Take a wager: MPs may no longer get to fix their own pay

QUICK PILL

Pay up

• Many MPs want a salary hike, others want to end the perks

• MPs get to decide their own pay; in 2010, they got 5-fold hike

• MPs say the current salary is not enough to meet their expenses

Pay back

• Government now plans an independent body to do the job

• Critics say raise the MPs\' salary, but put an end to all perks

• Compute an MP\'s Cost to Nation and pay him accordingly

Do MPs get a decent wage? It's a question that has occupied the lawmakers for quite sometime now.

Some like the BJP's Adityanath believe the MPs are shortchanged. So, in July this year, a joint parliamentary panel led by him recommended doubling their salary and increasing the pension by 75%.

On the other hand, lawmakers like BJD's Bijayant Panda want to end all subsidies given to the MPs.

Both sides have strong arguments. Those favouring a hike claim the salary isn't enough to cover the cost of travelling to and from parliament, hosting a stream of visitors and running the office. Besides, top bureaucrats earn more though their expenses aren't as high.

The other side argues that since the MPs already get several subsidies and perks - free air and rail travel, accommodation, and practically free power, water and telephone - any further hike in salary or perks can't be justified.

There is another tougher question than whether the MPs merit a pay hike or not, and that is: who takes the call?

So far, the MPs have been appraising themselves. The last time they decided to revise their salary in 2010, they effected a five-fold increase, costing the taxpayer an additional Rs 103 crore annually.

Now, the NDA is mulling an "independent Emoluments Commission" to do the job. It will "put to rest the public outcry and media criticism over MPs themselves deciding their salaries," the government said in a press note on 27 September.

What's the proposal all about?

Brought by Parliamentary Affairs Minister Venkaiah Naidu, the proposal will be discussed at the All India Whips' Conference in Visakhapatnam on September 29.

It suggests that the "salary should not be so low as to deter suitable candidates or so high as to make pay the primary attraction for the job".

Instead, the "salary should reflect the level of responsibility, and those who chose to make parliament a full-time career should be adequately rewarded to reflect their responsibilities".

The government though seems to have already picked a side. The press note claims that Indian lawmakers are one of the lowest-paid in the world.

In July, a panel led by BJP's Adityanath suggested doubling MPs' salary and hiking pension by 75%

"As per a comparative analysis of MPs in 37 developing and developed countries, MPs of only six countries, Tunisia, Venezuela, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Haiti and Panama are drawing salary less than that of Indian MPs," it pointed out, without listing the other 31 countries considered.

The note also cites a survey - whose details have not been publicised - done by the Inter Parliamentary Union of 138 chambers from 104 parliaments. In case of 69 of these chambers, the parliaments determine the salaries of their members.

How do Indian MPs compare with lawmakers elsewhere in terms of pay?

Beginning with a fixed pay of Rs 500 from 1965 to 1982, and nominal raises thereafter, the Indian MPs got the biggest salary bump in 2010 - from Rs 16,000 to Rs 50,000. This is what they earn now except other perks.

In comparison, the monthly pay of lawmakers, adjusted to their Purchasing Power Parity, around the world is: the US, Rs 2 lakh; Canada, Rs 1.50 lakh; Britain, Rs 1.2 lakh; France, Rs 90,000; and Sweden, Rs 90,000.

How does an MP's salary fare against that of other public functionaries?

In monthly wages, several public figures earn more than the MPs. The Sebi chairperson earns Rs 2 lakh, the president gets Rs 1.5 lakh, vice president Rs 1.25 lakh, governors Rs 1.10 lakh, Chief Justice of India Rs 1 lakh, cabinet secretary Rs 90,000, DGPs Rs 70,000.

What much should an MP's salary ideally be? Should it include perks?

Some political observers dispute the very grammar of the question. They argue that since an MP gets many perks other than the salary, we should instead talk about a lawmaker's Cost to Nation - not unlike how salaries are fixed in the private sector.

"To talk about MPs' salaries is misleading. A lot of MPs' remuneration is difficult to account for. And they are in a mood to increase this part of their compensation further," said Jagdeep S Chhokar, founder of the Association of Democratic Reforms.

"A parliamentary committee made some bizarre recommendations earlier this year. Thank god they weren't tabled and accepted. The structure of remuneration for MPs needs to be changed."

Chhokar advocates raising the salary substantially, but on one condition. "We could compute what an MP costs to the nation, and give them, say, a 10% hike, or Rs 5-10 lakh a month. But end the practice of unaccountable perks. The principle is important here, not the amount."

In 2010, MPs gave themselves the biggest salary bump, from Rs 16,000 to Rs 50,000 a month

Others favour an autonomous body to decide the salary. "All public officials should earn a salary that provides them with a reasonably decent and good life. They will inevitably have some perks. But if we are moving towards a corruption-free country, we need to get periodic revisions done," said Prof Gurpreet Mahajan, who teaches political science at Jawaharlal Nehru University.

"But the revisions should be done by autonomous bodies rather than by the MPs themselves."

The MPs, however, don't seem eager to let someone else decide their salary. "I feel the allowance for the MPs should be enhanced. Our main income is taxable and the expenditure has increased in the last five years. It seems odd that parliamentarians should decide their own salaries but that's the norm followed the world over," said Bhatrahari Mahatab of the BJD.

"I am all for having an autonomous body look into the issue, but let them have power to make recommendations."