"No vote" is a not a solution

Over the last few years, there has been an effort to introduce an option - "None of the Above" in our ballot. The Election Commission of India too has endorsed this option.
But in a representative democracy, the 'No Vote' is not an answer to the problems that plague our democratic system.
Such an option was introduced in Bangladesh, during the recent parliamentary election there in December 2008. I was privileged to have been invited as one of the international election observers during that election. We found that only a fraction of 1% of voters cast their ballot in favour of the "None of the Above".
The reason is not too difficult to fathom. An astonishing 85% of the people had turned out to vote on December 29, 2008. Most of them were poor. And most of them turned out in hope that the election would throw up better leaders, better solutions to the their problems, better opportunities for themselves and their country. Voting "No" would have undermined the democratic process itself.

Barun
------

Following is an editorial in Indian Express (30 Jan 2009), calling for a rethink on the "None of the Above".
Double Negative
Indian Express - Editorial
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/double-negatives/416815/
The question posed in the Supreme Court for the Central Government was straightforward. Does the right to vote, the bench asked the government counsel this week while hearing a petition on the subject, include the right to not vote? The reference was not abstention from voting, but the demand by the petitioner that the election ballot have an option for the voter to register her discontent with the fray by hitting a “none of the above” button. The counsel duly registered the government’s reservations about the reform, and in due course other respondents will make their submissions.

Negative voting is an idea that catches the imagination every few years. But there is ample reason to ask whether it is a proposal that is not only problematic in itself, but also whether it is cited as a solution to a misidentified problem. The case presumably is that by being given an imperfect choice the voter is constrained to cast a positive vote for the best of bad options. The “none of the above” button would put the fray on notice that they are not up to standard. Put simply, the reform would capture the public mood. How can that be wrong?

It can. The point of electoral democracy is to get the best possible outcome for viable governance, that is a government that derives its legitimacy from the expressed will of the people. Certainly norms are necessary for candidature. Of late there has been reform like compulsory declaration of assets and criminal records. There needs to be more — importantly, on intra-party democracy, so that lists of candidates are not the reflection of purely backroom dealings. But even in the best case scenario, human nature being what it is, is there any guarantee that the voter will be satisfied with the fray? And if a substantial chunk of the votes cast are for “none of the above”, then what? Is that an inducement for that mythical perfect candidate to make an appearance? May it not instead deny the winning candidate the legitimacy needed to be an effective legislator? In any case, in a democracy, the people should never be fully satisfied with the legislatures they get. They must always be impatient to get the best out of their elected representatives.

The relationship between markets and democracy

I just had two very distinct experiences in Bangladesh and Malaysia. Both the countries are poised for democratic transitions. Bangladesh had perhaps for the first time in three decades a free and fair election last December that elected 300 new Members of Parliament, after two years of military backed caretaker government. Free and fair election is something that most of us in India take for granted.

In Malaysia, an opposition coalition is beginning to make in roads, and erode the dominance of the ruling coalition that has been in office continuously since Independence from Britain in 1957. It seems a very interesting parallel to our experience in 1977, when the first non-Congress government was elected to power in Delhi, following the general election at the end of the 20 month emergency.

In the last few years, I have been trying to grapple with the relationship between democracy and market. It seems that democracy and markets are two sides of the same coin, both empowers the citizens and consumers, by enhancing their scope of choice in politics and economics. In these turbulent economic times, I think this could be a critical issue to understand.
Another interesting corollary seems to be that historically, property rights had a very significant role in democratisation of societies. Only property owners could be full citizens in ancient Greece.

Democratisation of property ownership played a key role in gradually dissolving the absolute rights of kings, beginning with Magna Carta in UK. Only property owners could vote at the founding of US. In case of India, 60 years of political democracy seems to have started with socialisation of economics and nationalisation of property rights, but now there seems to be a better political recognition of the need to respect for property rights (land rights).

Would like to exchange views with anyone interested...

Barun Mitra

'No Vote' or 'None of the Above'?

Hi, There is not too much of a difference between "No vote" and "None of the above". The former is usually a short form for the latter. The no vote does not mean not going to vote, or boycotting the vote. I am opposed to this idea, unless proven otherwise.

