Honorable Speaker,

The government has completed the first 100 days of its term. No one expects a miracle to happen in 100 days. But 100 days do show the government's thinking, priorities, working style, approach to democracy, and the direction in which it is trying to take the country. And, 100 days is not only an opportunity to make public the list of achievements but also a time for self-reflection.

In the meantime, I read the achievements made public by the government on the occasion of 100 days. My party reviewed it. I take some of the efforts made by the government positively. The government has been seen to be active in the areas of good governance, corruption control, administrative reform, service delivery, and some structural reforms. The Congress does not hesitate to praise positive work wherever it has been done. Because when the government is successful, the Nepali people are the ones who ultimately succeed. Nepal is the country.

But in a democracy, the government is not evaluated from the booklet of achievements prepared by the government itself. The evaluation is done from the experience of the citizens. It is done from respect for the Constitution. It is through accountability to the parliament. It is through the credibility of public institutions. It is based on whether the law is applied equally to everyone. And, most importantly, it is based on whether there has been a change in the lives of citizens.

Today, I would like to ask some questions on behalf of the opposition party, and these questions are to make the government more accountable. And, we should not forget that in democracy, questioning is not opposition, but accountability. First of all, we want to talk about the parliamentary accountability of the Prime Minister.

The Constitution of Nepal has made the Prime Minister accountable to the parliament. The parliament is a representative institution of the sovereign people. The Prime Minister is a member of that institution. His government rests on the trust of that parliament. Therefore, the Prime Minister must be accountable to the parliament. But after seeing the Prime Minister's style of work in the past hundred days, I remind the Prime Minister that after climbing the axis, you should not forget the ladder. Will you climb the axis of power and forget the parliament that brought you to the axis? Will you devalue the parliament?  

I would like to ask the Prime Minister seriously, how can parliamentary democracy be strong if the Parliament is not your priority? If the Prime Minister considers writing messages on social media more effective than being present in the Parliament, how can the dignity of the highest representative institution of the people be maintained?

Being popular and being responsible in a democracy are not the same thing. At the same time, I would like to remind you - being famous and being popular are not the same thing. To put it more clearly, we are also living a life of illusion that we have become popular by becoming famous. And I would like to tell the Prime Minister - it is easy to go viral on social media, but it is difficult to work seriously and seriously as the Prime Minister of the country. Therefore, Prime Minister, you should give up the path of going viral. Forget it. You have become the Prime Minister of the country. As the Prime Minister, drive the country properly. Drive on the expressway but with great care. If you have an accident, not only you but the entire country will be in an accident.

Mr. Speaker, 

Whenever the opposition leader speaks in Parliament, the Prime Ministers of the democratic countries of the world sit on the front bench smiling . But here, I do not see the Prime Minister, who has to listen to the opposition leader laughing. Despite this, I will not look for him again . It is his responsibility to be in Parliament . It is my responsibility to remind him . I know - since he is not here, I do not want to go through the pain of looking .

Mr. Speaker, 

Another important basis of democracy is dialogue. Democracy runs through dialogue, moves forward through consensus and also respects disagreement. But looking at the working style of the government in the past hundred days, it has been seen that distance has been given priority over dialogue, confrontation over cooperation and unilateral decisions over consultation.

It was necessary to move forward by forming a common opinion on issues of national importance . But the government tried to move forward alone . Remember - one cannot reach the destination with one's feet twisted and shoes worn upside down . The democratic path is a slippery path. After the Prime Minister, who came from a slippery path, tried to put on his shoes backwards, it is certain that he cannot reach the right destination. To reach the destination, he has to walk a slippery path. Again, he cannot reach it by just walking fast. The path he walks should be correct and the Prime Minister came from the path of the democratic constitution, but I feel that he is walking with North Korea in his mind. This is not a good sign at all.

I humbly request that the opposition party supports the government for the development of the country, for the strengthening of the democratic system and for the justified amendment of the constitution. If the government extends its hand for national consensus, the Nepali Congress is always ready to play a positive role.

Mr. Speaker,

The government calls itself democratic but does undemocratic work, does not open the source of wealth called good governance. But it has started a campaign against corruption by investigating assets in 100 days. Naturally, I welcome the willpower shown by the government in controlling corruption. Whoever commits corruption, whatever party he belongs to, whatever position he holds, should be brought under the purview of the law. The Nepali Congress has no objection to this.

