Avarice of our MPs

How far do our Members of Parliament deserve hefty hikes in salary, allowances and perquisites? Although we elect them, do we have any benchmarks to evaluate their collective and individual performance?

Last week we were treated to details of heavily subsidised food and beverages they are served in Railways–run cafeteria in Parliament Complex. This is understandable since not all lawmakers are well-off and, in any case, are away from their homes. But their seeking salary hike and awarding it to themselves raises issues of principle and procedures and of frequency and the extent of this collective self-indulgence with public money.

Parliament’s Joint Committee (comprising members of both Houses) on Salaries and Allowances has sought doubling of the Rs 50,000 salary, hike in pension for ex-MPs from Rs 20,000 to Rs 35,000 and doubling of Rs 2,000 daily allowance. All parties in parliament want raise. The odd-one-out, CPI (M), partially looks after its nominees.

Among many other perks, they want facilities for “companions” in place of “spouses,” as many MPs are single. They want to travel Executive Class by air, first class train travel for ‘companions’ and more. The MPs had given themselves huge hikes just three years ago, and acrimony, like it has happened each time they have done, is still fresh. Should they be seeking the raise so soon?

There are norms involved. They want their perks on par with the Union Government Secretary and salary on par with the Cabinet Secretary, since MP is above him/her in terms of protocol. But these are jobs given to qualified people who pass tough examinations. Truth be told, being elected to Parliament requires no academic or professional qualification. Officials reach those positions after 36 years’ work.

Elected representatives are not regular employees of government or parliament anywhere in the world. Seeking comparison with bureaucracy is born out of jealousy. Pray, why are peoples’ representatives shy to travel ‘cattle class’ when Pappu Yadavs creates ruckus while travelling. Other passengers who pay their hard-earned money resent them. Some MPs are accompanied by persons other than ‘spouses’ and ‘companions’, while some sub-let government accommodation. Lawmakers don’t always follow law.

Let there be higher pension for ex-MPs as they have family responsibilities. MPs do need better stationary for parliamentary work – provided laptops are returned when they retire. A hundred ex-MPs continue to stay in government a year after they lost the polls or retired. Government’s acceding to the Committee’s recommendations —which seems inevitable – will be playing to the “parliamentary gallery,” when it has pleaded lack of funds to fulfil one-rank-one-pension to military retirees and other, more deserving, demands.

The hike should be connected to two norms: the nation’s gross national income and more particularly, to MPs’ presence and performance in the House. Parliament, after a relatively better 2014-15 record, is back to its old disruptive ways. Those who disrupt should be denied daily allowance. There is no reason why legislature should stay above norms when the Executive follows them and those governing judicial appointments are under review.

By Mahendra Ved