders having floated these. It will be of beginning of national-government because party-based system has failed in the country.

Blackmailing politics can also be avoided by electing Prime Minister/Chief Minister by secret and compulsory votes of members of the Lower House through EVMs on nominations signed by at least one-third members with same system repeated for no-confidence motions but with compulsion to name alternate leader in the same motion. Also rules for being recognised party should be tightened by making 20-percent votes compulsory for being national or regional parties. Election Commission should be empowered to derecognise parties going against aspects mentioned in their poll-manifestoes by a government joined by such party.

RJ Khurana: Yes. This will put an end to the proliferation of 'Aya Rams and Gaya Rams' of Indian politics and save the country from the whims and fancies of the coalition partners who change colours faster than a chameleon would. This will also put an end to the minor political parties that thrive on caste politics, the bane of our nation.

Further, there will be a marked decrease in corruption and more emphasis on performance. Many minor political parties are founded merely to escape the scrutiny by the income tax authorities since donations to political parties are exempt from payment of income tax. Finally, there will be less expenditure on holding elections since the ballot papers will not run into several pages as they do now.

Syed Zia Ul Hasan Naqvi: India is a vast country, in which there are many states and in some states regional parties are so popular and strong within their territories that national parties often fail in elections to get mandate in their favour.

In such circumstances the only alternative left behind for forming the government is by the alliance of different parties.

Coalition government is risky like clay more because in it alliance of the parties may end at any time on account of any dispute among them; such type of government is lame duck. Its running is an uphill task.

In coalition government, parties are also unable to implement their individual manifestos. They work under common minimum programme.

Hence instead of having so many parties like mushrooms in the country we should have only two parties throughout the country for the purpose of better governance and avoidance of lurking danger of instability of government in the country.

Dr Suram Singh Verma: I think multi-party system of governance in democracy is definitely a sign of maturity of voters towards it (democracy). However, whether it is a two-party or multi-party system of governance, politicians are smart enough to find out ways to protect and harness their self benefits ignoring the people's benefits who have voted them to power.

Multi-party system has evolved due to regional based awareness of local people for the role of government's towards their specific demands. Local political parties are harnessing support from local people on the basis of longstanding local issues which no doubt have to be sorted out.

This political scenario, however, is giving ample opportunities for politicians at national level to have alignments with like-minded and opportunistic leaders for their benefits but on that basis sometimes it puts a counter check on the monopoly of a single governing party.

Ultimately every issue will have only a political beneficial (not people oriented) solution weather it is two-party or multi-party governance.

But, it is true that multi-party system of governance gives a satisfaction to people of a diverse country like India about their representation at national level.

SS Chitwadgi: Two party system is not suited to India. In fact the country is so big that to organize only two parties in place of many political parties is to classify only two like-minded parties out of millions of voters.

This calls for that kind of efforts which neither existing multiple parties nor government can do. Every man is in his humour and the mindset so changes that alignment into one of the two parties only may be impractical if not impossible. The population is very large. The culture of the country varies across the country.

Every part has a language and custom of its own. The country has history over thousands of years and those were the days of isolations because of long distances and absence of communication. We have acknowledged parliamentary system only recently as against the rule of either foreigners- British or Islamic rulers.

The traditions last even today in the form of kings or queens although no longer in vogue. The rich and the poor have set their standards so fixed that rich get richer since money earns faster than mussels while poor hardly have any chance. Politics has become very expensive and only rich go in political organizations. Few join hands to form parties with some kind of uniform thinking.

In India presently all parties are formed out of class rich and each has its own way of political thinking mostly confined to the place within the country with almost similar conditions. To put the entire voters of the country only into two parties would be unthinkable and should not be tried either, multiple parties may continue in the interest of both regional and the country's interest.

Shantanu: One can only imagine how many diverse views and diverse problems can a country of over 1.1 billion people, living across 28 states, speaking 14 major languages and following 6 major religions can have.

One of the binding and stabilizing forces in this country of ours has been our political system- the multi-party democracy- in which the voices of every group and every individual is heard and solved through the representatives elected by them. This billion plus population is presently represented by six national and more than sixty-five regional parties, at the national level, which voices the concerns and views of the people they represent. We are still an evolving and learning democracy where now the thrust is being given towards the development of those citizens who till now have been untouched by our economic growth. And for the effective and meaningful development of our country we require that everyone should have an equal and effective say in the policies formulated. This can be effectively ensured only in a multi-party system, although sometimes this system itself turns out to be the biggest hindrance in the above cause. Sometimes this system prevents us from reaching consensus on critical issues, but it's always beneficial to debate and remain inconclusive rather than to reach at a conclusion without debating. Also a number of regional parties ensure that an all-round development of the country takes place. Both resource abundant and resource deficient regions are developed equally. A multi-party system never allows the parties to take the common man for granted, knowing very well that if they don't perform they can be shown the door any time. This keeps them on their toes, thus improving the quality of governance. Thus only a multi-party system can in the true sense represent the pulse of such a diverse country like India.