But there is a question. The Prime Minister said that there was no working environment in the country for 35 years. But immediately after becoming Prime Minister, nearly two hundred tolas of gold were found in the Prime Minister's assets. More than crores of rupees were found in the bank. Prime Minister! Why did the Nepali Congress acquire gold? It does not ask and does not seek. But what is the source of the gold acquisition? It is the opposition's responsibility to ask that. We will fulfill our responsibility. We will not run away from this.

Mr. Speaker, our main concern is in controlling corruption. I respectfully take the name of the Honorable Prime Minister and say that the investigation into the assets should start with the opposition leader Bhishma Raj Angdembe and Prime Minister Balendra Shah. Let there be an investigation into Tinghar, Siloti and Phungsing's Pakhobari in Umlabung (Nawamidanda) of Panchthar. Let there be an investigation into the Prime Minister's nearly 200 tolas of gold. But I do not believe at all that the Prime Minister has earned gold by doing so. But the voters who voted for you are asking from afar - what is the source of so much gold? Where did it come from? So, Prime Minister, let's investigate. Let's investigate the assets of former Prime Ministers too. Let's investigate other former high-ranking politicians and employees, but let's not start with others, let's start with us. Prime Minister, are you ready? I am ready. It is not that the investigation should not be done on yourself, but only on others. Mr. Speaker,

While investigating assets, the selective principle should not be used. And the asset investigation campaign against corruption should be credible. That trust is only when the Prime Minister himself is ready for a fair investigation and shows the same severity in the investigation of his people as he shows it to the opposition. 

And the necessary law is needed for the investigation of assets . Which was in the list of 100 of the promises of the ruling party, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). Forgetting that promise, the legal validity of the investigation without making a law on the investigation of assets raises questions .

Mr. Speaker, 

The most serious concern in the 100 days of the government is the interference in the democratic process. It is surprising - the presence of only 3 people in the 6-member Constitutional Council, which is not found anywhere in the world, was called a majority . I think - it happened in the country of a Prime Minister who was a miraculous young Prime Minister and led the country on an expressway . And, the matter of pride, another surprise has been added to the world 

But, Mr. Speaker, 

Such a practice is against the Constitution . It is against the essence of democracy. This has weakened the culture of consensus. There has been an attempt to bring constitutional bodies under the influence of the government, not independence. The government has weakened democracy, not strengthened it. The Nepali Congress does not accept unconstitutional actions. It condemns them.

Honorable Speaker,

I would like to reiterate – our aim is not to oppose the government for the sake of opposing it. We want the government to succeed, because when the government succeeds, it is the Nepali people who succeed. The lives of the Nepali people will change.

But the success of the government is not measured by how many bulldozers it has driven, but by how safe the lives of the citizens have been. The residence of any citizen may have been illegal.

But Mr. Speaker,

His birth was not illegal. The womb of the mother who gave birth to him was not illegal. It was not illegal for him to be born on Nepali soil either, Mr. Speaker. Therefore, sustainable management of squatters should be done from a practical perspective. But in the name of a solution, thousands of squatters and unorganized settlers were displaced without alternative arrangements at the beginning of the rainy season. That was the moment when the government's human sensitivity was zero.

Before evicting a family, at least where will that family live from tomorrow? Shouldn't the state think about the condition of the elderly, disabled, pregnant and small children? Can the state be so insensitive? Yesterday, in the name of management, squatters were forcibly removed from the settlement and placed in shelters. And today, they are being driven out of there overnight?

Mr. Speaker,

Is this country only for the bigwigs? Is it only for those who wear dark glasses, black coats and pants and drive around in black cars? Isn't this a country for squatters, unorganized settlers, the poor, farmers and laborers? If not, then why is powerless citizens being oppressed? Is this in keeping with the character of a welfare state?

Therefore, my humble request is - let's solve the problem of squatters. But do it in a humane manner. Let's take care of human dignity. Let's not use the tools of power on powerless citizens. Let's be clear - the government never wins over citizens.

However, recently, the police arrested the squatter Dambar Tamang, who criticized the government. I demand his release. While a video was seen in which some government minister said he would break the legs of a construction businessman. I don't think that video was created by AI. Some MPs from the ruling party even made violent, provocative and illegal statements like dragging the police on the street. Perhaps that wasn't an AI-made video either. Your Honor, you must be here somewhere. But the government remained silent. Let it be known that this is not a dark regime that stifles the voice of the citizens. The Nepali people have made history 7 and a half decades ago. Now, such history will not be repeated. We will not allow it to happen. But it should not be about letting the big ones go free and arresting the small ones.

