The Election Commission of India has waded back into the debate over the cost of so-called "freebies" by asking political parties to tell voters what their poll promises cost, how they will be financed and assess their fiscal impact.
The poll watchdog, which has declined to become part of a panel on the issue of freebies, this week proposed to supplement the model code of conduct by asking parties to specify certain parameters about their poll promises:
The parameters are extent and expanse of coverage; quantification of physical coverage; quantification of financial implications of the promises; availability of financial resources; ways and means of raising resources for meeting the additional expenditure to be incurred and the impact of additional resource raising on fiscal sustainability of government.
The poll body has prescribed a form for political parties to populate these details. The form will come prefilled with the latest budgetary numbers from the central or state government. The EC has sought responses from political parties on this proposal by October 19.
EC is only seeking more information
The proposal from the Election Commission only asks for more details from political parties, which are already required to ensure their manifestos reflect the rationale for promises and also broadly indicate the ways and means to meet the financial requirements of such promises.
However, the EC found that most political parties were often late in making the declarations which were “quite routine, ambiguous” and did not include adequate information for voters to exercise an informed choice.
In India, political parties generally release their election manifestos before the announcement of poll dates. However, the EC’s model code of conduct comes into effect after the poll dates have been announced. The poll body is relying on a Supreme Court direction to it for framing guidelines on norms for governing contents of election manifestos.
Also read: SC refers 'freebies' issue to a three-judge bench led by Justice DY Chandrachud
The apex court had said that while the EC doesn’t have authority to regulate any activity that is done before the announcement of the election dates, an exception may be made for the poll manifesto.
To be sure, the SC had also put on record the need for separate legislation in this regard for governing political parties.
The problem of making projections
While political parties making an assessment of what their poll promises cost should be a back-of-the-envelope calculation, such assessments would miss out on the costs that every new scheme or welfare measure imposes on the government machinery.
Additionally, parties are free to declare a particular route of funding a particular poll promise, say additional borrowing for free laptops for students, but what would be the mechanism for holding them to such promises?
Also read: All political parties are in favour of freebies, says SC
Money is fungible and while sources of financing may be attributed to certain areas of spending, large budgets must retain the flexibility to move funds and allocations around.
When the Election Commission in 2013 met political parties on the issue of declaring, several were of the view that it was their “right and duty towards voters” to make such offers and promises in manifestos.
Still, opposition parties often release the so-called budget white papers after they come to power to expose the decaying state of finances. They often even have to renege or are forced to scale down poll promises given fiscal situations.
The question finally is: would political parties be held accountable for their declarations made on the cost of poll promises? What would such a mechanism be? Who would impose it?
Unless there is a more informed public debate on what fiscal accountability should be, the additional disclosures could end up being just that.