Money and morals

They take over the streets during elections. They deface walls. Their loudspeakers shatter the quiet of our neighbourhoods. They commandeer,...

They take over the streets during elections. They deface walls. Their loudspeakers shatter the quiet of our neighbourhoods. They commandeer, with suitable inducement, hundreds of persons out of their daily gainful work to cheer their rallies. And now it would seem that they, aspirants to the legislatures, want the taxpayer to fund this excess. The law ministry has finalised a blueprint to initiate funding of elections out of the Central budget. It could appear very timely. In a month when one lot of MPs after another has been caught selling parliamentary privileges, an old excuse is being trotted out again. To understand a legislator8217;s vulnerability to financial temptation to take money for submissions during Question Hour or to solicit kickbacks for MPLADS works, say apologists, understand the economy of electioneering. To clean up politics, they argue, clean up the process of election first. Have the state fund election campaigns, so that early inducement to corruption is rendered unnecessary.

It is not that simple. This recourse to first principles 8212; state funding of elections 8212; is a valuable part of election reform. But it cannot substitute for the mechanisms that must be expeditiously put in place to enforce accountability and transparency in elections. A few points need to be clarified. A key recommendation of state funding is that by having part of the tab picked up, candidates are obligated by the transaction to adhere to certain norms and good practices. The state cannot in a country like India completely subsidise a campaign. Even in the US, funding is only on a matching basis. And since no political party can realistically hope to mop up adequate budgets from membership contributions, there is no getting away from the need to lobby private and corporate contributors.

Far too much hypocrisy has misted the issues involved in campaign funding. It has to be recognised that corporate funding of a party or candidate is not in itself unhealthy 8212; if that contribution is properly audited and disclosed. The cabinet must by all means take up this subject. But it would abdicate its responsibility if it were to simply recommend state funding and leave it there. After all, there is an upper limit to campaign expenditure, isn8217;t there? Has that worked? An important debate has been started. The cabinet 8212; and members of Parliament 8212; must address it in all its dimensions.