Kochi, Sep 25 Speaker Thiruvanchoor Radhakrishnan on Friday defended Keralam Chief Minister V D Satheesan’s recent travel on a chartered flight, saying he knew the family that provided the aircraft personally and there was no reason to make an issue of it.
Satheesan travelled by a chartered flight from Thiruvananthapuram to Karipur airport to visit Nilambur, where six people died in a flash flood.
The flight came under scrutiny after reports emerged that a private entity had sponsored it.
Radhakrishnan said that when an emergency occurs and the presence of a public representative is required, the mode of transport should not be an issue.
“If an incident occurs and we are convinced that our presence is required there, then whichever mode of transport it is, it is not an issue at all. We will go there,” he said.
Radhakrishnan dismissed concerns that the aircraft provider could expect favours from the government, saying the company belonged to someone from his constituency and that he personally knew the owner and his family, who were his voters.
He said the owner was a prominent Congress leader, while his wife owned the aircraft, adding that he knew the family well.
“These are people well-known to us,” he said.
On concerns over transparency and ethics, Radhakrishnan said there were no issues and that everything had been handled properly.
Responding to Opposition allegations that ministers travelled abroad on sponsored trips, he said ministers were required to follow prescribed procedures, including obtaining political and Central Government clearances and adhering to decisions of the state government.
Radhakrishnan said he had travelled abroad for a Commonwealth Parliamentary Association meeting as a state guest and believed official trips could take place once the required formalities had been completed.
On Local Self-Government Minister K M Shaji using a friend’s Range Rover as his official vehicle, Radhakrishnan said temporary arrangements should not be made into a major issue.
He compared the situation to getting into another person’s vehicle when one’s own car breaks down, saying such situations were a natural human response.
“None of this is a constitutional violation or against constitutional obligations. It is none of those. It’s an emotional question, and continuously heating that emotion doesn’t make it a relevant topic of discussion,” he said.
(PTI News)
