Hindustan Times
Up for grabs
I am not Mamata Banerjee’s admirer: Never was. I find her noisy and somewhat irritating, raising issues and sometimes backtracking. Her anti Nano agitation was rather misplaced.
She is erratic and in a sense a law unto herself. Those in her Party dread her. If they dare oppose her, she will crack the whip. Defy her and she will show you the door. I remember meeting her many, many years ago as a junior reporter. She had spent more than an hour with me though I do not remember any of the things we discussed. It was partly politics, partly Bengal and partly her views on gender. Now it comes to mind that she said something about women being raped. I don’t remember the context but her views on the subject had surprised me.
It has been long years since I met or even saw Mamata. She must have matured and perhaps mellowed a wee-bit. Though when it comes to Mamata I am not sure how much any of this is possible. Nevertheless, now that she is Union Minister I am likely to meet her either in Parliament or some official function. Maybe, maybe not but I must confess that she is one person I would like to interact with. Despite her shrillness, she intrigues me.
Cut to present. She has been making news: various kinds: of taking over charge of her ministry in Kolkatta instead of Delhi; or of Railway officials flying to Kolkatta to get files signed simply because she is camping in her home state. But she has done one thing, which others need to follow: She has refused to move into a ministerial bungalow. Instead she has opted to stay in her modest flat in New Delhi.
This step by Mamata is indeed exemplary and should be a lesson for those who are either grabbing government bungalows or refusing to move out once they have occupied them. Worse still, they look for conversion from residential to setting up party offices or memorials.
Meira Kumar currently Lok Sabha Speaker, was among those who asked for the Krishna Menon Marg house to be converted to a memorial on the lines of Mrs Indira Gandhi’s Memorial on Safdarjang Road and Akbar Road. Meira Kumar’s father Jagjivan Ram lived in the Krishna Menon House for decades. Later his widow and Meira Kumar lived there with her family. When she lost an election and was served a notice to vacate the house, she resisted and used the memorial route. I do remember that there were problems and the government did not relent. Later I think she managed to get the allotment through.
There is now a picture gallery there and prize property has been blocked to remember the dead. That apart, she also had acres and acres of land allotted for her father’s samadhi on the lines of Rajghat, Vijay Ghat and Shakti Sthal. These came up in the memory of Mahatma Gandhi, Lal Bahadur Shastri and Mrs Indira Gandhi respectively.
I am not singling out Meira Kumar. I am only using her as an example of the trend. There are many like her who have resisted surrendering government accommodation or sought its conversion into a party office or memorial. Irrespective it is prime property being misused or allotted to the dead. Even at the cost of being soft on Mrs Indira Gandhi, I justify her house cum office to be converted into a memorial. To begin with, she was a national leader and a Prime Minister for long years. She ruled the country and the entire nation identified with her: either hated her or loved her. Second she was shot at between the Safdarjang Road and Akbar Road complex and that in itself is reason enough to use the place to reconstruct the tragic event.
The others, Jagjivan Ram, Charan Singh etc did not die in unusual circumstances. Nor can they boast of the kind of following Mrs Indira Gandhi could. So the grounds of converting their house into a memorial or allotting acres of land to build one are very, very flimsy.
That apart, there is always a clamour for government accommodation. As elections end and a government sworn in, the demand for houses increases. There are many takers for prime properties as there are for the “lucky” houses: some where MPs graduated to ministers etc. Lobbying begins and MPs and ministers who have clout manage to bag the best deal (read house).
In this context I remember the first time film stars were elected to Parliament. As first termer MPs they were entitled to stay in small government flats. Film stars being film stars could not bring themselves to accept their larger than life images to fit into cubbyholes. So they made a noise and demanded bungalows on grounds that since they had a fan following they attract larger crowds than “normal” MPs and thus are a fit case of allotment of bungalows. The Government gave in and allotted bungalows to some of them. It is another matter that many of these MPs neither attended Parliament nor stayed in the bungalows leaving them for use—rather misuse—by their personal staff.
My solution to all this is very simple: End this drama and allot houses akin to portfolios rather than persons. For instance the Prime Minister’s House. There is only one and whoever is named PM will move in there. No controversy, no lobbying and no fuss. In office stay there, out of office move out. So also it should be with ALL and I emphasize ALL ministers houses. They should not be person specific but portfolio specific. For instance it should be the Defence Minister, Railway Minister, Home Minister’s residence rather than a house type. Simply put this means earmark houses for particular ministries with no change at all. This would mean that the moment one ceases to be that minister he or she moves out. Inconvenient for that person yes definitely but less complicated for the system. More important it would end the problem of overstaying or seeking conversion on flimsy grounds.
Mamata Banerjee has set an example by refusing to move in to a bungalow. Instead, she has opted to continue in her modest flat allotted to her as an MP. By doing this she has inadvertently put to shame all those not willing to let go government accommodation. I am not suggesting that those who need it should not use it. All that I am saying is that the clamor for freebies from the government including accommodation should now end. Elected representatives should set standards rather than succumb to temptation; they should do what they have been chosen for: real, solid work, irrespective of whether they sleep in a six-bedroom house or a tiny flat. The government in turn should put a system in place whereby wangling ends and bungalows are allocated on basis of portfolios.