And in democracy, criticizing the government is not a crime. Disagreeing with the government is not opposition, and democracy cannot be strengthened by suppressing dissent. Democracy is strengthened when the government can patiently listen to its critics.

Mr. Speaker,

The Constitution of Nepal is a national agreement made through decades of struggle, sacrifice, movement, and political consensus of the Nepali people. Therefore, it does not mean that the Constitution cannot be amended. It is not a scripture, so it is not immutable. But unnecessary tampering with the basic essence of the Constitution, democratic values, and the federal system in the name of amendment is unacceptable to the Nepali Congress.

There has been no intensive dialogue on a serious issue like constitutional amendment so far. There have been attempts to tamper with the federalism institutionalized by the Constitution. स्मरण रहोस्, संघीयताका लागि मधेसले विद्रोह गर्‍यो । आदिवासी जनजाति, थारु, दलित, महिलाले गरेको बलिदानीपूर्ण सङ्घर्षबाट प्राप्त भएको राजनीतिक उपलब्धि संघीयता हो । त्यसो हुनाले संघीयता सितिमिति आएको व्यवस्था होइन । यसलाई तलमाथि गर्न सकिन्छ भनेर नसोचियोस्, बरु सोचियोस् कसरी संघीयताको सबलीकरण गर्ने भनेर । 

सभामुख महोदय,

संविधान निर्माणमा संसदका सबै दल, संसद बाहिरका जनता समाजवादी पार्टीदेखि विभिन्न दलहरु, संवैधानिक कानुनका विज्ञ लगायतबीच संवाद गरौँ । के के मा संशोधन गर्ने गरौँ । तर, संविधानको मुल संरचनामाथि प्रहार नगरिकन ।

सभामुख महोदय,

मौजुदा संविधान कांग्रेसका पूर्वसभापति सुशील कोइराला प्रधानमन्त्री हुँदा जारी भयो । कांग्रेसकै निवर्तमान सभापति शेरबहादुर देउवा प्रधानमन्त्री भएपछि सविधानको कार्यान्यवन थालनी भयो । त्यसो हुनाले यो संविधानको अभिभावकत्व र अपनत्व सबैभन्दा बढी नेपाली कांग्रेसले बहन गर्छ । यो हाम्रो अभिभारा हो । तर सर्वपक्षीय रुपमा संविधान संशोधनको प्रक्रिया अगाडि बढाउनुपर्छ ।

अहिले जसरी संविधान संशोधनलाई हल्का रुपमा लिएर सरकारले संवैधानिक कानुनका ज्ञाता नभएको, संविधान निर्माता नभएको व्यक्तिलाई संयोजक बनाएर बहसपत्र तयार गराइँदैछ- एकदमै अपरिपक्व काम भइरहेको छ । यसमा कांग्रेसको रिजर्भेसन सुरुदेखि नै छ । हामीले भन्दै आएका छौँ- सर्वोच्च अदालतका पूर्वन्यायाधीशको नेतृत्वमा संविधान संशोधन सुझाव आयोग गठन गर्नुपर्छ । 

यसबीच सत्तारुढ दल संघीयता मास्नेतिर उद्धत भएको छ । संघीयताको मेरुदण्ड मानिने प्रदेश सभा खारेजीको प्रस्ताव पारित गरिएको छ र त्यसलाई रास्वपाको राजनीतिक दृष्टिकोण भनियो । म सोध्न चाहन्छु सरकारलाई- जनकपुर र झापा पुगेर वर्तमान प्रधानमन्त्रीले संघीयता बलियो बनाउने चुनावअघि भन्नुभएको थियो । तर सत्तारुढ रास्वपाको पहिलो महाधिवेशनले प्रदेशसभा खारेज गर्ने भन्यो । सभामुख महोदय, 

प्रधानमन्त्रीजी बालेन कि उहाँकै दल रास्वपाका सभापित माननीय रवि लामिछानेको भनाइ पत्याउने ?  म सोध्न चाहन्छु । लोकप्रिय गायिका कुन्ती मोक्तानको गीतमा 'गोठाला जाँदा लाएको माया खेताला जाँदा भुलेछ' भने जस्तै जनकपुरमा बोलेको कुरा चितवन पुग्दा भुलेछ । यो राम्रो होइन । प्रधानमन्त्रीजीले त्यसबेला मधेशको नागरिक काठमाडौं आउने होइन, जनकपुरमै सबै काम गर्ने हो, काठमाडै त घुम्न जाने हो भनेर संघीतालाई बलियो बनाउने कुरा गर्नु भएको भुल्नु भएन । 