Omprakash Sharma: India is the greatest democratic country in the world in which several political parties are serving Mother India with their views and ideologies.

Now-a-days there are several national & regional political parties in India and all are playing very important role in national and regional politics in forming governments. As far as question of good governance, it could not be formed without ideas of people from different aspects of society which form different ideologies.

The ideas of people appear to nation in form of a political party and creates an ideology. Any political party works with its own ideology. National political parties like Indian National Congress, Bharatiya Janata Party, Janata Dal etc are old national political parties having different ideologies.

There are several regional parties also in different states on region, religion and language basis. All these parties participate in elections and sometimes play crucial role in forming or removing governments. India is experiencing coalition governments for last 15 years in which a big party seeks support directly or indirectly from other small parties.

It is absolutely right that sometimes these governments face instability and the chief of government cannot take hard decisions in public interest but it is also a fact that there is no chance to the ruler for being a dictator. It is must for ruler to respect ideologies of supporting parties and being together for public interest.

In two-party system, when one party comes into power with majority, it is necessary to accept its decisions and ideology by the people. This type of government may not be more transparent than a coalition government. So India must have multi party system for a strong democracy and better governance.

Small supporting parties also play a healthy role in governance without any personal interest for better service of mankind in the strongest Indian democracy in the world.

RK Kutty: No other instance can be a better proof than the present impasse created in the State of Karnataka to prove the need of having a two-party system for better governance. This writer has quite often been a proponent of the idea since long. To achieve this goal, the Election Commission of India, with the help of all States Election Commissioners, must work out strategies how to wean away small political parties, vis-à-vis the system of allowing candidates to fight elections as 'Independents'.. This system of Independents causes more problems, as they take best advantage of the situation. In this era of coalition politics, small parties, that have any larger agendas sprout like mushrooms and occupy space, leaving established political parties to run for their money. The political impasse being faced by India's one of the most prosperous States - Karnataka- proclaims much loud and clear that not only at the Centre, but also in all the states there should be only two parties, based on clear-cut ideologies. This, exactly, is the Westminister model of democracy we originally adopted and wanted to follow. The problem for India in its formative years, post Independence, was lack of political parties to give fight against the Congress and its ideology. In fact, that might have been the reason Gandhiji was of the view that Congress shouldn't convert itself as a political outfit. Basically it was formed with the sole objective of gaining freedom and the people of all walks of life joined it under Gandhiji's leadership. Once that goal was achieved, it would have been in the best interest of the nation if we laid a solid foundation for a two-party formula, but the unforeseen circumstances like the partition and then the assassination of Gandhiji created such consternation that our national leadership might have been compelled to consolidate strength under the Congress ideology and its infamous election symbol of 'yoked bull' became the bulwark of election after elections under the dynamic leadership of Nehru, Patel, Morarji, Kamaraj and others.

Satish Kumar Singh: We are the persons who make a party. Party itself cannot do anything. So I think we cannot bring better governance through one or two-party system. Problem lies in people instead of party. Debacle of any government or bad governance is just repercussion of clash of ego or selfishness of person who is holding prime post in party. Why BJP government fell in Karnataka? This is matter of introspection. India is a big country. Its main feature is unity in diversity. But now-a-days this feature is not its trade mark. Selfishness is hovering in the mind of each and every person. Regionalism is now big hindrance in the way of one or two-party system as well as in the way of unity. People of every North-east states are demanding their independence. In whole country regional parties have established their feet. Regional parties are enjoying power in Bihar, UP, Karnataka, AP, Tamil Nadu. Nobody is in position to ignore their importance. No doubt too many parties create problems particularly in better governance. Failure of nuke deal is also repercussion of many parties system. Due to many parties system in many states, hung assembly and parliament has become permanent feature. However we cannot change this system. Thus it is now our compulsion. People are casting their votes not on the ground of development and removal of poverty. They don't want to come out from the net of caste, poverty, creed and religion. Presently most of states are in the grip of this mindset. In this position how we can think about better governance?

Two party system is a good concept. But practically it is not possible to implement it in reality.

K Rajesh: Multiparty system has always been a vibrant attribute of Indian democracy wherein all political parties, irrespective of their national or regional status represent the aspirations of the citizens.

It has paved way for coalition governments, which works on the principle of common minimum programme and operates on consensus. The true meaning of democracy could only be replicated when the government works on broader consensus among all political parties in the parliament.

