Poet and freedom fighter Sarojini Naidu had once famously declared that it costs the Congress a lot to keep Gandhi in poverty. Now that Congress leaders, from party president Sonia Gandhi to humble Ministers, are travelling economy class, we can only wonder whether Sarojini Naidu's comment is relevant all over again.

Many things are hidden from the public eye. If Ms Sonia Gandhi is in an economy class seat, would it be prudent to let another passenger sit by her side? There are two points here. The passenger could be a security risk or finding himself or herself so close to the 'seat' of power, he or she may be tempted to give Ms Gandhi a bit of his or her mind. Perhaps talk with her through the flight and turn her journey into a nightmare.

If it is Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee who is in the economy class, a passenger would be tempted to ply him with many requests, suggestions, etc. You may term such experiences as occupational hazards for politicians in power.

One TV channel reported that the saving in Mr Rahul Gandhi's train trip to Ludhiana was only Rs 455 but that did not take into account the cost of the security personnel who travelled with him and who imposed strict restrictions on other passengers.

If you add all the hidden and not-so-hidden costs, this exercise in austerity is in fact an eye-wash like Mahatma Gandhi's travel by third class compartments of trains. Once in power, Congressmen themselves stepped out of the sacredness of the Mahatma's third class compartment, first by renaming it as second class and then deciding to travel in first and air-conditioned coaches.

Meanwhile, by publicly admonishing his Ministerial colleagues Mr SM Krishna and Mr Shashi Tharoor for their profligacy, Mr Mukherjee has scored a media byte only at the cost of traditional courtesies. The Ministers concerned are feeling let down. He could have sweetened the admonition by privately telling them to quit their five-star accommodation.

In any case, they were paying for the hotel rooms from their personal funds. The list of assets that Mr Tharoor submitted to the returning officer before seeking election from Thiruvananthapuram constituency reveals that he is well off with assets in the region of Rs 22 crore. After all, he has had a distinguished career in the UN.

As a former Deputy Secretary-General of the UN, Mr Tharoor is no stranger to five-star luxury. Similarly, Mr Krishna has had a long stint in Karnataka politics and has served as Chief Minister. In Karnataka, politicians are not exactly poor; most of those who contested the last Assembly election were in the 'crorepati' category.

The austerity theme has been recurring with almost every Government. But as a recent survey showed, most State Governments have only succeeded in increasing their administrative expenditure. As a result, they have little or no funds to spend on welfare measures for which taxes are collected from the people. The situation at the Centre is only slightly better - partly because the Centre more taxes than the States.

Instead of displaying political determination despite its strengthened position in Parliament after this summer's election, the UPA, more so the Congress, seem to be playing to the gallery, making a great show of austerity. Ministers know how to deal with this. If they have to throw parties, they ask public sector units to foot the bill. If the PSUs are afraid of the CAG coming down on them, they ask them to pass on the bill to their regular contractors. Here is one more reason why Ministers are reluctant to promote disinvestment in PSUs attached to their respective Ministry.

Let us, therefore, bring some sanity into the debate over austerity. People occupying positions of authority, including Ministers and legislators, need basic infrastructure for their proper functioning. They have hordes of visitors to handle for which they need adequate staff. Legislators, if they are serious about their work, need assistance to get inputs for their participation in discussions and debates. If they travel by economy class, they will have no peace of mind from countless passengers who would want to bother them.

These are the realities of democracy. You can't wish them off. Instead of projecting that legislators and Ministers live in luxury, it is better the people recognise the parameters within which legislators and Ministers must function; those facilities should be publicly funded. It would be far better if those in authority, including legislators, are held to account for what they have done or failed to do rather than be harassed to live like hermits.

Gandhi, for instance, used to live in a Harijan colony in the early stages of his political career when he was in Delhi. But he realised that this caused inconvenience to the large audience which came to meet him every day. Hence, he had to shift to the sprawling Birla House.

In the wake of the Janata Party's victory in 1977, Sanjiva Reddy, who became the President, declared in his first broadcast that he would like to live in a smaller place rather than the 360-room Rashtrapati Bhavan. A huge amount of money was spent on locating this 'smaller place'. But the officers who had to run the President's secretariat finally found that either the place was not suitable or the cost of renovation was astronomical. Finally Reddy had to concede publicly that his plan to move to a smaller house was not feasible. As President, Mr APJ Abdul Kalam lived in Rashtrapati Bhavan but maintained his frugal lifestyle. But he did not make a fetish of this simplicity.

Are we to believe that the UPA-II has already lost its shine and, therefore, has to resort to gimmicks to gain public attention?

Courtesy: www.dailypioneer.com, September 18, 2009