सभामुख महोदय,

 सरकारको १०० दिन पुगेपछि मैले सोचेँ- त्रिभुवन अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय विमानस्थलमा देखिएको भीड विदेशबाट फर्किएका युवाको स्वागत गर्न पुगेका आफन्तहरूको होला। किनकि कुनै बेला सरकार चलाएको १०० दिनमै विदेशबाट कम्तिमा सय युवालाई फर्काएर स्वदेशमै रोजगारी दिने बाचा सुनेको थिएँ । त्यसका लागि अस्ट्रेलिया, युरोप र अमेरिकाको गल्लीगल्लीमा स्टिकर टाँस्ने र युवाका लागि देश फर्क अभियान चलाउने र विदेशमा जति नै कमाइ हुनेगरी रोजगारी दिने भनिएको थियो ।

तर अहिले लाग्छ त्यो पनि भुल्नका लागि गरिएको बाचा थियो । र त विमानस्थलमा देखिएको भिड देश फर्काइएको युवाको होइन रहेछ विदेश पठाइएको युवाको रहेछ । यदि होइन भने विदेशबाट फर्काउने भनिएका कम्तिमा १०० युवा कुन विमानबाट आए ? कि ती हाम्रा युवाहरुलाई फर्काउने जहाज अझै रनवेबाट उड्नै सकेन ? म सरकारसँग जवाफ चाहन्छु ।

सभामुख महोदय,

संविधानको धारा ७६ (९) ले प्रधानमन्त्रीसहित मन्त्रिपरिषद्को संख्या बढीमा २५ जनामा सीमित गर्नु भनेको छ । तर सरकारले मन्त्रिपरिषद्को सङ्ख्या घटायो । घटाए पनि सचिवस्तरीय ५७ जना सल्लाहकार र स्वकीयसहित दुई सयभन्दा बढीको सदस्यीय सचिवालय बनाएर राज्यकोषमाथि थप भार थोपर्ने काम गरियो। मन्त्रालयको संख्या घटाएको भन्दै मितव्ययिताको प्रचार गरियो, तर सयौं राजनीतिक नियुक्ति गरेर कार्यकर्ता व्यवस्थापनलाई प्राथमिकता दिइयो।

सरकारप्रति प्रश्न छ- यदि प्रशासनिक संयन्त्र सक्षम छ भने यति ठूलो सल्लाहकारको फौज किन चाहियो ? यसबाट जनताले कस्तो अतिरिक्त सेवा पाए ? जनताको कर विकास, शिक्षा, स्वास्थ्य र रोजगारीमा खर्च हुनुपर्ने हो, राजनीतिक नियुक्तिको फौज पाल्न होइन। मन्त्रीको कुर्सी घटाएर सल्लाहकारको कुर्सी थप्नु मितव्ययिता होइन, खर्च लुकाउने उपाय मात्र हो। जनताको करमाथिको यो भद्दा मजाक हो ।

सभामुख महोदय,

वर्तमान सरकार पारदर्शिताको नारा दिएर सत्तामा पुगेको हो । तर सरकार पूर्णतः अपारदर्शी देखिएको छ। शेयर स्वामित्व लुकाएको आरोपपछि तत्कालीन गृहमन्त्रीले राजीनामा दिए। त्यसपछि गठित छानबिन समितिको प्रतिवेदन आजसम्म सार्वजनिक गरिएको छैन।

हामीले पटकपटक उक्त प्रतिवेदन सार्वजनिक गर्न माग गर्‍यौं। तर सरकारले निरन्तर लुकाउने काम गरिरहेको छ। प्रतिवेदनमा के निष्कर्ष आयो, कसलाई जिम्मेवार ठहर गरियो र के कारबाही सिफारिस गरियो भन्ने विषय जनतासामु ल्याइएको छैन।

