Member of Parliament Local Area Development

Member of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme is given created in 1993 by prime minster of India, P.V.Narashimha Rao to enable Member of Parliaments to undertake small works of capital nature in their constituencies requested by the local residents. Currently under this scheme each M.P is allotted 2 crores for development activities. M.P can also recommends projects up to Rs.10 Lakhs. The funds under MPLADS may be used for creation of durable assets which shall always be available for public use at large. The ownership of such assets created with MPLADS funds would vest in the Government. M.P identifies the works need to be done and gives administrative sanction. One the approval is given the minstery release funds directly to the district administration and it’s the responsibility of district machinery to implement the project.  Normally, the advice of the MP should prevail unless it is for technical reasons such as land selected for work not being suitable for execution.

            By creation of this scheme the role of parliament is raised from the legislative to executive. Era Sezhiyan argues that the scheme is a threat to basic tenants of democracy undermining the role of local governing bodies created under 73^rd and 74^th amendments to the constitution. Often the projects approved under the MPLADS are in the domains whose power is transferred to the local bodies as part of decentralization process. This overlap of powers has lead to undermining of local bodies. PRI also sometimes won’t vouch for their needs and accept M.P’s recommendations due to power relationships.  The M.P had final say on the location of project and type of project. In some cases the M.P’s have also directed district administration to award the contract to certain contractors. The Supreme Court of India by upholding the constitutional validity of the MPLADS progamme has created legitimacy for M.P’s to undermine the local bodies. There are other allegations on the progamme that the scheme gives the sitting MP under the scheme gets an opportunity to create patronage at the expense of the public exchequer. The funds give political and electoral advantage to the sitting MP. The opposition candidates get no such facility. Often there is a tussle between the bureaucrats and M.Ps on the projects referred. Sometimes the M.P might recommend projects that are not feasible both legally and technically and push for it. Implementation of the project can potentially create problems to bureaucrats as they might have to violate the laws.  Some times M.Ps orally communicates the recommendations and refuses to send a formal request. As a result many projects do not take off.

             The programme was started off with good intentions to empower M.P to allocate some resources to address the needs of his constituents. But the programme has undermined the importance of Panchayathi Raj Institutions (PRI). An amendment has to be brought in where M.P recommends the work and PRI institutes prioritize them based on their requirement. By this we can give emphasis on decentralized reforms carried out to ensure participatory democracy. M.Ps might oppose repealing the MPLADS progamme but we can reach to a consensus where we PRI would have say. By involving PRI’s one the lacuna, lack of accountability in the progamme can be addressed. Social audits can ensure better quality and can restrict MP not to misuse the funds. A Part from this the progamme has to be reconciled with the similar programmes of state, i.e the MLA local area development fund to use the funds efficiently. The MPLAD funds can be used as additional resources by the PRIs apart from the revenue they from raise taxes which are always usually insufficient to carry out any substantive development activities. So repealing MPLADS might not make sense but serious reforms has to be brought in to make the scheme more participatory and bring in more transparent and accountability so that misuse of funds can be checked.