1. This is an elitist idea. People who can't get elected in the democratic way, are seeking a legal response to a political issue.
2. This is also a futile attempt to depoliticise democratic politics and delegitimise political parties. Democracy cannot survive without electoral politics.
3. If we dont like the candidates in our constituency, then we should either put ourselves as candidates, or join a party and persuade the party to put up better candidates, or form a political party and try and persuade the voter by putting up better candidates. Just because we may not be in a positition to undertake any of these options, does not mean the existing democratic process should be scrapped.
4. This is not a practical idea. In the best case situation, if the No Vote, wins, what political alternative will it create, except prolong the political uncertainty. In the worst case, very few voters will exercise this choice.
5. In Bangladesh, in the parliamentary election held on Dec 29, "None of the Above", was an option on each ballot. While the election saw a national turn out of nearly 85%, far less than 1% votes were cast for the "No" option.
6. A vast Majority of people who vote, need an elected representative for various functional reasons, related to their daily struggle for survival. So when poor voters out number the rest, the 'no' option is not a practical option for the voters. This is exactly what happened in Bangladesh, where poor voters chose to ignore the "No vote".
7. All of us would like to contribute to reforming and strengthening our democratic institutions. But for this initiative to have any chance of garnering popular support, a positive and practical alternative needs to be proposed. The "No vote" is an empty and meaningless gesture, and so will not find favour among voters.
8. Democracy is not primarily about majority rule. That would be a snapshot. And a snapshot can easily be discarded, or get faded and forgotten. Democracy is a process which allows every one to renew and remake that picture of their dream. This means, much more than majority rule, democracy is about protecting the minority opinion of today, so that it may have an opportunity to peacefully persuade others and aspire to become the majority view tomorrow.
9. Lastly, the option "none of the above" already exists, since we thankfully haven't made voting compulsory. Those who legitimately choose not to vote, are in effect not voicing support for any of those on the ballot. Having that option on the ballot would not only add nothing to the democratic process, it would also imply that someone else, the political parties or the candidates, need to clean up their act, while we can sit on the sidelines. That would not be a good omen for democracy. Democracy can only thrive when the demos participates actively as citizens. Inner party democracy, financial transparency, etc., will come when we the people not only demand it from others, but participate in the political process, and make these happen.

Barun Mitra

Election Observation in Bangladesh

During the last week of December 2008, Barun Mitra was invited to join an International team of election observers proir to the Bangladesh elections. Below is an article on the same that was published in The Daily Star.

Dec 29 Election Fair, flawless

A 10-member foreign delegation that carried out a short-term observation of the December 29 parliamentary elections in a preliminary statement said it did not find any irregularities that might impact the legitimacy of the process or the results.

The delegation comprised of individuals from government and civil society organisations, from Australia, Canada, India, Indonesia, Japan, Mongolia, the Philippines, and the Republic of Korea, noted that the voting process appeared to be organised and calm, and election officials seemed to be generally familiar with the election laws and procedures, a press release said.

They urged the new government and all political stakeholders to work together to effectively meet the nation's challenges.

Under the auspices of Asia Pacific Democracy Partnership (APDP) and at the invitation of Bangladesh Election Commission (EC), the delegation observed various stages of the voting process at 88 polling centres in all six divisions of the country.

Prior to Election Day, the APDP observers were briefed by representatives of the EC, major political parties and domestic monitoring groups.

Based upon their observations, the observers felt that all stakeholders would work together to bring about the next phase of democratic governance, in which all political parties have constructive roles to play.

The APDP observers, however, recommended better dissemination of information on the electoral process to voters and improvement of the process within the polling centre to reduce the length of queues by adopting a simple and standardised procedure.

The Bangladeshi people have been without an elected government for almost two years and the high voter turnout and enthusiasm of voters is an indication of a great desire by the people to participate in the selection of their representatives to the parliament and the formation of a new government, read the press release.

The observers thanked the EC and all election workers and the staff at the International Republican Institute for facilitating this election observation mission.


(Asia Pacific Democratic Partnership, International Election Observation Mission for the Bangladesh Parliamentary Elections in December 2008.)