प्रमुख प्रतिपक्षी नेपाली कांग्रेसले गृहमन्त्रीसँग सम्बन्धित सम्पूर्ण आरोपको स्वतन्त्र, निष्पक्ष र उच्चस्तरीय छानबिनको माग गरेको थियो। तर सरकार सत्य बाहिर ल्याउनभन्दा विषयलाई ढाकछोप गर्नतर्फ उन्मुख देखियो। आफ्नै मन्त्रीसम्बन्धी छानबिन प्रतिवेदन सार्वजनिक गर्न नसक्ने सरकारको कार्यशैलीले सुशासन, पारदर्शिता, नैतिकता र जनविश्वासमाथि गम्भीर प्रश्न खडा गरेको छ।

सभामुख महोदय,

सरकारले प्रतिबद्धतापत्रमा पाँच वर्षभित्र बहुआयामिक गरिबी १० प्रतिशतमा झार्ने ठूलो घोषणा गरेको छ। तर बजेटले भने शिक्षा र स्वास्थ्यमा ३ प्रतिशत समता शुल्क थपेर जनताको ढाड सेक्ने काम गरेको छ। महँगी नियन्त्रण गर्ने कुनै प्रभावकारी योजना छैन, गरिबलाई राहत दिने कार्यक्रम छैन। अनि गरिबी कुन आधारमा घटाउने?

साना किसान, भूमिहीन र सिमान्त वर्गलाई अनुदान दिने प्रतिबद्धता गरिएको छ। तर बजेटमा २ करोड रुपैयाँ लगानी गर्ने किसानलाई ४० प्रतिशत अनुदान दिने व्यवस्था गरिएको छ। सरकारले साना किसानलाई देखाउने र ठूला लगानीकर्तालाई सुविधा बाँड्ने नीति लिएको हो?

शिक्षा र स्वास्थ्यलाई क्रमशः निःशुल्क बनाउने प्रतिबद्धता गर्ने, तर त्यही क्षेत्रमा नयाँ शुल्क थप्ने; स्वास्थ्य बिमा सबैको पहुँचमा पुर्‍याउने भन्ने, तर आफ्नै अर्थमन्त्रीले स्वास्थ्य बिमा धान्न नसकिने अभिव्यक्ति दिने—यो सरकारको नीति हो कि विरोधाभास? प्रतिबद्धता एउटा, बजेट अर्को र मन्त्रीहरूको अभिव्यक्ति अर्कै। यही कारण यो सरकारको घोषणापत्र जनतालाई देखाउने कागज मात्र भएको छ, कार्यान्वयन गर्ने मार्गदर्शक होइन।

सभामुख महोदय,

गत वर्ष भदौ २३ र २४ गते भएका जेन–जी आन्दोलनसम्बन्धी गौरीबहादुर कार्की आयोग र राष्ट्रिय मानव अधिकार आयोगका प्रतिवेदन सरकारलाई बुझाइसकिएको छ। तर दुवै प्रतिवेदन सरकारले अहिलेसम्म दराजमै थन्क्याएर राखेको छ, सार्वजनिक गरेको छैन।

म स्पष्ट रूपमा भन्न चाहन्छु– २३ गतेको नरसंहार र २४ गतेको विध्वंस दुवै घटनामा संलग्न सबैलाई कानुनी दायरामा ल्याइनुपर्छ। मैले यसअघि पनि यही सदनमा भनेको थिएँ, २३ गतेको नरसंहारलाई देख्ने तर २४ गतेको विध्वंसलाई बेवास्ता गर्ने, वा २४ गतेको विध्वंसलाई देख्ने तर २३ गतेको नरसंहारलाई ओझेलमा पार्ने कुनै पनि प्रतिवेदन न्यायको आधार बन्न सक्दैन।

त्यसैले सरकारले दुवै प्रतिवेदन तत्काल सार्वजनिक गर्नुपर्छ। विशेषगरी राष्ट्रिय मानव अधिकार आयोगको प्रतिवेदन सार्वजनिक गरी त्यसका आधारमा निष्पक्ष छानबिन, कानुनी कारबाही र कार्यान्वयन प्रक्रिया अघि बढाइनुपर्छ। सत्ता वा शक्तिको आडमा कसैले पनि उन्मुक्ति पाउनु हुँदैन।

