Rich representatives of a poor electorate

The Supreme Court recently declined to intervene in a PIL filed by the NGO Lok Prahiri, challenging the lifetime pensions and perks given to former MPs and MLAs after retirement. The question of pay and perks attracted greater interest when reports on the disruptions of the recent Budget session pegged the losses at Rs 198 crore of public money. MPs from the BJP surrendered their salaries in a positive step towards an acceptance of the proportionality between the work and commensurate pay and perks for parliamentarians. Besides demands for more accountability, debates have also started on minimising the widening chasm between parliamentarians and the general public. 

Beyond the socio-cultural attributions to this position of power and privilege, we see an economic disparity between MPs, MLAs and the average Indian citizen. Each MP’s pay and perks cost about $2.2 lakh PPP dollars in contrast to India’s per capita GDP which is about $6,570 PPP. This disparity between an Indian citizen’s average income and an MP’s cost to the country is among the highest in the world. 

Politics which was earlier understood as altruistic social work with a single-minded focus to bring in social change has now become a profession to advance self-interest and personal agendas. Moreover, the fact that decisions on salary and perks are made by the MPs and MLAs themselves brings forth a constant prioritization of their own interests over other problems of the public. Recent reports of AAP MLAs pushing for a hike in their salaries due to problems in marrying their children showcase the same mindset. 

According to ADR, the average of assets per Rajya Sabha MP in this term is around Rs 55.62 crore while the average asset of an MP has more than doubled from about Rs 6 crore to Rs 14 crore in the new Lok Sabha. In the 543 member-house, 449 members have assets worth Rs 1 crore or more, with the 16th Lok Sabha being the richest up till now. This brings doubt over the basis for the pay and numerous perks given to them from taxpayers’ pocket.

When notions like the creamy layer are often kept into consideration, why is it that the varying economic conditions of MPs aren’t factored in while pegging their salaries? This is when several MPs like Sachin Tendulkar have given away their salaries and many have actively supported proposals to reduce the salaries of those not needing it. Moreover, when expenditures are incurred on the lifetime pension of ex-MPs, without any significant contribution to the public fora on their part, citing social security or a dignified standard of living, when these remain out of access for the vast majority of our nation, it brings forth a problematic dichotomy.

The writer is a student of Delhi University. Views expressed are personal