Opting for two-party system will only strengthen the hands of the politicians who will flex their muscles and would act with utter disregard to the aspirations of the masses. It would inculcate a feeling of dictatorial traits in them. It would not leave any choice to the electorate and they will be forced to cast their vote to either of these two contenders, which will ultimately result in authoritarianism and totalitarianism.

Indian experience has shown that a single-party rule had led to uneven development in the country, with several regions like the Northeast, "neglected" by the Centre, "crying" for equitable economic and political justice. At present, we are still divided on caste, creed, linguistic and ethnic grounds. These divisions can be wiped out not by restricting participation of political parties in governance but by raising the living standards of the people and by ensuring equal participation in government formation.

This opportunity could only be provided to them if there is multi-party system, which will ensure greater participation for better governance. It would be disastrous to force two-party system on the electorate at this stage when political literacy is very low and decentralization of power is still unfinished. Two-party system is successful in countries like USA, where per capita income is high and also they have a strong federal government, which takes care of the local development.

In India, where most of the economic power is with the Centre and trickle to the states through them only, an equal participation of regional parties at the Centre would ensure a better flow of resources and planned development.

The essence of democracy will only become stronger by inputs from different political parties. Democracy in itself is an institution, which is fully capable of churning out the unwanted political parties and retaining only those who truly represent the mandate of the people. By opting for two-party system, in a country like India, the rights of the citizens will be trampled under the burden of the politicians and their personal agenda.

A strong federal government with more powers and equal participation at the Centre would ensure a better governance, speedy development and more socio-economic growth.

Krishna Chander Mouli: In a vast country like India, full of diversities, a two-party system may not be perceivable, that too at this stage, after completing around six decades of democratic governance.

Yet two-party system would have been ideal from the initial stages itself for a developing country to grow faster and stabilise the growth. The ambitions and greed for power of the various political parties existed at the time of independence and later on at the time of adopting the constitution of a sovereign Socialist Secular Democratic Republic in 1950, did not allow a two-party system for the country to emerge.

It is now too late to think in terms of a two-party system in our democracy unless, God forbid, an autocracy reigns in. Why at all this issue has come up at this stage for a debate in a forum. One possible reason is the simmering discontent among the various units of coalition alliances which have become the norm these days.

Whether at the Centre or in a state alliances are playing havoc with each other at the cost of the Nation and people. The alliance partners have no qualms in disregarding and disrespecting the valuable voters of the constituency and holding them to ransom every now and then by imposing elections at their whims and pleasure. The latest example is Karnataka.

A similar serious problem was faced by Bajpayee's NDA alliance with Jayalalitha's and Mamata Banerjee's tantrums and Manmohan Singh's UPA alliance with CPM, CPI, and other Left wing parties threats. A two-party system will definitely usher in good governance. But if a two-party system for India is a distant dream let the present day multi-party system be reduced to a reasonable number of political parties which may facilitate good governance.

Similarly in the Assembly elections too some screening could be done for deregistering the parties with parochial objectives and manifestos and bar them from contesting elections.

Sharjeel Khan: Today political situation of central and some state governments insist people to think about "Two-party system".

There are many advantages of two-party systems; one it would save lot of funds, which are spent on rallies for advertisement of the parties.

Two-party system would ensure more political stability and for unity and integrity political stability is very necessary.

The expenditure of parliamentary election goes in crores of rupees so is the case with state assembly elections.

It is also observed that in two-party system there is no fight for important portfolios.

There is no confusion among people for choosing of ruling party, the general public will have more confidence while casting their votes in favour of any party in a biparty system.

One more thing, which makes a mockery is there are many single members who represent their parties in parliament.

Today if we ask any youngster to choose politics as a career, we will find nobody wants to join it because the image of Indian politics is very defiled and dirty in front of them and up to certain extent they are right.

The Election Commission and Supreme Court have power to ban mafia and criminals to participate in any election, but it is our irony that many politicians have criminal records. Due to political interference Election Commission and Supreme Court are unable to take any effective action against them but in a biparty system government, we can easily check the entry of mafia and criminals in parliament and state assemblies.

India is a country with a multi-party system, with a number of national and regional parties, each party having its own ideology.

At a time when India is passing through coalition era, I strongly believe that it is the right time to change government system, for the development and progress of our nation.

Sivda: Yes, India should have two-party system for better governance. Being a fast developing country now we need a change in the system which would look to the need of the times. At present our politicians are leading our nation in a negative way.

Most state governments are coalition one which makes it difficult to pass bills due to differences of opinions. If the coalition government has to take a decision then its allies should also agree like the Indo-US civil nuclear deal has been bogged down due to opposition from the UPA alliance partner the Left parties. Quarrel over Ram Setu project is another example.

When there are only two parties, then decisions can be taken independently.

are: First Manish John Mathew , Second Jyoti , Third Rini Ponnachen.