DMK Signals Flexibility on Delimitation Bill, Demands Guarantee for Tamil Nadu's Seats

The Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) has indicated a willingness to engage in discussions on the proposed delimitation bill, provided the interests of Tamil Nadu are safeguarded. The party, which leads the ruling coalition in the state, is seeking what it calls an 'ironclad guarantee' that the state's representation in Parliament will not be reduced.

Delimitation, the process of redrawing constituency boundaries based on population changes, has been a contentious issue, particularly for southern states like Tamil Nadu, which have successfully implemented family planning measures leading to slower population growth. Critics fear that a delimitation based on the upcoming Census could reduce the number of parliamentary seats allocated to these states, shifting political power to northern regions with higher population growth.

DMK sources emphasised that the party is not opposed to delimitation per se, but insists on constitutional safeguards to protect the state's interests. 'We are open to talks if Tamil Nadu's interests are not hurt. An ironclad guarantee on the number of seats is non-negotiable,' a senior party leader said on condition of anonymity.

The bill, expected to be introduced in Parliament, requires a two-thirds majority as it involves a constitutional amendment. The DMK's stance could be crucial, as it is a key ally of the ruling United Progressive Alliance (UPA) at the centre. The party's flexibility on the matter suggests a possible compromise, though the demand for a guarantee remains a sticking point.

Political analysts note that the DMK's position reflects a broader concern among southern states about maintaining their political weight in the Lok Sabha. Some have proposed a formula that freezes the number of seats based on the 1971 Census until 2031, but no consensus has been reached.

The delimitation bill is likely to be a major legislative priority for the government in the upcoming session. The DMK's conditional openness to talks could pave the way for broader negotiations, but the demand for an 'ironclad guarantee' may prove challenging to accommodate within the constitutional framework.