548 MPs, But No Mayors

This might sound like obvious questions, but:

Why do we elect an MP?

What is an MP supposed to do in New Delhi in the interests of his constituency?

Can the MP build local roads and provide local water supply? Is that his role in the democratic polity?

Or should there be local bodies responsible for such things?

I ask these questions in the context of an interview published in the ToI today, of a Bengali activist-musician who has just been elected to parliament from Jadavpur, a suburb of Calcutta. He says this is the constituency of Buddhudev Bhattacharya himself. And then he delivers a shocker:

Question: As an MP, what is your top priority?

Answer: No development ever took place in my constituency in the last 32 years. There's no water, no roads. Eighty out of 100 patients die on the way to the hospital. Providing water and roads are my priority.

Frankly speaking, this is sheer nonsense. How can an MP provide roads and water? All he has is a seat in the Lok Sabha, from where he can ask questions, and from which he can participate in parliamentary debates and vote in them – according to the directions of his “party whip.” There is no way by which an MP can provide local roads and water supply.

These are under the jurisdiction of institutions of urban local self-government. A Mayor can provide urban roads and water supply; an MP cannot. But in India, mayors do not exist. There are a few, but they are purely ceremonial. The vital role of mayors in liberal democracy has never informed the socialists of New Delhi, obsessed with their centralised The State.

All over the world, even in China, mayors run cities and towns. In India, all talk of “local self-government” revolves around the bogus notion of panchayati raj, or village republicanism. It is this village vision that has destroyed the very idea of urban self-government.

Thus, we are forced to conclude that our socialist democratic The State is designed to fail. It is a totally centralized structure, meant for central economic planning. It is not designed for a free democratic society, where democracy diffuses power rather than concentrating it.

For such a huge country, central government can accomplish very little. Local governments (who possess local knowledge) must be given adequate powers and resources to manage local affairs, especially roads. We will never have urban roads if we all have to depend on the 548 MPs of the Lok Sabha to provide them.

This calls for a government designed on the Principle of Subsidiarity. I have blogged on this principle many times before. This is the governing principle of the EU, whereby the might of Brussels is matched by the independence of all the cities and towns.

Thus, as I stood outside the grand old mayoral building in downtown Frankfurt-am-Main, I was struck by the fact that the building had three flags flying on top. First was the flag of the EU, second was the flag of Germany, and third was the Flag of the City of Frankfurt-am-Main.

Subsidiarity implies that each city flies its own flag and manages its own affairs with its own resources. It does not depend on higher levels of government. It is this principle that we need in India today. Centralized socialism is a disaster.