Steel City Youth Parliament: Young minds debate on ‘One Nation, One Election’

Jamshedpur: The Steel City Youth Parliament kicked off its two-day event at the IMA building in Jamshedpur with an electrifying showcase of youthful political acumen. Organized by Samvaad and The Avenue Mail, the event witnessed 40 students stepping into the shoes of national political leaders, with “Prime Minister Narendra Modi” and “Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi” taking center stage in a heated debate on the contentious agenda of One Nation, One Election.

Participants represented the ruling coalition (22), the opposition (17), and one independent representative, simulating Lok Sabha proceedings with remarkable authenticity. The event featured sessions such as the Shatrughan Hour, where probing questions kept the “ministers” on their toes, and the Zero Hour Debates, which allowed participants to present their perspectives on pressing national issues, including the Uniform Civil Code.

Vijay Anand Moonka, president, Singhbhum Chamber of Commerce, graced the event as the chief guest, while special guests Gyanchand Jaiswal, Adityapur-Seraikela district president of Laghu Udyog Bharti, and senior journalist B Vijay Murthy . The National Medicos Organisation (NMO) Jamshedpur unit supported the event, with Dr. Santosh Gupta serving as a mentor.

Speaking at the event, Dr. Santosh Gupta expressed his admiration for the young participants: “It’s inspiring to see students engage with such critical topics. This is the future of our democracy.”

The parliament will conclude with a lively DG Night, where participants will reflect on their experiences and celebrated their success. Founders of the youth parliament, Shaurya Gupta, Aditya Pandey, and Aryan Kumar, expressed their gratitude to all attendees, noting the remarkable enthusiasm of Jamshedpur’s youth in embracing the complexities of democratic discourse.

Anshul Pandey (Amit Shah) – “I stand for One Nation, One Election as it will lead to a significant savings of funds for India. Elections are held every few months, causing a drain on the national resources. By conducting One Nation, One Election, we can save one-fifth of the money spent on elections. It will also reduce the imposition of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC), allowing the government to work at its full potential.”

Pragya Pandey (Sambit Patra) – “One Nation, One Election is not only about saving money, it’s a vision to strengthen democracy. The challenges may be numerous, but if we work together, we can overcome them and lead India to a brighter future. This initiative will not only save resources but also ensure a more stable and continuous democratic process.”

Aarav Sharma (Bidyut Baran Mahato) – “One Nation, One Election is a beneficial proposal that solves multiple problems. Some critics claim it’s an attack on the union, but I would like to emphasize Articles 324 and 327, which empower the Election Commission of India and the government to take such decisions. This proposal has the potential to streamline the electoral process and reduce the overall burden on the system.”

Daksh Jain (S. Jaishankar) – “One Nation, One Election is a beneficial move that will address numerous challenges. Some critics see it as an attack on the union, but the Constitution, particularly Articles 324 and 327, grants full authority to the government and the Election Commission of India to implement this. It will bring efficiency, reduce costs and contribute to a more streamlined governance system.”

Harnoor Sandhu (Narendra Modi) – “One Nation, One Election must be adopted for the country’s progress. It will save resources and tackle many problems caused by frequent elections. The proposal is designed to simplify the process, reduce election-related disruptions, and allow the government to focus on the development and growth of the nation without constant election cycles interfering with governance.”

Saumiadeep (Rahul Gandhi) – “One Nation, One Election is a flawed concept. It’s a tool used by the ruling party to distract from pressing issues. They present it as a solution, but in reality, it’s a remedy searching for a disease. This proposal doesn’t address the true challenges of our democracy  instead it shifts focus away from local concerns and the accountability that the ruling party should face.”

Vivek Singh (Akhilesh Yadav) – “The central government is trying to mix regional issues with national matters, imposing a one-size-fits-all approach. This decision should be made through a referendum so that the people’s voices can guide the outcome. The public must have the final say, not just the top-down orders from the ruling party.”

Anushka (Priyanka Gandhi) – “Let’s not be swayed by catchy slogans and empty promises. We must demand real change, real reform and a government that truly represents the people, not one that works only for the political elite. The promises made must be backed by action and a real commitment to addressing the needs of the citizens.”

Pragya Kumari (Iqra Chaudhary) – “Instead of opposing One Nation, One Election, we should focus on working together to address the concerns it raises. Let’s aim to create a more efficient electoral system that works for the country as a whole. We must carefully analyze the possible issues and take a balanced approach before implementing such a significant reform.”

Divya Drishti Tiwari (Imran Masood) – “One Nation, One Election poses a serious threat to the democracy of India. It risks undermining regional voices, leading to the imposition of the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) and a uniform approach that may not be suitable for every part of the country. It could stifle diversity and the representation of local concerns, which is vital for a truly democratic nation.”