Font Size 
New money in politics sparks old debate
Published on Sun, May 11, 2008 at 02:41 in 
Tags: 
MONEY WITHOUT ACCOUNT: Political parties get away without telling who funds them.
Other stories in the section:
J-K will return to normal in 10 days, says NSA
MK Narayanan says Hurriyat leader Sheikh Aziz wasn't killed by police.
It's the law of politics. In office, power brings wealth. Out of office, wealth brings power. Yet political parties will go to any limits to make sure their wealth remains hidden.
And that's why the Information Commission's ruling asking political parties to make sure their Income Tax returns were available for public scrutiny is an important step.
Parties fought this tooth and nail. The BJP called the information confidential and others called it an infringement of privacy. Some even argued that political parties are not public organisations to come under the purview of the Right to Information (RTI).
The bare truth is no one knows how much a political party earns, or what it spends, what part of the money can be traced to any source.
“Once you get into office, doesn’t matter which party it is there are multiple returns—ten times, hundred times,” says Jai Prakash Narayan, president of the Lok Satta Party.
Somashekhara Reddy made his fortune in the mines of Bellary, Karnataka. When the demand for steel shot up in 2003, mine-owners in Bellary struck gold. Little wonder then that the candidates in Bellary this time are all mine barons.
“For taking policy decisions and development, politics is 100 per cent needed. We entered politics for that and to serve people,” says Reddy.
And the ones who are politicians like CK Jaffer Sharief are making sure they have mines to fall back on. It's the coming of age of the new politician: He could be a contractor, a real estate agent or even a mine owner.
The massive amount of money in politics doesn’t shock Yogendra Yadav, professor at the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies. "Lets not be hypocrites and suddenly be shocked after discovering it. We have closed all the avenues or we have not provided for any legitimate avenue for channeling white money into politics. The problem I insist is not that there is too much money in politics. The problem is that there is too less white money in politics,” he says.
Gone are the days when the cadre raised 70 percent of the money and when small contributions created the financial backbone of a party.
So whether it was the Jana Sangh's Nanaji Deshmukh and his friendships with industrialists like Nusli Wadia or the Congress's S K Patil and Atulya Ghosh, men celebrated for their fund-raising skills, collecting money was a tame affair and did not dominate party politics
“Mahatma Gandhi's relationship with Birla is well known. Mahatma Gandhi used to live in Birla house in Delhi but nobody, not even Mahtma's Gandhi's worst enemy, could accuse him of playing to the tunes of Birla. He never submitted to Birla's wishes and Birla also never dominated Gandhi's politics,” says former BJP member Madhu Deolekar.
But then politics ceased to be about Mahatmas long ago. It's about the maha-moneyed; those who can make the coffers jangle with ready cash. There is justification for it. How do sustain the aam political worker? Is the answer to ending political corruption more money? Or is more money in politics the problem itself?
More Headlines from Nation
| Related links: | |
Total Comments: 0
Read Comment | Post Comment
Be the first to comment.