Read the original article here http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=70103

Speak now or be quiet forever

Thank you so much for all the positive feedback as well as the criticisms. How else would we better ourselves if people don’t tell us when we falter? We really appreciate it, and hope that you keep visiting the blog and writing in views. We have been busy with launches and attending meetings. And various questions have been asked. Sometimes when you are involved with something, it is good to get a third perspective on things. So, it is with us. Many viewers questioned us on how to take this forward and get as many Indians as possible involved in this initiative. As you might have guessed, we are not looking to stop only with the elections. The citizen’s role doesn’t stop with voting alone. The democracy works successfully only when the people are actively in the running of it. So, speak up and let us know what change you are looking for in your constituency. Write in the complaints – the promised road, the promised neighbourhood park, the lesser power-cuts – all still in the manifesto. Take the power of democracy in your hands and hold your representatives accountable.
Talking over dinner with friends and family is not working. We have seen for the last 50 years. Criticising is done, now is the time to do something. For starters, give a voice to your frustration and dissatisfaction. Who will speak for you if not you, anyway?

Launch of EI in Delhi

Empowering India was unveiled to an audience of about 40 people by Mr TN Chaturvedi, the former governor of Karnataka. It was quite apt that an event focussing on democracy was held while the terrorists struck Mumbai the night before. The programme began by observing a minutes’ silence in solidarity with the victims of terrorism. Ballot, after all, is a more potent weapon than the bullets of terrorists.

Empowering India was born out the desire to better understand the Indian electoral system, and to empower the voters with information to enable them to make more informed choice at the ballot box.

Mr Chaturvedi, a former Comptroller and Auditor General of India, launched the web site. The various features of the website were demonstrated to the audience present. At one level, the web site is seeking to reach out to voters in every constituency with information about their own candidates. At another level, an increasing array of analytical tools is available for more serious students and political analysts. Mr Chaturvedi felt that by making the information widely available, it may be possible to bring about a degree of transparency and accountability.

Mr TS Krishnamurthy, former Chief Election Commissioner of India, was the key note speaker, recounted the need for electoral reforms, and said the next steps should be to disseminate the information widely, and to make the information available in major regional languages. He also called for building an active network of citizens and civil society organisations to help discuss and disseminate the information to citizens at the local level. Dr Ashok Desai, economist and columnist, said that the web site has the potential to emerge as a very significant tool for political awareness. He noted that other indicators, such as developmental profiles of constituencies, could further add value to this initiative.

Around 50 people spread over a dozen locations from Orissa in the East to Rajasthan in the West, have been helping to compile the candidate affidavit information using the online data entry system. The aim is to continuously strive to decentralise data gathering and dissemination efforts and to involve local citizens and to make the site available in one or two regional languages as soon as possible.

Launch of EI in Hyderabad

It was a full house at the launch of the Empowering India website at the conference hall of CESS. Over 100 people participated including about 25 persons from the print and electronic media, students, academics, senior government officials, former civil servants, young persons interested in joining politics, and members of various non-government organizations (NGOs).

Mr Barun Mitra briefly explained why Liberty Institute had launched www.EmpoweringIndia.org and invited Mr. Lyngdoh to formally release the website in Andhra Pradesh. Thereafter, Mr Mitra gave a detailed demonstration of the site and emphasized on its main features namely,

• Comprehensive compilation of candidate and election results information;
• Comparability of information across time;
• Latest features including a set of election analysis tools;
• A powerful new feature called “Build Query” where the user can design a query as per his/her own requirements;
• Future plans of compiling constituency information and performance indicators for MPs and MLAs and expansion of the website to include information from the municipal council and panchayat elections;
• Need for local partnerships to compile and disseminate the information.

Mr. Lyngdoh commented that he was very impressed with the flexibility of website and suggested that over a period of time, we could also compile information about each candidate’s election expenditure coupled with remarks from the Election Commission’s expenditure monitoring teams. Later in the afternoon, Mr. Lyngdoh interacted personally with the audience members and explained the political dynamics involved in the state assembly and national level elections. He also responded to many queries concerning a uniform voter identity card and deletion of obsolete names from voter lists. Mr. Lyngdoh promised to stay in touch after the event was over.

Dr IV Subba Rao, the Chief Electoral Officer for the state of Andhra Pradesh also lauded the initiative and explained some of the features he had recently introduced for voters in Andhra Pradesh. This includes an online facility for verifying whether the individual’s name is on the voter list, easy availability of voter registration forms, and the facility of drop boxes in shopping malls and at petrol filling stations to submit the completed voter identification card application forms. Dr Rao also mentioned that they are working towards making post offices the nodal agencies for voter registration. The need for simplifying voter registration system was underscored by Mr Lyngdoh, who confessed that after his retirement from the post of CEC, it took him over three years to get himself registered as a voter in Andhra Pradesh. With regards to www.EmpoweringIndia.org, Dr Rao said that it is important to make information accessible for the public if true transparency is to be achieved. In this light, www.EmpoweringIndia.org had achieved something remarkable. He promised to cooperate in providing any information that we may need in future.

