[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

"Theorem" of Corruption




----------------------------------------------------------------------
Postings not related to the writing of the Manifesto or policy chapters
are likely to be summarily rejected. Thanks for your understanding. IPI
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Arvind:

Thanks for the update on MPs. Could you pl. help update the 'proof'
which was circulated a couple of days ago by me, based on this info?

Sanjeev

PS: Prof. Roy had been requested personally by me to comment reg. this
tentative 'proof.' Instead I have received this note from him:

"Your efforts and those of your colleagues appear to be headed to become
on behalf of a legitimate political interest group in India, one to
which I have myself belonged in the past, but one which has little to do
with defining the public interest in India, namely, the interest group
of Non-Resident Indians/Person of Indian Origin, or a subset thereof."

Short reply:

a) There are no "colleagues" on IPI. Each is an individual. In fact, IPI
is owned by 7 Directors of which Prof. Roy is one, and I am not even one
of the 'owners' in any sense of the word. I helped kick-start it. I do
most of the work. But who is the owner of this effort is clear: it is
the people of India who own this debate.

b) I am forced to wonder from where this implication has been drawn. If
EVEN ONE statement on the IPI manifesto can be shown to represent the
'interest group' of NRIs then I may please be shown that. I would
strongly urge Prof. Roy to see the IPI effort for what it IS, i.e., the
effort to bring sanity and sense into Indian policy making, and to NOT
attribute to anyone, least of all to me, any interest other than the
best interests of ALL Indians. That is why this is a policy-by-policy
debate and not a generalized debate or mud-slinging on anyone in
particular.

c) In particular, I would once again request Prof. Roy to furnish his
comments as one of India's major political economists, to the very
tentative Theorem of Corruption and the proof which we are studying. My
regard for his work is enormous. Let us please work together to study
policy clearly and in a focused manner and not get distracted by
perceptions which are not related to the work on IPI.

In particular, I believe in that Theorem lies the very **source** of
corruption in India. If the diagnosis is correct the solution will
follow. Let us diagnose this issue very carefully. I have also
circulated that "Theorem" to some of India's best economists across the
world, merely to ensure that there is no error in the economic
calculation. Please help point out any inaccuracy/ rash judgment.

On Sun, 10 Jan 1999, Arvind Kumar wrote:

> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Postings not related to the writing of the Manifesto or policy chapters
> are likely to be summarily rejected. Thanks for your understanding. IPI
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> An article titled 'A case of custodians looting the coffers'
> by P.L.Prasada Rao appeared on Page 25, The Hindu dated Dec 1 1998.
> 
> Some points made were:
> 
> The monthly salary of an MP has been enhanced to Rs.4000 from
> Rs.1500, his daily allowance (a sitting fee for each day the
> MP attends parliament or any meeting of the house Committee)
> increased to Rs.400 from Rs.200 (on an average there is a
> sitting of either of the Houses or a committee on at least 20
> days in a monthwhich means Rs.8000 a month), office expenses
> (stationery) to Rs.2500 (Rs. 1500), secretarial allowance to
> Rs.6000 (Rs. 4000), constituency allowance to Rs.8000 (Rs. 6000),
> pairs of air tickets to 32 (28), free electricity to 25000 units
> (15000), car allowance to Rs.1 lakh (Rs.50000), monthly pension
> to Rs.2500 (Rs.1400), family pension to Rs.1000 (Rs.500),
> accomodation in a mansion or an apartment with host of other
> privileges. The new pay package to the MPs brought in with
> retrospective effect from April 1, 1998 is estimated to entail
> a recurring expenditure of over Rs. 15.05 crores a year and a
> non-recurring expenditure of Rs. 3.65 crores.
> 
> ... on restoring the "out of turn" allotment of gas connections
> and telephone connections, the author says -
> 
> ...Adding insult to injury, the quota for gas connections was raised
> from 100 to 160 and the phone connections from 25 to 50.
> 
> ... Not the kind to be left behind, the MLAs also have been giving
> themselves hefty hikes in their emoluments. An MLA in Punjab gets the
> highest basic monthly salary of Rs. 7500 followed by Haryana Rs. 7000,
> Karnataka Rs. 6700, UP Rs. 5850, and Assam Rs. 5700 besides a host
> of other allowances. Under the "vehicle loan scheme" all the 87 MLAs
> in Punjab had a Rs.4 crore bonanza of Tata Sumo cars. In AP, the MLAs
> are given a grant of Rs.54,500 and a loan of Rs.17,250 to purchase
> computers.
> 
> The author also suggests that pension be given only to those who
> quit politics for good.
> 
> -Arvind
> 
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This is the National Debate on System Reform.       debate@indiapolicy.org
> Rules, Procedures, Archives:            http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 



--------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the National Debate on System Reform.       debate@indiapolicy.org
Rules, Procedures, Archives:            http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------