Debate 1: JSRP vs PCP

Kaushik Das, the Election Commissioner (Overall Affairs), and Preetham Krishna (Principal Secretary to the Election Commissioner) served as the moderator of the parliamentary debate between the political parties: PCP (Progressive Conservative Party) and JSRP (Jana Samveda Rakshaka Paksha).

The debate kicked off with the opening statements from both parties, along with a point of information by the opposition. The first political party to provide its opening statement was JSRP. The Prime Ministerial Candidate laid the foundations upon which the party is built. Their opening statement “People’s power is greater than the people in power”. This catalyzed their ideology, which serves their basic purpose in implementing policies toward social welfare-centric outcomes. The principles of being clean, consistent, connected, and congruent serve as their pillars of functioning and provide their political party with a sense of purpose that aligns with the people's interests. Modernization of armed forces and replacing the borders with technology instead of people, promotion of defense manufacturing, and making India a self-reliant country in the genre of defense were some of the policy outcomes they wished to achieve. Apart from this, they also wanted to scrap the Right to Information Act as they regard it as a fundamental right and see no basis for the act to be upheld in the first place.

In this regard, the PCP (Progressive Conservative Party) added a point of information that questioned the political biases behind it as the Government would dictate the information the public would receive, thus establishing an agenda, on their own. JSRP replied to this statement by holding the Government responsible and accountable so that any person does not have to beg for any information, they know is readily available.

The Progressive Conservative Party was next in line to provide their opening arguments, where they highlighted the oxymoronic sense in their name and mentioned that, one has to let go of the values and the cultures but simultaneously, have to incorporate the same in their community. According to their manifesto, progress is a western concept that the Indian Youth seldom interprets. JSRP added a point of information where they questioned PCP’s manifesto being hypocritical to which they replied with for being progressive, one has to always be conservative.

This was followed by the main arguments from both parties. JSRP were the first to go and they provided the arguments of holistic and skill development which would be pertinent for their employability, the existence of the red tape in the political structure of the country, and also the use of Student Redressal Forms where students can talk about their problems. The opposition argued against the scrutinization of the authority willing to be influenced the educational sector where there would be no check on the powers of the student. This was put into context by JSRP , where they removed any inconsequential attributes and ensured that there would be only a 50-50% division of powers. PCP provided their main arguments which aligned with the points of making a domestic armory and the interests of India aligning with that of Russia and the USA which, has an indirect harm on the economy. Self-reliance is the key and India would achieve it under their rule. Their point of information was provided by JSRP who took up questions directing how privatization and the cultural norms would go hand in hand to which they provided the example of Japan, handling their technological prowess and the importance they provide on the culture.

The closing statements were given where JSRP GAVE THE CHOICE TO THE PEOPLE and rather highlighted the concentration of their manifesto being backed by execution. And highlighted the Nirmal Bharat Mission which would see Pure India and will address waste disposal on a much more grassroots level. PCP gave the closing statement which promised the audience optimization in their work rather than giving false hopes.

This marked an end to the first debate and soon, followed a Q/A session by different media houses where both political parties took up questions and provided their perspectives on it. Instead of making the event successful, the political parties aimed at informing the public about their manifesto and also promoted their schemes and ideologies to garner a voter base.