The parliament these days is witnessing disruptions because of the opposition party’s unhappiness over the split of the CPN UML and the way it could not continue to rule despite its original command of near two third- majority in the elected house. Leaders and MPs of that party are heard blaming Speaker of the House of Representatives and the Election Commission playing an instrumental role in truncating the opposition party. They demand action against them for this. That is why they are determined to disrupt the House proceedings with a show of physical force: shouting down in well and not taking seats properly. Important parliament businesses are affected daily because of this. Finance Minister Janardan Sharma was compelled to present and get approved a revised version of the ordinance budget the other day against the shouting of opposition members of the CPN UML in parliament. Those who believe in parliamentary values and practices do not consider such disruptions democratic. They do not think such mess in the floor of the House adds to the standard of parliamentary politics. The opposition party could have pursued a path of debate to make their statement forcefully and seek explanation from authorities concerned. Rather than creating chaos in the parliament, they could have approached session with forceful argument defending their side. All in parliament should understand that nonparliamentary activities undertaken in the floor will ultimately harm the interest of parliament and the people. They will erode people’s trust in parliament. The parliament, the supreme body of elected representatives, is a place for making bills essential for the country and the people. Not allowing the body to concentrate on this vital agenda is a wrong political strategy. The party concerned should therefore come forward creating an environment for healthy debate, deliberations and arguments for what they protest against or what they intend to propose. That actually is a standard CPN UML-way of doing politics. The others particularly in the ruling bench should openly facilitate such attempt for rendering parliament able to find solutions to problems through political dialogue. The process of debate has power to tackle even knotty political problems and create way forward through a win win negotiation. Why key seasoned leaders pretend to forget this at this moment is something to worry about.