Dr N Jayprakash Narayan, a former civil servant, and now head of the Loksatta Party spoke subsequently on the issue of analyzing the disclosed information within a larger context instead of sensationalizing the revealed information. He was a key player in the public campaign ten years ago that had led the Election Commission to introduce a system of disclosure of personal information by candidates to political office, which was subsequently endorsed by the Supreme Court. Dr Narayan also called on the people to be more active in bringing that information into the public domain which elected representatives try to conceal.

Dr N Tulasi Reddy, former MP and spokesperson for the Congress Party in Andhra Pradesh, spoke about how the disclosure policies instituted by the Supreme Court of India had in fact made a difference to the quality of the candidates who are now contesting the elections. He noted that the in the past five years, there has been a slight decline in the percentage of legislators with criminal background in Karnataka, for instance. He expressed optimism about the manner in which the Indian democracy has been maturing in recent times. His comments revealed that political parties are aware of and adapting to the new mechanisms which are being introduced to make parties and candidates more transparent and accountable to the public.

Prof CV Raghavulu, former Vice Chancellor of Acharya Nagarjuna University, summarized the main points that were raised by the panelists, and he urged the people to be vigilant and to participate in holding their elected representatives accountable.

Later the group discussed how the participants present would like to be involved with www.EmpoweringIndia.org and to explore the possibilities of disseminating the information uploaded on the site. One of the main suggestions that came up during this session was to host the site in regional languages so that more people could access this information. It was also suggested that some of the audience members could establish personal rapport with the district returning officers in order to obtain affidavit information as soon as it is filed. Some of the audience members also spoke of holding the politicians accountable for the promises they have made. Two-three organizations immediately committed to assisting with information compilation and dissemination. Their commitment implies that we may be able to digitise about half of the 42 parliamentary constituencies in Andhra Pradesh in the coming general elections.

In the last session, Mr C Arjun Rao, a retired civil servant and special Chief Secretary to the government of Andhra Pradesh, spoke about the need to elect good candidates. He impressed on the people to be part of the efforts that www.EmpoweringIndia.org was undertaking, and particularly to disseminate the information on the site to the poorer voters.

Empowering India will plan a follow-up strategy to continue communication with the persons who had attended this launch. We also hope to organize meetings in a few of the districts in Andhra Pradesh in order to involve more people to be part of the information compilation and dissemination during the national and the state assembly elections in 2009.

We were greatly encouraged by the response of the participants and the local media. Reports of the event have been published in a wide range of publications, including national newspapers like The Hindu and the Indian Express, news agency like the Press Trust of India (PTI) and in local Telugu newspapers. The event was also relayed on national and regional television channels.

Launch of EI in Cochin

The Launch of www.empoweringIndia.org in Kerala was organised on 8th November, 2008 at Ashirbhavan, Cochin, in partnership with the Centre for Public Policy Research. It was attended by eminent personalities from different fields like Shri PA Rajan, eminent journalist and political commentator, Dr G Gopakumar, Head of Dept, Political Science, Kerala University, representatives of a number of NGOs from different parts of Kerala, and students from different colleges.

Before the launch of the website, Mr Barun Mitra of Liberty Institute introduced the project to the gathering. He shared with them his experience, his thoughts and what led Liberty Institute to initiate the project called – Empowering India.

EmpoweringIndia.org was formally launched by Dr Sebastian Paul, Member of Parliament. He commended Liberty Institute and Centre for Public Policy Research for this initiative and said that every voter has the right to be able to access as much information about their political representatives and an initiative like this would make the democratic exercise more fruitful. He also thought that such a website would be helpful both for the general public and to the candidates contesting for elections. He added that the website is more relevant in cities like Ernakulam where ordinary people have access to the internet.

Later, Mr Mitra took the audience through the details that are available in the website. He showed how a voter could find out about the various candidates in their own constituencies. The voter could also see the details of the affidavits filed by candidates giving details of his assets, liabilities, educational qualification, and if they face any criminal charge in any court of law. The audience saw with interest the affidavit details of Dr Sebastin Paul filed in 2004.

