The assistance an MP used to get on Bills was laughable: M R Madhavan

M R Madhavan left a finance and investment banking career to set up PRS Legislative Research that looks at governance and the functioning of parliamentary institutions. Currently its president, he tells Anjuli Bhargava where he sees governance heading and what still needs to happen. Excerpts from an interview:

Most people in India today have no faith in the MPs and question their ability to deliver on almost any front in India. But you say your experience has been different. Please elaborate.

There are many misconceptions that our MPs grapple with. Let me explain by going back a bit. Parliament typically deals with a range of subjects from water, to issues relating to minorities, forest and environment to finance. MPs may have some knowledge of some areas and some may even be experts in certain areas but nobody knows about everything. No matter who it is, some assistance is required when Bills are tabled and passed.

Let me cite an instance. Dr Bimal Jalan was a Rajya Sabha MP. Now he is an expert in finance and the economy but would be equally conversant with, say, the economics of water and its scarcity or a topic like forests and environment. What I am trying to say is that many MPs may be very knowledgeable on a particular subject but almost none of them will be the jack-of-all trades. The scope of what Parliament is expected to ponder over and take decisions on is very vast.

Back in 2005, we looked at what assistance a MP in India receives and it was laughable. We have a well-equipped Parliament library that hands the MP the last six months press clippings on any topic he may need to acquaint himself with. Even you will agree that press clippings is not the ideal way to learn more about a subject.

In addition, at the time, any MP got a princely sum of Rs 12,000 a month for his personal staff including a driver, computer literate assistant, et al. This sum has now gone up to Rs 40,000 a month. Now you tell me what quality of assistance you can expect to get in this amount?

Compare the situation with a Senator in the US Congress. They have two levels of support. The US Congressional research service is a body manned by over 700 people and has a budget of over US $ 110 million annually. It provides detailed research on every subject. In addition, each Senator has a budget of US $ 3-4 million to hire personal staff.

In India, often Bills and legislation — even if well intentioned — fail to improve the lives of citizens. It is due to a poorly framed or designed Bill. Look at the Bankruptcy code or the Right to Education bill. These are complex issues that very few will be conversant with.

So in a sense in India, Parliament is designed to fail. No matter which government is in power, it is not in its interest to strengthen Parliament to do what it is supposed to as then the government of the day is held accountable. This partly explains the failure of governance in India.

A second point to note here is that Parliament meets less and less. In the 1950s and 1960s, it was 125-odd days. Now it meets for barely 70 days in a year. Remember back then, it took much longer for the MPs to go to their constituency and come back to Delhi. Now with flights and increased connectivity, it is that much easier. Yet this is the situation.

What progress have you managed to make in the last 15 years or so? Are our MPs better equipped to do their job today?

Our growth has been both vertical and horizontal. In 2011-12, we started dipping our toes and working with state MLAs who argued that the Centre was much better off and the situation in many states was dire. They had virtually no support and even less assistance was available for the state legislatures. Of course, there are 29 states and we are a small organisation. So this will take time but a beginning has been made. If our stated objective is to improve the lives of citizens, we have no option but to work closely with the states as many subjects are either in the State List or Concurrent List.

We also started the Legislative Assistant to Member of Parliament fellowship to help the young with no political background engage better with policy making in the country. It’s important that the youth get involved with decisions that have a direct bearing on their future and understand how policy is made and evolves in the country.

An interesting aside for citizens is that we in 2008/09 also started tracking MPs on whether they were attending Parliament, participating, asking questions and so on. On our site, you can find your own local MP (by entering your area pin-code) and see his contribution and work. This can at a quick glance tell you the serious and hard workers from others. In general, it’s a fallacy to think that MPs are not sincere or interested. In fact, most are. The system we have in place is just not designed to make the government of the day held accountable. There’s very little individual MPs as such can do about that.

But perhaps the most successful initiative has been the Wednesday sessions where we bring in an expert on a subject and invite MPs for a closed-door discussion. We started in 2010 and around 80-100 sessions have been held attended each time by anywhere between 20 to 30 MPs. For instance, for a discussion on the New Education Policy, Dr K Kasturirangan and the entire committee was present and the MPs could question them and clarify issues. Similarly, if it’s a discussion on water, we have had Planning Commission member Mihir Shah brief the MPs, Neelkanth Mishra for state of the economy, a discussion on trade policy may be led by the former Ambassador to that country. We have even had Prof. Abhijit Banerjee in the sessions for one of the MP discussion sessions. In many cases, we find the MPs seek out the expert even after the session and enhance their knowledge further. We end up acting as a bridge and often it helps build a network for the MPs.

In addition to this on Thursdays during Parliament sessions — again a regular feature - we have in house sessions on the upcoming bills. Detailed discussion is held and we have a research paper on the topic. Typically, 15-20 MPs attend this and get themselves acquainted before the discussion in the House on the Bill in question. In Delhi winter, anywhere between 20-30 MPs make the effort to reach these sessions at 9 am! They must be reasonably sincere and well meaning to do it.

If all this is happening, why isn’t it translating into better governance? Why don’t we see concrete results?

There are 700-odd MPs in our pool (80 or so are ministers) in every Parliament year. After each election, we lose a few (those who fail to retain their seat) so it is a bit like a revolving door. In 2009, we had around 200 MPs reaching out to us. Then, we had casualties in the elections and the numbers fell. By 2014, we had 400 plus MPs who were interacting and partaking of our services. Post every election, we lose a few and then the number builds up again. So, it is an ongoing process.

Let me add here that we take no positions or political views on any matter; we simply offer the analysis. If this policy action is chosen, this could be the fall-out and so on. Take for instance the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership. We analyse the implications of India joining an agreement like this but we will not advise on whether it should or not. That’s a decision for the government of the day. We don’t advise or advocate the direction government policy should take. This neutral approach has helped pull in MPs across party lines.

As far as improved governance goes, let’s put it this way. If we did not do this and PRS didn’t exist, governance and the outcomes for citizens may be worse than what you might think it is today. Things are slowly but surely improving.

How much progress have you made with states?

Going forward, we have to see how to improve matters across states. In 2019, we worked with 20 states. We are using three barometers to get into states : Size (larger states get priority as more lives are impacted), our own ability with language and the third is electoral cycle (if the elections are very close, we wait).

Most state Assemblies typically function very little: 25-30 days in a year. Certain states like Kerala, Karnataka and Maharashtra function better and the state Assembly meets for almost 50 days in a year. Most MLAs spend time in their constituency and do political and development work. Legislative work takes a backseat. So we have been able to work in recent times with many states despite our size and limitations.