1 / 15

Why we need to monitor our Elected Representatives (ER’s)

Why we need to monitor our Elected Representatives (ER’s). Steady decline in the quality of governance in the last three decades. Growing frustration amongst citizens. Elections – the only time when citizens get a ‘real’ say.

gage-foley
Download Presentation

Why we need to monitor our Elected Representatives (ER’s)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Why we need to monitor our Elected Representatives (ER’s) • Steady decline in the quality of governance in the last three decades. • Growing frustration amongst citizens. • Elections – the only time when citizens get a ‘real’ say. • Looking at the growing deficiency in governance and the increasing needs of the citizens. We believe there is a need for a continuous dialogue with the ER’s and have developed a report card on the Performance of the ER’s which can form the basis of such a Dialogue.

  2. The Constitution as a Basis for monitoring of Elected Representatives • ERs derive their powers for functioning through the Constitution • They are mandated to Attend Sessions, Raise people’s Issues, Debate, Participate in Discussions and Pass legislations. • The Constitution defines their powers and rules of functioning, hence only the Constitution can provide the parameters for their monitoring.

  3. Parameters for Rating MLAs RTI Data Source: 1 Vidhan Bhavan and City & Suburban Collector Offices; 2 Election Commission of India’s Website; 3 Mumbai Police.

  4. Reasons for major shifts in ranks from year 2013 to 2014

  5. MLAs with criminal cases before elections and with new cases after elections • 50% MLAs have criminal cases. • 15 MLAs had criminal cases before (2009) elections. • New FIRs/Charge sheets filed against 10 MLAs, 3 of whom had no cases registered against them in their 2009 affidavits.

  6. Number of FIR/Chargesheet as per (2009) affidavit and RTI’s in subsequent years

  7. Movement of Rank & Score (in %) from 2011 to 2014

  8. Observations • Probity: Mangesh Sangle, who got the first rank in the 2011 report card, dropped to 20th in 2013 because of low attendance and a new charge sheet, then recovered to the 6th position due to improved attendance and consistency in his other parameters. • Multiple Parameters: Sardar Tara Singh’s rank has gone down from 3rd in 2011 to 15th in 2012 due to a new charge sheet, then recovered to 10th in 2013 due to increase in overall perception and quality of questions and is now down to 24th due to drop in attendance, questions asked and overall perception. Bala Nandgaonkar who has asked 4933 questions (12% of total) has never been in top three as asking questions is just one aspect of the gradation system but there are many more parameters such as quality of questions, attendance, criminal record, perception, etc. • Consistency: Yogesh Sagar has remained in the top four in all years and Numero Uno for the last three years due to his consistent scores in all parameters. Similarly his party colleague, Prakash Maheta has remained in the bottom five in all the years.

  9. Questions THANK YOU

More Related