(4 votes, average: 5 out of 5)
Loading ...Posted by Kumkum Chadha on Tuesday, June 30, 2009 at 8:25 pm
Filed under India · Tagged alloted houses, houses based on portfolios, Mamta banerjee, nano agitation
I couldn’t agree more.
[Reply]
Do you know the story that was doing the rounds when Amitabh Bhachchan won the election from Allahabad, wanted a BIG bungalow expecting special favor being Rajiv Gandhi’s friend. When he failed to get the house of his choice, he quit Congress (I will not say politics, what with his chamchagiri of Amar Singh etc) and built a bungalow for himself in Gulmohar Park. I am not sure about the authenticity of this story. Was it true? You would perhaps know about it. It is believable if one can judge his personality from his blog…..never forgives anyone…..keeping the spirit of ‘badla’ alive.
[Reply]
saurav Reply:
July 1st, 2009 at 2:14 pm
I agree, Bachchan does come across as a vindictive person sometimes who takes himself a tad too seriously.
[Reply]
kumkum chadha Reply:
July 2nd, 2009 at 2:48 pm
No the story is not correct. Yes eh did want a big bungalow like many others but he did not quit the Congress because of that. He was allotted a nugalow in Moti Lal Nehru Place and his gulmohar park house is ancestral: boguth actually by his father Harivansh Rai Bachchan. About his being vindictive I have no basis to conclude that. I have interacted with him several times and my take is that he si reserved but gracious and courteous. Yes he takes himself and the world around him too seriously.
[Reply]
Umesh Garg Reply:
July 8th, 2009 at 7:17 pm
The Gulmohar Park land was purchased by Dr. Harivansh Rai Bachchan (as part of land allotted to “literature” folks). Amitabh built the bungalow there for his parents and it was named “Sopaan”. [All this from Dr. Bachchan's autibiography, as I recall it.]
Amitabh, when not allotted a big bungalow, is reported to have said that he did not need a government bungalow and will build himself a much bigger and better one, instead.
He resigned as MP when his name came up in the Bofors scandal.
I wish if all could think the way you have suggested. The problem is we are talking of the policy makers and trust me here, they would do anything to have their comforts secured.
Mamta Banerjee may have set an example, but leave the following part, is anyone even going to notice.
I may sound a bit negative in my last few comments but it is not possible for our policy makers to “PRACTICE WHAT THEY PREACH”.
[Reply]
kumkum chadha Reply:
July 2nd, 2009 at 2:50 pm
If politicians want to remain relevant and credible then they should practice more than they preach. In the matter of bungalows it is not so much personal but a matter of policy that the government needs to put in place.
[Reply]
It is shameful on the part of people like Meira Kumar holding august post doing shameful acts like grabbing Govt Bunglow in the name of memorial of her father. The tendency to grab everything under the name of previleges by MPs is really disturbing. After the death of Pramod Mahajan his son Rahul and cronies were found doing all notorious activities in the Govt bunglow allotted to his late father.
The practice of building memorial in prime govt land should be avoided. Also allotment of large stretch of land for ’samadhis’ should never be allowed. Otherwise, everybody will do like Mayawati is erecting her own statues in while she is still alive and kicking.
The suggestion of having separate and exclusive places for Prime Minister’s residence, Defence Ministers etc will have good effect. The expenses on refurbishing them after change of guard will be minimal.
One thing I admired about Mamta is her down to earth approach. She may seem whimsical but has firm views. Her stay in ordinary flat even after being alloted huge bunglow is admirable. The other act of her unusual style is that she doesn’t travel in red becon bearing vehicle and got late on the budget day due to getting trapped in Delhi’s erratic traffic.
[Reply]
rule making is tough n breaking is easy ,rules are made for normal govt servant not for politicians irrespective of their ranking. They can manipulate the rules as per the priority n they get it done righteously.
[Reply]
Nice blog Kumkum.
You are perhaps the best writer amongst all HT bloggers. Your articles are straight forward, honest, seem fairly unbiased, neutral and simple. Makes for refreshing reading. You also seem to avoid being always “politically correct” or expressing views which are “fashionable” on various topics.
[Reply]
Kumkum,
I think, is the best way to deal with this mess. Good way to save immense energy, time and money on to totally irrelevant issue. Look how simple is the solution, but why is not implemented. Is Government so dumb. It because our system is too smart. Why we as country allow our effort and energy to be wasted on such issues even though we have perfect solution. We are “HYPOCRATS”.
Also, I remember of an instance were, the defense minister, Mr Antony choose to stay in his flat, but due to security concerns he was asked to move into his official bungalow. Was that true.
Look at Meira kumar, she is the speaker of lok sabha, are we setting them as an example. With all due respect to her womenhood. But where are professional ethics????
Who are to be blamed? The Governmnet, system… or ourselves!!
[Reply]