Should MPs get a salary hike?

Today, I woke up to read morning newspapers and I found myself in disagreement with host of issues.  Here’s the first one.   The MPs in Indian Parliament are about to get a hike from the current salary of Rs 16,000 to Rs 80,000.   Is that a good thing or bad thing? 

For a very long time, I have strongly believed that one of the best ways to reduce corruption in India is to increase the salaries of government employees.  In many evening and late-night discussions with my fellow Indians, I found myself in opposition to most others who thought that Indian government employees are extremely corrupt and hence they do not deserve any hike; if ever they deserve a punishment, not a reward.

The Editor at Times of India seems to harbor similar opinions like many Indians on this topic. [Emphasis mine]

Our MPs clearly don't deserve a salary hike. Any pay raise must be linked to performance. But the track record of Indian MPs in the recent past has been poor, to say the least.

They have neglected one of their basic duties crafting and debating legislation. The figures for business conducted by Parliament speak for themselves. The number of sittings of the Lok Sabha has come down from a yearly average of 124 in the first decade of 1952-61 to 81 between 1992-2001, a decline of 34 per cent. This has had a direct impact on the number of Bills passed by Parliament. The annual average of the number of Bills passed has come down from 68 in the first decade to 50 between 1992-2001…And even when Bills are passed, they are done without debate since MPs are busy shouting slogans or creating mayhem in the House.

This leads into a discussion I had earlier on this forum.  What is the accountability for elected leaders of India?  Number of bills passed? Number of sittings? Quality of discussion? If so, who will enforce it? Will there be an enforcing body which says, ‘OK, you attended 120 days, you get an A, you attended only 80 days, you get a C’, or will it say, ‘OK, you didn’t shout at all in the last year, you get 100 marks, and you shouted 10 times, you get only 60 marks’.  Neglect of one’s duties, if they are not enforceable, should not be used as an argument against the proposed hike.  We may not be very happy with the performance of our elected leaders, but then what are we going to do about it?

The accountability for an elected leader in a democracy comes from the standards the society imposes onto him by which he takes moral and ethical responsibility for his actions.  If an elected leader refuses to show up at Lok Sabha or refuses to meet any of his constituency people, there is nothing that people can do other than apply pressure through channels like news and media to coerce him into becoming more accountable.  When the electorate gets disappointed with that elected leader, it does not vote that leader back. The only fear he has is that he may not win in the next elections.  Sadly, that’s the only enforceable check people have against their elected leaders.    

That’s why in most mature democracies, the qualities of a leader are thoroughly examined BEFORE elections.  His prior record, his conduct, his performance, etc, are scrutinized in excruciatingly painful detail, sometimes going overboard in that scrutiny, all for the same reason - better check him out before you elect him.  There’s no fun in regretting later.

Most Indians do not understand how their democracy works and come up with ridiculous propositions like recalling a nonperforming candidate.  I find such discussions including the one above in Times of India naïve and downright impractical.   For an elected leader to perform better in a democracy, the expectations of his constituencies have to become better.  Better checks can be made by the media, by creating more awareness, by bringing more transparency, and exposing his dubious standards, his hypocrisies, his inefficiencies, his scams and scandals.  A mature society which takes itself seriously will impose the necessary standards on its leaders.  As long as the elected leader is not doing anything illegal, he cannot be stripped of his power.  The only way he will be coerced into resigning is through moral and ethical compulsions imposed by his peers and his electorate. 

Like man like state, said Plato.  We get leaders that reflect people's cultural and moral ethos. If our elected leaders are not performing, it is our failure that we have not imposed higher standards onto them.  We should start looking for ways on how to improve their performance.   Are there other incentives for them to perform better? Is there a way we can reduce corruption? Is there a better way to increase accountability?

Corruption in India

Most officers and elected leaders are people like you and me.  As young people, they wanted to grow up to become honest and sincere workers and leaders.  Nobody dreams of becoming a corrupt officer.   So, how come we have so many corrupt officer and leaders in this country? 

Amongst many factors, which include our misplaced prioritization of goals, emphasis on worthless values and bad parenting, the most important one is the low barrier to entry for corruption.   It is extremely easy to become corrupt in India; and the societal conditions actually compel one into becoming corrupt.   

An officer starts out thinking he will be an exception, that he will not be corrupt.  But over a period of time, he realizes that it is not easy to survive and make a decent living with such paltry salary if he continues to be a Gandhian.   Especially when everyone around is corrupt, when the society gleefully accepts corrupt officers, he starts out rationalizing why he needs to take that first bribe – just to satisfy basic needs of life, like having good food and clothes, like buying a TV, sending his kids to good school, etc.   Once he crosses that line, there is no turning back.  What started out as a compulsion to make both ends meet turns out to be an exercise of long and continuous rationalization.  Now he wants to buy a house, then a car, then another house, and so on.  There is no difference between a guy who takes 5 lakh bribe to another who takes 500 Crore bribe.  A bribe is a bribe.  Now that you have committed yourself to it, why stop at small number?

If you want to root out corruption, this officer has to be stopped at the first step itself.  He should be incentivized NOT to take that first bribe.  For that, he should be earning  adequate salary to make a decent living.  That’s when the motivation to take bribe is reduced considerably. 

One of the best ways to reduce corruption in Indian government is by giving extremely good salaries to our government employees and elected leaders.  The current salary structure in Indian government does not allow a person to work honestly.  An honest officer loses out continuously and forever in all respects.  Not only does he not provide basic amenities to his children and family, he will be seen suspiciously by his peers and  treated as an outcaste.  To fit in, he has to take bribe.   Over a period of time, the motivation to take bribes far outweighs the incentive to be honest and sincere. 

In India, we call government employees ‘servants’ and I never understood why.  Many people say that taking a government job is a ‘service’, that getting elected as MLA and MP is a ‘service’ and so on.  They think that a 'service' should be paid a token amount of salary.  I think that’s sheer bullshit.  Each of us wants to be rewarded for the work we do.  And if running a country, state or district is my job, I better be paid accordingly.  I would like to describe the job of a MP a 'responsibility' not a 'service', and it is really a big responsibility which deserves a big paycheck.

A company which has a turnover of few tens of crores will pay few 2 to 3 lakhs of rupees for its top management and here we are talking of deciding fates of millions of people, handling budgets in hundreds of crores.  A salary of Rs 16,000 per month sounds ridiculously low, something that we don’t even pay a fresh software engineer.

Right now, the MPs have to depend on perks, allowances, etc, to get most of their work done.  But how can one pay kid’s school fees or buy kid’s toys with such allowances?  Not possible.  An elected leader like every other person has certain minimum expenses that require liquid cash.  And that is definitely far higher than Rs 16,000.  I am quite OK to increase the salaries even further, say, Rs 4,00,000 per month or more if we are going to get few decent and honest elected leaders who do not have to be compelled into taking bribes. 

That would be the first step towards cleansing our government and politicians from corruption.