“We will speak against all wrongdoings and injustice committed by the State government and nobody can stop us. We are in the Opposition, and the Constitution has given us right to speak up,” said former TDP Minister Ch. Ayyanna Patrudu.
Releasing a video on Saturday night after YSR Congress Party workers led by Narsipatnam MLA P. Uma Sankar Ganesh, tried to stage a protest near Mr. Patrudu’s house, in protest against a few comments made by the former TDP Minister at a recent meeting in Guntur.
“They (YSRCP) can stage protests and even get us arrested, but we are not scared or deterred from such acts. We shall continue to speak against the government, if we find that things are going in the wrong direction,” he said.
The former TDP minister said the government was getting into a debt trap just to fund its welfare schemes. “What is the necessity. There is change in the air and even intellectuals are questioning the administration of the government, which is pushing the State to the brink,” he said.
According to Mr. Patrudu, the government was now getting scared, as there was a rising negative trend against the YSRCP and that was why they were indulging in such coercive tactics against the Opposition and dissent.
Commenting on the statements made by R&B minister Dharmana Krishna Das against him, he said, “It is very evident that he was forced to speak, as there is a threat to his ministerial berth. Mr. Krishna Das is from a very good and educated family and he never speaks in this tone and tenor or uses such language,” he said.
According to Mr. Patrudu on the one hand Mr. Jagan Mohan Reddy was trying to show his magnanimity by showering welfare schemes and on the other he was recovering more than the amount given through taxes, increased electricity charges and fines from the common man.
Clarifying his comments made in Guntur, he said, “There is recording of every word that I had spoken in the meeting. I challenge the YSRCP leaders to prove that I was abusive. Yes I called the CM ‘Tughlaq’, what is wrong in it. History proves that Muhammad bin Tughlaq had tried to shift his capital and paid the price. The same is the case here.”
