Yamini Aiyar’s portrayal of “our MPs” (‘Quality at Rs 500 a day?’ IE, September 12) as helpless and hapless creatures responding to “confusing signals” and “perverse incentives” thrust on them by insensitive “voters, political parties and the media” is amusing or exasperating, depending on how one looks at it. Amusing, if one thinks that Aiyar is writing a tongue-in-cheek piece, exasperating if Aiyar would seriously like us to believe that MPs are really dependent on “Rs 500 a day” for what they do or do not do in Parliament. Aiyar seems to convey two messages: (a) PRS Legislative Research, and Democracy Connect are doing outstanding work; and (b) we should sympathise with MPs. The first is fine. It is the second proposition that is confusing.

US Senators and members of the US House of Representatives and the British House of Commons may well be getting significantly larger “staffing allowances” and may well be able to hire 15-18 staffers for “researching legislative and policy issues” and so on, but who has made these decisions? And what do our MPs do, while they could also be making similar decisions? Remember MPLADS and how that money is “used” by most of our MPs — with some honourable exceptions.

And what do our MPs do with whatever meagre staffing allowance they get? Remember flunkies who carry two cell phones and tell people to move because “MP sahib” is coming? If Parliament’s Library and Reference, Research, Documentation and Information Services (LARRDIS) is an “unexploited opportunity” as it “now offers information and reference material to MPs but no serious analysis”, what has prevented MPs from demanding that it provide “serious analysis”? One wonders if Aiyar tried to find out how many of our MPs actually visit the Parliament Library. Does LARRDIS really have to “tie up with organisations like PRS and Democracy Connect”, although there is nothing objectionable in that either, “to offer better support services” to MPs.

Aiyar is right in saying that “some advisory help” can be useful for the MPs but “bridging of the resource gap” can be useful for everyone, and MPs are no exception there. But before offering more resources to them, we need to look carefully at what an MP really costs the nation and how much every hour of Parliament time costs.

The fact is that the Parliament can do whatever it likes and most people will not resent it, provided it is meant for the larger common good. Unfortunately, the experience so far has been the opposite.

There is no doubt that MPs, like everyone else, emerge from society. But since they choose to become “our leaders”, they also become our role models. Consequently, we “the people” expect them to show us the way. Therefore the excuse that society is like this is not available to them to the same extent as it is to us. “They” also need to do something to earn “our” respect.