A class was debating the merits of a bicameral system. The following points were made during the discussion. Read the arguments and say if you agree or disagree with each of them, giving reasons.

✓ Neha said that bicameral legislature does not serve any purpose.

✓ Shama argued that experts should be nominated in the second chamber.

✓ Tridib said that if a country is not a federation, then there is no need to have a second chamber.

1. Neha said that bicameral legislature does not serve any purpose. But it is not true. In a large country like India it is preferred to have two houses of the legislature to give representation to all sections of the society. The second argument in favour of Bicameral legislature is that the monopoly of the first chamber can be checked.

2. Shama argued that experts should be nominated in the second chamber. In our country the President can nominate 12 members in Rajya Sabha. These nominations are made from among those persons who have the specialisation in the fields of literature, art, social services, science, etc. The selected members of the different fields are experienced and they posses intellectual depth.

3. 'Tridib’ arguments may not be valid. Even if a country is not a federation, a need for the second chamber is there. The two houses of the national legislature are required to give representations to all the sections of the society and to give representation to all geographical regions of parts of the country. A bicameral legislature ensures double check on every bill and every policy matter, thus realizing the exact purpose of the legislative organ of the government.