CPN-UML's unity rant meaningless, don't mistake my PM candidacy for greed of power: Sushil Koirala
KATHMANDU: Nepali Congress President Sushil Koirala and prime ministerial candidate Sushil Koirala said CPN-UML's rant for unity among the major parties was meaningless as, he said, the second party has breached the past agreement.
It is meaningless to talk about agreement when the CPN-UML did not support the proposal on the amendment of Constitution and was responsible for the failure of the Bill on Reconstruction Authority, he said.
He maintained that there was no gentlemen's agreement to elect KP Sharma Oli as the new Prime Minister. "Where is it in th 16-point agreement?" he said.
Koirala was speaking at the Legislature-Parliament before the prime ministerial election.
He said his candidacy was a part of democratic process.
"I know about my commitment, I have never done anything for power. Please don't mistake it for greed of power," he said.
Stressing on peace, stability, democracy and development, Koirala and said his candidacy was for that.
According to him, none should take his candidacy otherwise.
Earlier he said he believed in democracy, national sovereignty and development and was jailed for that also.
Referring to the ongoing agitation in the Tarai Madhes region over the provisions in new Constitution, he said all need to be sensitive towards the issues in Madhes and efforts were being made to resolve the issues.
If we were bit flexible earlier, he said, this situation would not arise.
He further said the government has been held responsible for the alleged blockade at Nepal-India border. It's not that government is not doing anything, the government is trying to resolve it through diplomatic channel, he added.
He pointed out the need for resolving the issues of provincial boundaries peacefully.
Nepali Congress senior leader Sher Bahadur Deuba, who is the proposer of Koirala's candidacy, and Ram Chandra Paudel, who is the seconder, also argued that Koirala's candidacy as a democratic process.
Paudel went on to claim that the concept of consensus that the parties have been reiterating was not on a par with democratic values.
READ ALSO:
