Let’s look at the numbers first, then at the irony. As many as 128 of the 543 members in Lok Sabha, according to National Social Watch, have declared themselves to be industrialists, businesspersons, traders or builders. That is close to 25 percent of the total number. Given 315 members of the House are crorepatis, chances are there would be many more in the above categories. Seven out of the 10 richest parliamentarians are associated with industries, either directly or indirectly.
Now the irony. They represent sections of the business class which take the brunt of the economic policy missteps or blunders of the government. If the decisions of the latter are stalling investment, killing growth and leading to the flight of capital, they should be the one’s to raise the red flag and offer valid counter arguments. It is because if the economy falters, they stand to lose a lot, if not as a class, then as individual businesspersons. Curiously, well maybe not so curiously, they are most visible when scams involving allocation of public resources come to light.
The composition of Lok Sabha, and the state assemblies too, since the 1990s—the years the economy opened up—is marked by a steady rise in the pro-capitalist bias. The number of the rich members has been on the upswing in both the Houses – at present close to ten percent of members of Rajya Sabha are crorepatis. The 315 we mentioned earlier could be an underestimation. It is based on wealth disclosed in their submission to the Election Commission. If we consider the undisclosed assets of others, the number of crorepatis could be more than 400.
In fact, senior parliamentarians have been raising concern over the changing character of the representative House and calling the trend a distortion of democracy. They have been arguing that the space for the common man is shrinking in the polity and with this kind of representatives the voice of the downtrodden would get progressively muffled. Some others have been raising the issue of conflict of interest. The representatives from the business classes, they maintain, would be too busy promoting their own interest and this would work to the detriment of the common man.
It is now getting clearer that this bunch of parliamentarians does not have a definite economic view and if it has, it is not prepared to fight for it. As the 2G spectrum allocation scam, the coal allocation scandal and all other big ticket scandals during the UPA 2 suggest, some of them have been busy promoting their own selfish agendas through crony capitalism and clever manipulation of the corrupt system. Their status as parliamentarians has made it easier for them to gain access to all the levers of power. Those who are not into corruption are too indifferent.
What is evident in the whole debate over the Food Security Bill and its passage in Lok Sabha is the absence of strong opposition from within political parties, particularly from people who have reason to oppose such moves. This has been the case with all other faulty moves on the economy front. We see more resentment from members of this class outside Parliament—in the media in particular—but hardly any where it matters, in the party forums. This is ironical considering these are the people who fund political parties and this should have a larger say in critical policy matters.
So what’s wrong? Lots, in fact. It is obvious that so many of our MPs are not doing what they should be doing: presenting a solid counterview and reasoned argument that would impress the top leadership of parties. It is possible they are absent during discussions. If they come together cutting across party lines—they have no ideological dis-similarities—they would certainly be a force to reckon with. But before they do that they need to think beyond maximising their self-interest.