सभामुख महोदय,

बीवाईडी गाडी प्रकरणले यो सरकारको वास्तविक अनुहार देखाइदिएको छ। अर्थमन्त्रीमाथि राजस्व दर परिवर्तनसम्बन्धी गोप्य सूचना चुहाएर निश्चित व्यापारीलाई फाइदा पुर्‍याएको गम्भीर आरोप लाग्यो। ७०० बढी बीवाईडी गाडी नियन्त्रणमा लिएको जस्तो गर्यो। र आरोप लागेपछि स्वतन्त्र र निष्पक्ष छानबिन हुनुपर्ने थियो। तर सरकारले के गर्‍यो? आरोप लागेकै मन्त्रीले आफ्ना मन्त्रालयका कर्मचारीको नेतृत्वमा समिति बनाएर आफैंले चोख्याउने काम गर्‍यो।

के यही हो सुशासन?आफूले आफैँलाई निर्दोष घोषणा गर्ने हो भने जनताले कसरी विश्वास गर्ने? विगतमा यस्तै घटनामा "सुनपानी छर्केर चोख्याउने" भन्दै अरूमाथि आरोप लगाउने मन्त्रीजी आज आफैं त्यही अभ्यास दोहोर्याइरहेका छन्।

सुशासनको मापन भाषणबाट होइन, निष्पक्ष छानबिनबाट हुन्छ। सरकारसँग नैतिक साहस छ भने यस प्रकरणमा स्वतन्त्र न्यायिक वा उच्चस्तरीय छानबिन गराओस्। होइन भने सुशासनको नारा केवल जनतालाई झुक्याउने राजनीतिक नारामात्र भएको पुष्टि हुनेछ।

सभामुख महोदय,

सरकारले कृषि उत्पादन बढाउने, आयात घटाउने र आत्मनिर्भरता बढाउने कुरा गरेको छ। नीतिमा यी सबै कुरा राम्रो सुनिन्छन्। तर मध्य बर्खाको समयमा पनि किसानले मल पाएका छैनन्। सरकार भने मल पर्याप्त भएको बताउँछ । उसो भए किसान किन भौतारिइरहेका छन् ? म सरकारलाई सोध्न चाहन्छु ।

सभामुख महोदय,

हात्तीको आतंकले अहिलेसम्म २५ जनाको ज्यान लिइसकेको छ। एउटै परिवारका चारजनाले ज्यान गुमाउनुपरेको पीडादायी अवस्था छ। वर्षौंदेखि आतंक मच्चाइरहेको हात्ती नियन्त्रण गर्न सरकारले प्रभावकारी योजना ल्याउन सकेको छैन। स्थानीय बासिन्दा आफ्नै घर र खेतबारीमा असुरक्षित जीवन बिताउन बाध्य छन्। सरकारले राहत बाँडेर मात्र दायित्व पूरा हुँदैन। जङ्गली जनावरबाट नागरिकको जीवन र खेतीपातीको सुरक्षा गर्ने दीर्घकालीन नीति, प्रभावकारी उद्धार संयन्त्र र शीघ्र हस्तक्षेपको व्यवस्था तत्काल लागू गरियोस्। नागरिकको ज्यानको सुरक्षा गर्नु राज्यको पहिलो दायित्व हो।

सभामुख महोदय,

अन्त्यमा म यत्ति भन्न चाहन्छु- सरकारले सार्वजनिक गरेको १०० बुँदे शासकीय सुधारको सूची र ती सूचीहरुको कार्यान्वयनको स्थिति हेर्दा हात्तीको देखाउने दाँत मात्र रहेछ भन्ने पुष्टि भयो। कागजमा सुधार, व्यवहारमा अपारदर्शिता, भाषणमा सुशासन, कार्यशैलीमा चयनात्मकता, प्रतिबद्धतामा लोकतन्त्र, अभ्यासमा एकल निर्णय ।

जनतालाई आशा देखाइयो तर परिणाम निराशाजनक आयो। फेरि पनि भन्छु- लोकतन्त्रमा सरकारको मूल्याङ्कन प्रचारपत्रले हुँदैन, जनताले गर्ने हुन् । यी सबै कुरा जनताले कालो डायरीमा टिपोट गर्दै होलान् । एकदिन जनताले निर्णय अवश्य गर्नेछन् । साराशंमा भन्नुपर्दा सरकारको १०० बुँदे शासकीय सुधारको दाबी हात्तीका देखाउने दाँतजस्तै अबण्डा मात्र रहेछन्।

-कांग्रेस संसदीय दलका नेता भीष्मराज आङ्देम्बेले सोमबार प्रतिनिधिसभामा गरेको सम्बोधन ।