My speech was misconstrued, says Wahab

IUML Rajya Sabha MP talks to Shihab Thangal and clarifies his stand; party says it’s a closed chapter

Indian Union Muslim League (IUML) representative in the Rajya Sabha P.V. Abdul Wahab has denied having praised BJP Ministers during his recent speech in Parliament. Mr. Wahab said that he was critical of the Union government led by the BJP and that a part of his speech intended for fun was misinterpreted by some sections in such a way that it sounded like praising the BJP Ministers.

IUML State president Syed Sadikali Shihab Thangal had sought an explanation from Mr. Wahab in the wake of a controversy generated over the speech he made in the Rajya Sabha on Tuesday.

Mr. Wahab returned to Nilambur from Delhi on Thursday. He spoke to Mr. Thangal and clarified his stand. Mr. Thangal was reportedly happy about the MP’s clarification.

In a Facebook post, Mr. Wahab described as unfortunate that his speech was misinterpreted by some sections. He said the ‘Khelo India’ programme introduced to revive sports culture at the grass-root level was implemented with prejudice.

“When Kerala was given a meagre amount, Gujarat was given ten times more. I began my speech by raising this glaring disparity and also criticising the Union government for doing away with minority scholarships. I said Minister of State for External Affairs V. Muraleedharan was acting like Kerala’s ambassador in Delhi even when openly criticising the State. And this was construed as my praising of Mr. Muraleedharan,” said Mr. Wahab.

He said he had tried hard to bring Central schemes, including that of the Sansad Adarsh Grama Yojana, to Kerala. “Several parts of Kerala have benefited from that. I demanded more funds in skill development sector. And I made it clear in my speech that I wanted to get more funds from Minister of State for Skill Development Rajeev Chandrasekhar. And this was also misconstrued as eulogy for the BJP Ministers,” he said.

Mr. Wahab said that he explained everything to Mr. Thangal and there was no confusion or discontent within the party about his remarks.