“The financial translation of this disruption is staggering: an estimated ₹204 crore of taxpayers’ money was wasted. Yet, the MPs responsible for this dysfunction continue to draw full salaries, allowances, and perks without consequence. This is nothing short of a betrayal of the people.
Parliament is meant to be the crucible of democracy, where divergent views clash, consensus is built, and decisions that affect 1.4 billion citizens are made. Debate, dissent, and sharp questioning are not only legitimate but essential. But what unfolded during the session was not robust democratic exchange—it was orchestrated chaos.”
The recently concluded monsoon session of Parliament has once again highlighted the yawning gap between what citizens expect from their elected representatives and what they actually deliver.
Out of the 120 hours allocated for serious legislative business and debate, the Lok Sabha functioned for only 37 hours. That is just 31 per cent of the time.
The Rajya Sabha fared only slightly better at 41 hours, or 38 per cent. Together, the two Houses wasted more than 150 hours—time that should have been spent discussing bills, scrutinising government decisions, and addressing pressing national concerns.
The financial translation of this disruption is staggering: an estimated ₹204 crore of taxpayers’ money was wasted. Yet, the MPs responsible for this dysfunction continue to draw full salaries, allowances, and perks without consequence. This is nothing short of a betrayal of the people.
Parliament is meant to be the crucible of democracy, where divergent views clash, consensus is built, and decisions that affect 1.4 billion citizens are made. Debate, dissent, and sharp questioning are not only legitimate but essential. But what unfolded during the session was not robust democratic exchange—it was orchestrated chaos.
Shouting matches, placard displays, and deliberate disruptions swallowed up valuable hours. What citizens saw was not lawmakers engaged in fierce but constructive debate, but politicians turning Parliament into a theatre of protest. Both the government and opposition are guilty. The ruling benches accuse the opposition of staging deliberate blockades; the opposition claims the government stonewalls every attempt at accountability. The outcome is the same: the public loses, while the MPs walk away unscathed.
The oft-repeated defence that disruptions are part of democratic functioning is deeply dishonest. Disruption, when used sparingly, may draw attention to urgent concerns. But when it becomes the norm rather than the exception, it ceases to be a tool of democracy and instead becomes an instrument of democratic decay. A system in which weeks of scheduled debate are reduced to hours of slogans is not a functioning legislature; it is a mockery of the very idea of parliamentary democracy.
Citizens are left with no choice but to ask: why should we pay our MPs in full when they refuse to work in full?
In every other profession, “no work, no pay” is a simple and accepted principle. An employee who fails to perform duties cannot expect a paycheck at the end of the month. Why then should Members of Parliament be exempt from this standard? If 70 per cent of the scheduled time is wasted, then 70 per cent of MPs’ salaries for that session should be deducted. The equation is both fair and necessary. Lawmakers cannot pocket taxpayer money while simultaneously wasting taxpayer time. By linking pay directly to productivity, we can create incentives for MPs to prioritise debate over disruption.
The government and the presiding officers of both Houses must take the lead in reforming rules to enforce accountability. At present, MPs who indulge in disruption face little more than mild admonishments or, at worst, suspension for a day or two. These measures have lost their sting. What is required is a system of enforceable financial consequences. Salaries and allowances must be tied to the actual hours of functioning. Persistent disruptors must face cumulative deductions and eventual suspension. Transparency is equally crucial. The productivity of each session should be published daily in a format that every citizen can easily understand: hours lost, questions asked, bills debated, and names of members responsible for obstruction. Let voters see clearly how their representatives are performing.
It is important to emphasise that demanding accountability is not an attack on dissent. Healthy democracy requires strong opposition and uncomfortable questions. But there is a difference between questioning and preventing questions, between opposing and obstructing. Citizens have the right to hear their representatives argue passionately on issues that affect their daily lives—rising prices, unemployment, education, healthcare, and national security. What they do not deserve is the sight of MPs shouting each other down while nothing is achieved.
The monsoon session stands as another reminder that conscience appeals alone are insufficient. Our lawmakers have shown time and again that they will not police themselves. It is now up to the system—and ultimately the people—to enforce discipline. Linking salaries to productivity is the first step toward restoring dignity to Parliament. The people of India deserve a legislature that works as hard as they do. Until then, the message must be clear: no work, no pay.
