Was the Additional District Collector, Mr Sonawane, murdered by the kerosene mafia? In truth, he was killed by our corrupt political system: From the Prime Minister downwards, without exception, all our politicians accept political corruption as inevitable.

Politicians have an excuse: They want to help the poor. The only way they know how to help the poor is by subsidising them. Unfortunately, they do not know how to subsidise the poor without letting their colleagues capture most of that subsidy.

There is a fundamental aspect of poverty which has escaped our leaders: However organised an economy is, the bottom half of the population will always be poorer than the top half; the bottom quarter of the population will ever be poorer than the others. That is, poor people are permanent. Therefore, the best that can be done is to raise the poverty line. For instance, let even the very poor be in a position to afford basic needs like fuel. Even when that is achieved, the bottom half will continue to be poorer than the top half, the bottom quarter poorer than the others. However, the poor will be better off than before. That is the best we can do — gradually raise the living condition of the poor and the very poor, but not anything more.

Let me repeat: The only thing that anyone can do to help the poor is to raise their living conditions; there is no way of eliminating the poor.

PAY POLITICIANS WELL

Sensitive officials tell us how every scheme of charity and subsidy launched by the government is captured by local politicians to make money. Politicians are able to do so because there is no accountability.

For instance, nobody knows what benefit a village gets from the NREGA scheme, the Prime Minister's Sadak Yojana, or even the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan. No doubt, some benefit does accrue to the poor, but it is the middlemen who are enriched most.

Therefore, the problem will not be solved unless there is transparency and accountability. Transparency and accountability can be achieved only when politicians do not need money meant for the poor. That will happen only when they can earn legitimately and enjoy a decent living. That means politicians should be paid well, very well.

It is no accident that Singapore has the highest reputation for corruption-free government; it pays its politicians very well.

However, in a country like India, it is not enough to pay the winner alone; we should pay the losers too. At any rate, at least the top loser, or the minimum number of candidates who together obtained two-thirds of the popular vote, should be paid well. For instance, we may accept Gandhiji's upper limit of Rs 500 and distribute the price of 300 gm of gold every month (currently around Rs 600,000) to eligible Parliamentary candidates.

DEMOCRACY WITHIN PARTIES

Politics is corrupt in India also because almost all parties are family-owned. The family needs money to keep its supporters happy. That money it cannot get by honest means. Hence, the family businesses that manage our politics are the biggest supporters of black money. Because the family is corrupt, it cannot discipline its cadres — after all, it needs the cadres to collect black money.

Therefore, we need a law that compels all political parties to have inner democracy; that is, the law should force each constituency to choose its own representative without reference to the “high command”.

Further, the local representatives should choose their leader rather than the leader deciding who should contest from any constituency. Only such a system will ensure true democracy.

Elections in India are expensive. There is no honest way any candidate — unless he or she is a member of the richest families — can meet the cost. Hence, every politician has an excuse to collect money under the table. On the other hand, if the state (and not the candidate) foots the bill for contesting any election, and does so fully, that excuse will vanish. When the politician is also paid well, people can demand that he or she serve them well and not take money that is their due.

ELECTORAL REFORMS

Obviously, everyone who wants to contest cannot be funded by the state; the state should support only the serious candidates. How do we identify a serious candidate in each and every constituency? I suggest that we ask taxpayers (whose numbers are relatively small) to identify those they consider worthy of support. They may even suggest more than one candidate. Those that get at least, say, 5 per cent of the total votes cast may be supported by the state.

One may ask why only taxpayers should make the initial selection. The short answer is because it is the tax they pay that will fund the selected candidates. It is also true that they are likely to be better informed. In any case, as they are allowed to nominate more than one candidate, there is increased choice. Further, as a mere 5 per cent of the total votes cast is enough for a candidate to be supported by the state, a good candidate should be able to get at least that small percentage of support from taxpayers.

Mr Sonawane would have died in vain if we do not set right our corrupt political system. That requires three reforms: pay politicians so well that they will not grab what is due to the poor; abolish family-owned parties by making them truly democratic, and let the state meet in full all legitimate expenses of all serious candidates fighting for the popular vote.

(The author is a former Director, IIT, Madras. Response to >indiresan@gmail.com and >blfeedback@thehindu.co.in )

Related Topics