From: [email protected]
To:
http://www.ndtv.com/opinion/mps-dont-need-cheap-food-give-it-up-782723?pfrom=home-opinion
Today, we have another opportunity to re-examine our own stance on special
privileges. An excellent example is an incident that happened some years ago.
Former President Dr. Kalam was once frisked by an airline, thereby creating a
major furore. The impressive part of this episode is that the former President
did not even object to being frisked. This says a lot about the person, and my
respect for him only went up higher. And I am sure I can say the same for most
people in this country. Is it possible that shunning VVIP culture in small but
significant ways may be a strong reason for the respect he commands by us
citizens?
Special privileges that have become so ubiquitous range from substantive to the
frivolous. Politicians and bureaucrats do not have to stand in line for
anything, live in heritage buildings, move around in cars with red beacons, and
of recent relevance, enjoy subsidized food in canteens starting from the
Parliament to government offices around the capital.
The issue of food subsidy offered to Members of Parliaments reeks of privilege.
We talk about abolishing subsidies with regard to government policy, except we
completely miss the point when we ignore the food subsidy extended to MPs.
Without discussing the specifics with regard to the cost incurred to offer the
food subsidy, there are certain fundamentals that I feel must be followed with
regard to subsidies in general. They are 1) targeting the poorest of the poor
and 2) to effect minimal leakages and avenues for corruption.
No organization enjoys the absolute trust of its members. No government enjoys
the absolute trust of its citizens. And no elected representative enjoys the
absolute trust of his or her constituents. Indeed they may aspire to achieve
it, but it is a given that such a position is impossible if not untenable.
Keeping this in mind, one finds that the privileged of this country, wittingly
or unwittingly, participate in actions that are detrimental to this effect.
This brings me to what we all know as "VVIP culture". Such a culture has become
pervasive and an inescapable part of an Indian citizen. It has practically
touched everybody in this country. There are some who are more equal than the
others. And they seem to make it very clear to the rest.
In an equivalent of name-dropping, we 'drop' the kind of access one has with
the state. Interestingly, we are also a country wherein we decry and boast the
privilege in equal measure, depending on which side of the fence we are. This
deep-seated, still-fragile post-colonial mindset that 'they' are better than us
and thereby 'deserve' such privileges is an unfortunate scenario after over 60
years of independence.
The feudal relic of special privileges makes a mockery of democracy. Democracy
does not simply mean that citizens provide consent and approval by way of the
ballot every five years, but also means that they have access to the same
individuals they have elected to office. The latter argument is lost on the
elected representatives. Citizens are alienated from their representatives
courtesy privileges that should be done away with. This alienation feeds into a
cycle that is counter-productive, it promotes rent-seeking from the 'winners'
and servile attitudes among the rest.
In recent months, the government campaign to encourage those citizens who can
afford to voluntarily give up subsidized LPG cylinders has been very
successful. If a million Indian citizens can give up subsidized cylinders, then
certainly a few hundred MPs can give up subsidized food. I personally had given
up my gas subsidy some years ago. I also have been advocating the dismantling
of the well-entrenched VVIP culture in India over the years ranging from topics
relating to red light beacons, security frisking and toll exemption on national
highways.
Many have argued that the recipients of the subsidized Parliament canteen
facilities are not only MPs, but also staff working in the Parliament. It is
one thing to stereotype MPs to be privileged, for they already get a lot, but
another thing to take away subsidy from a government employee for another
person's disrepute. Unfortunately, this logic does not stand up to the
fundamental role of a subsidy, besides the failure of categorizing government
employees as the poorest of the poor. Government employees have also been
surrendering their subsidized LPG connections - so the affordability argument
is lost immediately.
However, should there be any measure of apprehension, and a strong case is
present to continue the food subsidy for them, the Direct Benefits Transfer for
LPG (DBTL) would be a suitable mechanism. DBTL is a process whereby the subsidy
is directly affected through cash transfers into bank accounts that virtually
eliminate any scope for leakage or corruption. The same model can be emulated
for the Parliament canteen food subsidy. Like the DBTL programme, the
intended/identified beneficiaries could receive a direct cash transfer as a
perk or subsidy.
The point what I am emphasizing is that such an action recognizes that
subsidies should be reserved only for the poorest of the poor. It makes
available funds to help those who need it the most. This issue has been gaining
traction in both mainstream as well as social media, with many citizens also
expressing similar views. Ending subsidized food in Parliament would mirror the
growing public sentiment. It is time we elected representatives demonstrate
that we too support that ethos.
(Jay Panda is Member of Parliament - Lok Sabha)
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this article are the personal
opinions of the author. The facts and opinions appearing in the article do not
reflect the views of NDTV and NDTV does not assume any responsibility or
liability for the same.
Story First Published: July 18, 2015 13:39 IST
