The monsoon session of the Assembly concluded last night. During the short session, the House had witnessed several adjournments. Issues concerning people were not taken up. Don't you think it's a sheer wastage of public money?

Many issues were taken up such as Mahanadi water dispute, farmers' demands and crop insurance. Besides, issues related to Dalits and tribals, such as malnutrition and deaths of 19 children at Nagada, killing of innocent people in Kandhamal by security forces, tribals being forced to eat mango kernels in Kashipur, the government's apathy towards Daana Majhi, the government's failure to control dengue and malaria, the lower Suktlel irrigation project, tension at Belbahali village in Keonjhar and the Polavaram issues were taken up for discussion. Various bills came up and discussion on the collapse of health services in the state and issues such as bureaucrats' dictating the proceedings of the House and incompetence of the government in enacting laws were also taken up for discussion. It is true that many other issues would have been taken up, but it was not possible as the BJD disrupted the proceedings of the House for three days in the eight-day session.

You are talking of the Mahanadi river dispute. However, the chief minister in the Assembly maintained that all of you were shedding crocodile tears on the issue and have no concern for the Mahanadi at all...

I have said in the Assembly that chief minister Naveen Patnaik was suffering from jaundice. To hide his failures, he is blaming others. If anybody is shedding crocodile tears in the House, it's none other than the chief minister himself. In 2001, when he was part of the NDA that was in power at the Centre, why could he not prevent further construction of barrages and damage in Chhattisgarh, particularly when a BJD MP, Arjun Sethi, was the Union minister of water resources? Why did he not explain to the House his grand failure to fulfil the promises he had made earlier? In 2001, he had boldly said he would not allow the Chhattisgarh government to proceed with the construction of barrages and dams without his consent? Why could not he fulfil his promises? What was he doing? Now it is for the people of Odisha to judge whether it is Naveen Patnaik or someone else that is shedding crocodile tears!

The chief minister has questioned the all-party meet convened by you and said it was not at all an all-party meet...

I take pity on the chief minister for his ignorance. The presence of a party president is not always necessary in our party meetings. All parties except the BJD and Samajwadi Party were present at the meeting.

Your Pradesh Congress Committee president had said he did not endorse the all-party meeting...

He has not said that he does not endorse the meeting. The all-party meeting was convened and held with the consent of the Congress high command.

The Assembly debated the Mahanadi issue at length. Why did it fail to adopt a unanimous resolution condemning the unilateral action of Chhattisgarh on the river?

Mahanadi is the lifeline of Odisha. If the Mahanadi goes dry, Odisha will suffer. There cannot be two opinions about it. But what had the chief minister said in 2010 and then in March 2016? Why he made a statement that Odisha was not going to suffer even if barrages and dams were constructed by the Chhattisgarh government? Why did he say that during the non-monsoon months the inflow of water to Hirakud increased by 24 per cent? Does it not show that he is hand-in-glove with the Chhattisgarh government and the industrial houses for whom the barrages had been constructed? We demanded a resolution. Even some ruling party members have indicated that unanimous resolution would be passed. But the chief minister said it was not necessary. He was confident that he would alone protect the interests of Odisha. I wish him success. But I know that he can't. He is not even clear how he plans to protect the interests of the state.

You have announced in the Assembly that you and the other Congress MLAs will meet the President. Why are not you including other Congress members in your delegation?

We have decided only the Congress legislative party members will meet the President and submit a memorandum and seek his intervention in solving the Mahanadi issue.

But it sends a wrong message and also indicates that all is not well in the Congress party...

Why do you think everybody has to go? I think those who think on those lines have a hidden agenda and are try to discover smoke without fire. Do they want to say wherever a Congress delegation goes, all MLAs must be a part of it? So, when the Speaker calls an all-party meet and the president of the BJD - who is the chief minister - does not attend, will you infer that there is a vertical crack in the BJD? Do you find all the 117 BJD MLAs visiting any place on their organisational issues? Why should you judge on this line?

You are going to meet the President on this issue. The all-party meet convened by you had adopted a memorandum and the Congress party also submitted a memorandum on this issue. Which memorandum will you submit to the President?

The contents of the memorandums submitted by the all-party meet to the governor and the Congress are not different at all. Our memorandum will not be different. The common intention is simple... that Odisha's interests are not jeopardised at any cost.

Left parties had attended the meeting convened by you, but later they turned up to meet the chief minister on the same issue...

The Left parties have given their views and they have been included in the memorandum submitted to the governor. Their leaders have duly signed it. Their views and ours are not different.

You are going to New Delhi to meet the President. Will you also be meeting your central leaders and take up the issue with them?

If the high command is available, we'll meet. Leave it to us.

There is a public perception that you will take up organisational matters with the high command during the visit...

I never discuss party matters with the media.

Besides the Mahanadi issue, the BJD has also targeted you saying that the Congress had let down the state by according national status to the Polavaram project...

I am really sorry that the media does not convey the truth to the people. The first question is whether Odisha is going to suffer. The UPA government had granted conditional permission when Jairam Ramesh was the Union minister of forests. The condition was that not a single inch of Odisha and Chhattisgarh land should be submerged and not a tribal be displaced. Let Naveen babu read the letter addressed to him by Ramesh. I read out the letter in the Assembly yesterday. The letter further says that directly or indirectly or remotely, the tribals of Odisha and Chhattisgarh should not be adversely affected by the project. If somebody does not understand the letter, God help them. Why did the BJD behave in a cowardly manner in the House on the Polavaram issue? On September 28, two of the ministers said that the government would bring a motion the next day and that the Polavaram issue would be discussed. Why did they run away? When they realised that their political gimmick would be exposed, the chief minister chickens out.