By Rishanlang Khongwir
The recent statement by the Voice of the People Party (VPP), expressing concern over the financial conditions of Opposition MLAs in Meghalaya, raises important questions—though not all for the reasons intended. At the heart of their concern is the claim that a monthly salary of Rs 2,02,000 is insufficient to cover the expenses involved in public service, including staff wages, fuel, and office operations.
While the issue of unequal privileges between political appointees and elected representatives deserves attention, framing a salary of Rs 2 lakhs as inadequate warrants deeper reflection, especially when viewed against the economic realities of the average citizen in India today. Across the country, millions of educated youth remain unemployed, and many workers earn less than Rs 500 a day. For families struggling to make ends meet, the notion that Rs 2 lakhs a month is insufficient can appear deeply disconnected from their lived reality. It is essential that elected leaders remain conscious of the socio-economic backdrop they serve within.
Moreover, all the 60 MLAs also receive a sum of 2.5 crore each as MLA development fund which can be used to support developmental work in their constituencies. While there is certainly merit in the VPP’s argument that political appointees enjoy extensive privileges—vehicles, housing, drivers, fuel, and staff—despite lacking an electoral mandate, the response should be a call for greater accountability and transparency across the board, not simply a demand for matching perks. Rather than viewing public service through the lens of what is lacking in personal convenience, there is a greater need for representatives to focus on efficient governance and ethical leadership. Citizens expect their leaders to embody simplicity and responsibility, particularly during times when economic disparity is so stark.
Take, for example, the reference made to VPP MLA Bah Brightstar Marbaniang, who reportedly uses a two-wheeler or a modest vehicle due to the lack of official support. While this is cited as a hardship, many may instead see it as a symbol of honest and relatable leadership—an image that resonates with people far more than one of excess. There is also a wider concern that must be addressed which is how certain public officials accumulate considerable personal wealth despite having modest official salaries. This raises important questions of financial ethics and public trust. If the current system leads to disparities in treatment and questionable enrichment, then reform must begin with transparency and equitable distribution of public resources, rather than with demands for more personal benefits.
At a time when a vast majority of citizens are striving to survive on modest incomes, a monthly salary of Rs 2,02,000 cannot, in good faith, be described as insufficient. In any part of the country—including Meghalaya—this is a significant amount of money, placing an MLA among the top earners in society. It is not just a salary; it is a position of privilege, responsibility, and public trust. Rather than diminishing the value of this remuneration, elected leaders should recognise it for what it is—a generous compensation for public service—and focus their energy on building systems that are fair, transparent, and efficient. Raising the bar of accountability and reducing wastage in governance will benefit both the representatives and the people they serve. Leadership is not measured by the car one drives or the size of the allowance one receives, but by the integrity of one’s actions and the impact made in public life. In a nation where financial hardship is the reality for millions, Rs 2 lakhs a month is not a burden—it’s a privilege that demands humility, not complaint.