Home arrow Archives arrow Political Diary arrow Political Diary-2011 arrow Surrogate MPs Crorepatis Club: CONFLICT OF INTEREST, TOH KYA? by Poonam I Kaushish, 19 Nov, 2011
 
Home
News and Features
INFA Digest
Parliament Spotlight
Dossiers
Publications
Journalism Awards
Archives
RSS
 
 
 
 
 
 
Surrogate MPs Crorepatis Club: CONFLICT OF INTEREST, TOH KYA? by Poonam I Kaushish, 19 Nov, 2011 Print E-mail

Political Diary

New Delhi, 19 November 2011

Surrogate MPs Crorepatis Club

CONFLICT OF INTEREST, TOH KYA?

By Poonam I Kaushish

Till yesterday, it was India’s best known political secret. Today, it is out in the open: Debut of ‘surrogate’ MPs in the Rajya Sabha. Epitomising as never before that politics is all about contaminated smog, toxic waste and sleazy fumes!

Underscored by the eye-popping Register of Interest, made public by a RTI application whereby 92 of Rajya Sabha’s 232 MPs have pecuniary interests including remunerative directorship, regular remunerated activity, shareholding of controlling nature, paid consultancy and professional engagement.

Scandalously, MPs are members of Standing Committees in which they have business interests. Take Maharashtra’s newspaper baron Vijay Darda and Reliance Petroleum’s director YP Trivedi both are part of the Standing Committee on Finance and the Consultative Committee of Commerce and Industry Ministry.

Ditto the cases of Bihar’s pharmaceutical tycoon Mahendra Prasad aka 'King Mahendra', Andhra Pradesh’s tobacco exporter and liquor distributor Sambasiva Rao and industrialist MP Srinivasulu Reddy. Jharkhand’s Essar man Nishikant Dubey and Ahmedabad-based Reliance’s Industries Corporate Affairs Chief Parimal Nathwani. Karnataka’s mining magnate Anil Lad is member of the Standing Committee on Science and Technology, Environment and Forests.

Indeed, the Standing Committees on Finance, Commerce and Industry, Public Accounts Committee and Public Undertakings Committee are highly sought after. Primarily because these committees enable them to work directly with the Minister or Ministry, summon officers generating a lot of clout and being in an advantageous position to influence decisions.

Worse, the trend of surrogate MPs in the Council of States has become more pronounced thanks to the Office of Profit Bill. The Bill bars a MP from occupying any Government positions but does not restrict him from holding a position in a corporate. Plainly there is a need to plug this lacuna and include the private sector as well in the Office of Profit Bill.

Think: A majority of Rajya Sabha MPs state they have no paid work yet 58% are crorepatis worth over Rs1 crore, how? Thirty three MPs have declared shareholding of controlling nature including King of Bad Debts Vijay Mallya Rs 39.45 crores, 28 remunerative directorship of companies, 28 others regular remunerated activity, 7 enjoy paid consultancy and 43 MPs are professionally engaged, senior lawyer Abhishek Singhvi Rs 50 crores!

Big deal, if this smacks of conflict of interest. Pertinently, to put a lid on this in 1999 the Rajya Sabha’s Ethics Committee recommended a Register of Interest but this was enforced only in May 2005.  Under Rule 293 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business Rajya Sabha MPs have to declare their financial and business interest in the Register of Interest, a critical document to ascertain conflict of interest.

According to the rules, MPs are expected to submit their financial interests and professional consultancies within 90 days of taking oath. Additionally, it is mandatory for MPs with interests to declare them before speaking on the floor of the House alas, it has never been followed. 

Importantly, although rules specifically allow this information to be made public, this is the first time. Ethically speaking, an MP who has interests in a particular sector should not ask a question or be part of a discussion, either in the House or Committee, but this too has been trashed in the Parliamentary dustbin.

Unfortunately, the Rajya Sabha is not what it was intended to be. Recall, our Constitution-makers wanted the House to consist of persons of experience and eminence than those in the Lok Sabha. They therefore, opted for three things. One, indirect elections from the State legislatures. Two, minimum age of 30 years as against 25 for the Lok Sabha. Three, President to nominate 12 persons “having special knowledge or practical experience in literatures, science, art and social service.”

The original concept was spelt out by Sir Gopalaswamy Ayangar, the second chamber, he said, was intended to “give an opportunity to seasoned people, who may not be in the thickest of political fray, but who might be willing to participate in the debate with an amount of learning and importance which we do not ordinarily associate with the House of the People”.

What he advocated was implemented by Nehru and Maulana Azad, both in letter and in spirit. Politicians defeated at the polls were firmly kept out and efforts made to bring in “seasoned” persons.

Alas, today, the quality of MPs and complexion of the House has undergone a sea change --- for the worse. Personal loyalty to the leader, monetary considerations and political connections has largely got precedence over competence and experience. Whereby, the House is functioning more as a parallel (and competing) political chamber to the Lok Sabha.

Clearly, it is high time that our Right Honourables realize people placed in positions of judgment or power must take extra steps to insure that their private interests do not compete with their professional duties leading to a conflict of interest. Whereby, a company in which a MP has financial interest benefit financially from his position of power.

Moreover, those with a conflict of interest are expected to rescue themselves from (i.e., abstain from) decisions where such a conflict exists. The imperative for recusal varies depending upon the circumstance and profession, either as common sense ethics, codified ethics, or by statute.

The best way to handle conflicts of interests is to avoid them entirely. For example, an elected MP might sell all corporate stocks that he owns before taking office, and resign from all corporate boards. Or he moves his corporate stocks to a special “blind” trust, which would be authorized to buy and sell without disclosure to him. Since the MP would not know the companies the trust has invested in there would be no temptation to act to his advantage.

Alongside, our netagan need to cry a halt to crony capitalism wherein political cronyism spills over into the business world; self-serving friendships and family ties between businessmen and the Government influence the economy and society to the extent that it corrupts public-serving economic and political ideals.

In fact, when the Standing Committees are constituted, care should be taken to exclude MPs who have a conflict of interest. It is time our MPs set their House in order. They need to heed former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher warning in her autobiography “the Downing Street Years”. Said she: “If individuals behave irresponsibly, it is impossible for them to establish a responsible society. Without a responsible society, there cannot be a responsible State”. 

As Parliament’s winter session begins, the coming months will decide whether the Rajya Sabha will make Indian politics more messy and unworkable! ---- INFA

(Copyright India News & Features Alliance)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                                                                                                             

< Previous   Next >
 
   
     
 
 
  Mambo powered by Best-IT