Prof. KV Thomas, Member of Legislative Assembly, felicitated the gathering and said that in a vibrant democracy people should be aware of the activities of their leaders in the Parliament and state Assembly. He said that this website is a novel attempt in providing easy access to the public to get more information and thereby know their representatives better.

Mr Dhanuraj D, Chairman, CPPR delivered the vote of thanks and shared his experience on working with Liberty Institute. He also mentioned what role CPPR would like to play for the future prospects of the website in the collection and dissemination of the information. He said that CPPR wants to take the information in the website to the masses so that they can make an informed decision regarding their leaders.

The launch was followed by a discussion on the prospects of the websites in the future and how to make the website more effective and efficient in reaching out to the public. Dr Gopakumar moderated the discussion and also shared his experiences being a political scientist and as someone who is well versed with the political conditions in Kerala. Many questions were posed to Mr Mitra on the website, its relevance, scope and usefulness. The key question that cropped up repeatedly was, given that only about 40 million people in have access to internet, how relevant a web based system such as this was in the Indian context.

Prof K C Abraham, (retd.) mentioned that this project would definitely bring about more accountability and transparency. He also said that the amount of money spent by candidates on electioneering should also be kept track of and made known to the public. Various topics were covered in the discussion, including the comparison of American political process to that of India. At the closure, Mr. Mitra called on the participants to join hands to gather and disseminate information among the voters.

Welcome

Hi there,
Please do write your views, suggestions, ideas or anything you want to be included on the site.
Happy blogging...
Team Empoweringindia.org

The easy guide to how much money you spend on Parliament

The nation spends 37,000 Rs every minute for the parliament to function properly. There is an increase of 3400 percentage in the cost per MP in the last twenty years. The members of Parliament even collect allowances when they boycott the Parliament. They are entitled to several other allowances too, writes Barun Mitra in The Indian Express.

At RS 437 crore in 2003-04, it costs the nation Rs 37,000 per minute to keep Parliament functioning.

The 400 hours estimated to have been lost in the last two sessions of Parliament in June, July and August 2004 have meant a financial loss to the exchequer ranging from Rs 88 crore to 207 crore.

The time parliamentarians spend discussing budgetary issues has declined from 23 per cent in 1970s to a mere 10 per cent today. And in 2004, the Finance Bill had to be passed without any debate at all.

The cost per MP (790 MPs, combining both houses) has risen from Rs 1.58 lakh in 1983-94 to 55.34 lakh in 2003-04. An increase of 3,400 per cent!

During the same period, consumer price index increased 500 per cent, and the average emolument for public sector employees increased 900 per cent.

It has been reported in the media, that 400 hours or 24,000 minutes were lost due to disruption of Parliamentary proceedings in the last two sessions spread over June, July and August. For the first time, even the finance bill could not be debated, ‘‘tainted ministers’’, Savarkar and other issues stalled parliament for days.

There has been a worrisome decline in terms of time spent on issues such as the union budget. According to one estimate, between 1952 and 1979, the Parliament devoted on an average 23% of its time on discussing and debating budget related issues. However, between 1980 and 2001 the time devoted to budgetary issues had come down to only 10%. In addition, the number of days when Parliament is in session has been steadily declining from 143 days in 1980 to merely 90 days 2001. This includes all the three basic sessions of Parliament — Budget session, monsoon session and winter session.

At a cost of about Rs. 37,000 per minute or about Rs. 22 lakh an hour or Rs. 1.7 crore per day (assuming that Parliament works for 245 days a year for 8 hours a day), on the basis of annual budgetary allocation for both houses of Parliament in 2003-04 at Rs 437 crore, the total loss in terms of public money comes to about Rs 88 crore or USD 19.5 million, for the 400 hours in the first two sessions of 14th Parliament.

Earlier, when members used to boycott Parliament, they did not collect their daily parliamentary allowances. Today, however, MPs feel free to disrupt the house from within and have no compunction about collecting their allowance for their labour. If members don’t sign their attendance and decline to collect their daily allowance at Rs. 500 days, then the exchequer could at least save Rs 3,95,000 each day for the 790 member. In the past two decades, the budgetary allocation for both houses of Parliament has increased from a mere Rs 12.49 crore in 1983-84, to Rs. 437.15 crore in 2003-04. A whopping 35 fold increase in 20 years!

