Annie Zaidi: What has your MP promised?

We curse politicians endlessly for not doing their jobs, and we are right to do so. Nearly everything is affected by their decisions. But as citizens, it isn’t enough to demand accountability. We must know who is accountable rather than spit at the broad face of the ‘system’.

For instance, your MP (member of parliament) is not responsible for water, sanitation or gardens. S/he can spend Rs3.35 crore on your constituency every year. But it is not her/his job to ensure that sewage isn’t leaking into drinking water.

Parliament’s basic job is national policy. This may translate into roads and drains, yes. For instance, new laws can force urban residents to start composting or rainwater harvesting. But to make that happen, MPs have to attend parliament. As our representatives, the least they can do is the actual representing. But are they doing it?

There had been a very promising trend started by a group called MumbaiVotes. Their ‘Promise vs Performance Report’ tracked six MPs from Mumbai between 2009 and 2010 by collecting data from parliament, direct interviews, and compiled media reports.

They told us that Eknath Gaikwad has 99% attendance. Gaikwad and Sanjay Nirupam are classified ‘livewires’ (over 90% attendance); Milind Deora and Sanjay Dina Patil are ‘healthy’ (80-90%); Priya Dutt is a ‘ghost’ (less than 70%). Gurudas Kamat was not included because, as a minister of state, he would be judged by different standards.

They also analyse ‘questions’, which tells us how active MPs are in parliament. Do they bother with research? Are they are trying to expose policy flaws? None of Mumbai’s MPs did well, though Gaikwad asked 426 questions, way above the national average of 135. But it seems like he was focused more on raising questions than on what his queries would achieve.

MPs were also judged by their willingness to sit on parliamentary committees, since this is one way of influencing policy. Here, Nirupam and Gurudas Kamat outstrip the others. On the question of MPLAD (local area development) funds, Rs 20.1 crore was released by the central government. The report card looked bad for everyone, except Nirupam, although Kamat later issued an angry riposte claiming that he had not just spent but overspent his quota. However, Kamat is also one of the MPs who did not respond to the research team’s questionnaire.

Every politician has a personal manifesto, where he promises to do this or that thing for his voters. So all six MPs were sent a questionnaire, demanding a progress report. Kamat, Dutt and Gaikwad did not bother to reply. (You can read details at www.mumbaivotes.com)

Since politicians are notorious for saying one thing before elections and singing a different tune afterwards, researchers dug out MPs’ media statements and did a consistency analysis. Milind Deora emerged champ while both Gaikwad and Kamat had red flags against their names. For me, the analysis was doubly useful because it reveals media biases. MPs too can use it, if they are doing good work which is not being covered by the press.

One of the things the report wants us to do is call or text MPs to let them know that we know what they are up to. Ideally, of course, MPs would not only subject themselves to scrutiny, but would also submit annual report cards to the public. I wish my representatives would. I’ve not seen or heard from them in over ten years!

This sort of report-card is an imperative now, and must include MLAs and corporators. It is always smart to keep an eye on the people you hire. And remember, you did hire them. And you can fire them.

Annie Zaidi writes poetry, stories, essays, scripts (and in a dark, distant past, recipes she never actually tried)