The incident that happened after the parliamentarians passed a unanimous decision regarding the 'cooling period' has raised questions about the ethics of the parliamentarians. Some actions taken by the executive are also of the same nature. Looking at the decisions made about the courts in recent days, it is felt that a ethics monitoring committee is needed.

We have realized that the parliamentary dignity and dignity has decreased after the election in 2079 for the current House of Representatives. The cooperative fraud case, the visit visa case, the discrepancies during the budget preparation and the abuses in the parliament, which are said to involve the leaders of the Congress and UML, including the president of the RSVP, can be nothing other than the ethics monitoring committee. 

There have been many discussions and conclusions about the importance of MPs and Parliament in democracy. MPs are the representatives of the people, while the Parliament is a forum for discussing matters of public concern. Every discussion that takes place there should be people centered and every document that comes out of it should be of maximum benefit to the people. If the parliament is permanent, the term of office of the parliamentarians is fixed. 

Our generation saw the 2015 Parliament and MPs in Nepal, saw the National Panchayat of the Panchayat period and its members. After 2047 years saw the House of Representatives and the National Assembly and its MPs. Saw the Interim Legislature and many of its MPs.

saw the Constituent Assembly and Legislative Parliament and its MPs. According to the current constitution, the Union saw the House of Representatives and the National Assembly and their MPs. In addition, the unicameral Provincial Assembly and its MPs were also seen in the province. Members of Parliament began to be addressed as honorifics, which are now more widespread. Once he became a member of parliament, he was called honorable everywhere in the village, town, square, club, festival, regardless of his personal conduct. 

In parliament, there are mainly ruling parties and opposition parties. The ruling party has a government, the opposition monitors every work of the government, opposes it, even heats the streets. Bills submitted by the government to make and amend laws in a timely manner are discussed in various committees at various stages, amended and become laws and are implemented.

We have seen that there are debates on issues of public interest in the parliament, there is a lot of noise and sometimes the chair is even thrown. But the people are and must be at the center of all this. Another standard says that the government belongs to the ruling party while the parliament belongs to the opposition party, which was fully followed by the then Speaker Damannath Dhungana in the parliament formed after 2047. BP Koirala himself has said that during the administration of the government, opposition opposition is not taken as opposition but as help. 

Any discussions and debates in Parliament are not and should not be personal. All these should focus on how the maximum interest of the people can be according to the policy of their party. 

As the age of democracy increases, and as much as the maximum clauses of the constitution are used, we are seeing and experiencing the opposite in ours that the attention of the parliamentarians should be focused on the people. Now the public debate in the parliament has started to thin out. We MPs have lost interest in studying. Swearing has become our daily routine. Every day we are faced with how much space the media gives when someone is abused or exposed.

Our standards are starting to be determined by social media comments rather than public service. The more projects and budget funds were brought to our area, the more proud we are. That's why from this time, the stain of budget buying and selling also came to us. What can be more ironic than this in democracy? Moreover, they started taking to the streets to silence the voice of the opposition from the ruling party. This cannot be the democracy of our thinking. 

Even last week we faced a terrible situation. From Singha Darbar to Baneshwar, the government documents have changed. Who is running our system? As high-ranking government officials openly threaten Parliament and the government, we are forced to keep quiet.

In the province, the government makes a procedure, a hull businessman starts a movement, the government is shocked. Why? Because we have become weak, our moral strength has diminished and that too because of ourselves. We have created a standard that no one has to resign after being scarred. We make compromises rather than consensus at midnight to run the government in turn. 

After the current parliamentary elections, people's voices have rarely been heard in the parliament. Even if it comes sometimes, it disappears in the middle. Meterbaze, co-operative fraud, teachers' demands, malkhad, wayfaring, corruption, human trafficking, visit visa etc. What was lacking and to discuss the subject in our parliament? Bankers in Bafia are luring MPs to introduce amendments.

When 8 years of federalism are approaching, why can't we make dozens of laws necessary for that? Why does our Parliament not discuss these issues in depth? Because we have become free, we have become so-called honorable, the palace of Singha and Baneshwar has been opened to us. Those who take advantage of our laziness are so enthusiastic that they can change the future of the country from Singha Darbar to Baneshwar by changing the document. 

Its direct impact has also started to affect the working committee meetings of major parties. It has started raining insults there as well. Accusations and counter-accusations have become normal. We either don't attend the parliament, or we do 'hata' of the official language. We are in a hurry to ask for the budget in Singha Durbar rather than the public affairs matters in the House, we are afraid that the quota for going abroad will be missed and the inauguration will be our main task. 

We are so apathetic in committee meetings that many times we do not attend committee meetings without a quorum. We the hon. are left out rather than in simple and universally understood language. Opponents of the current constitution, businessmen, and employees are taking advantage of this looseness. 

What happens when a boy in a village-town says to his son, "Hey dad, go and make tobacco and take it"? The son makes tobacco and smokes it according to the characteristics of the hookah and learns it himself. Then he becomes even more bitter than Baa. Our state assembly members are the sons of the same tobacconists. The situation there is even worse. 

A committee has become mandatory in the parliament to stop all this nonsense and that is the 'conduct monitoring committee'. We can get out of the chaos that we have seen, experienced and done in the parliament these days only with the formation of the conduct monitoring committee, which has been in practice for a long time in the parliament of developed democracies, and its effective implementation. 

Let's form a parliamentary committee consisting of the members of the House of Representatives and the National Assembly, which can monitor the functioning of the parliament and parliamentarians. To assist the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the Speaker of the National Assembly to investigate the conduct of a member of parliament against the code of conduct, and to recommend action. If this happens, there will be no need to interrupt the parliament meeting for several days to decide whether to form a committee or not. Its impartial investigation and assurance of results not only increases public trust, but also helps to bind everyone with a moral rope. 

This committee can monitor everything from foreign visits of MPs to gift transactions and investments. In addition, the work of this committee should be at least as follows – 

1. To account for the moral value of every bill introduced in the House,