May one enquire what ideas, what wonderful ideas, you are going to place before the House if you get unrestricted freedom of speech? It is clear that Members may move amendments only if these contain some new ideas or some new suggestions which would remove substantial defects in this Draft. I am sure that Mr. President would not prevent anyone here from moving such amendments for improving the Draft. In my opinion the motion which has been brought forward by Shrimati Durgabai only states that only one amendment–and the one which is the most comprehensive–out of several amendments having the same form and object but tabled by different Members, would be permitted to be moved. I believe, under this proposal, every one of those who gave notice of his intention to move any one of such amendments would have full freedom to place before the House any new suggestions he may have, while participating in the debate on the selected amendment. But no one would have freedom to indulge in mere repetition. Repetition is not allowed in any Parliament or Legislature or any where else. I repeat that in no country and in no parliament is there freedom to indulge in `mere repetition’. There is no reason why this rule should not be enforced here. I, therefore, fully support the motion brought forward by Shrimati Durgabai and totally dissent from those who have opposed it.