As a point of comparison, the general consumer price index for industrial workers increased only five fold between 1982 and 2004. Even the per capita emoluments for the much vaunted public sector employees increased from Rs 21,549 in 1983-84 to Rs 1,93,205 in 2001-02, about 9 fold increase.

In contrast, on a per capita basis, the expenditure incurred on each of our 790 Members of Parliament of both houses, in 2003-04 at Rs 437 crore, comes to about Rs 55 lakh per MP. A 3400% increase over two decades. It was a mere Rs 1.58 lakh in 1983-84.

This in a country where the per capita income is estimated at about USD 450/- or Rs 20,250/-, which even in purchasing power parity (PPP US dollar 2500/-) terms would translate in to Rs. 1,12,500/-.

Our MPs cost us about 20 times more than what an average industrial worker earns in a year, and about 40 times the earnings of an ordinary citizen. And all this is after putting in only about 80 parliamentary working days in a year, compared to about 250 days put in by an urban salaried worker.

The annual cost of Rs 300 crore may look to be a small price to pay for maintaining Parliamentary democracy in India. But that is only the minimum direct cost. If one factors in mis-governance, then the total cost of Indian Parliament begins to look very formidable indeed.

Increasingly, legislators officiate as executives. The MPs Local Area Development Fund (MPLAD), which entitles each Member of Parliament to allot Rs 2 crore annually towards development projects facilitates this dilution of legislative functions. 57 years after Independence, India has ranked consistently around the 125th level on most international socio-economic indices, finding its place among the perpetually poor nations of the world.

While the costs are significant, Indian democracy is also extremely competitive. Almost half the sitting members lose their seat at every general election. After all, that is the only way for the voters to hold their elected representatives to account. One can only hope that this will induce the elected representatives to look afresh at the core issue of governance, if only to increase their own prospect of getting re-elected.

Salaries and perks of Members of Parliament.

MPs are paid salaries and allowances along with travel and other privileges so that they may perform their responsibilities as lawmakers without fear or favour. According to an estimate made a few years ago, this is what an MP makes in terms of salaries and allowances:—

1.Constituency allowance: Rs 12,000 per month.

2.Allowance for Attending Parliament: Rs 400 per day.

3.Office allowance: Rs 14,000/- per month.

4.Secretarial allowance: Rs 10,000 per month.

5.Stationery and postage: Rs 3,000/-.

6.Postage and franking: Rs 1,000/- per month.

Perks: (monetised estimates)

1.Each MP is entitled to a free house, transport to Parliament, and subsidised food. The cost maintenance and furnishing of the house is borne by the government as well. This could easily come to about Rs 1,20,000/- annually towards housing.

2.A daily travel allowance of Rs 8 per kilometre, which could translate in to Rs 48,000 for a chauffer driven car during session. In addition, a conservative estimate of rs 24,000 for food. Both these could total about rs 75,000 per year.

3.Each MP get 50,000 units of free electricity every year. At a conservative rate of rs 2.,50 per unit, this will come to Rs 1,25,000/-. In addition, water is provided free.

4.Each MP is entitled to 3 telephones, one in the office, one at home, and one in the constituency, and total free calls could be 1,70,000 free local calls per year. One of these lines can be used for connecting to the Internet. But MPs have to pay for these facilities if they use them beyond the free limit. Unutilised free calls can be transferred to their mobile phones. At a minimum the monetised value of this benefit would be about Rs 2 lakh per anum.

5.An MP can travel 32 times by air (business class) anywhere within India, along with his of her spouse of a companion. He or she can travel another 8 times from the constituency to Delhi to attend Parliament sessions. At an average air fare of Rs 7,000, this could easily come to Rs 5,60,000/- annually.

6.When travelling abroad on an official visit, the MP gets a free business class ticket, along with a daily allowance which depends on the country being visited.

7. Each MP is entitled to unlimited free passes to travel (first class or AC 2-tier) by train any where in the country, along with a companion. The annual rail fare could easily come to about Rs 1,00,000/-.

8. Most medical expenses of an MP are taken care of under the Contributory Health Service Scheme of the Union Government.

9. Each MP is entitled to a pension for life. (This was added by the previous NDA government). The basic pension is Rs 3000 per month, and it increases as per the length of service in Parliament. There are additional travel and medical benefits for former MPs as well.