BackUnravelling the relation between wealth, politics
Top leaders have a lot to tell beyond scope and limitations of oath of office and secrecy
PremiumBritish Prime Minister Boris Johnson has expressed his intention to resign. Politicians usually do this when they find that the political ground is slipping under their feet, but Johnson has a different reason. He said that he can’t survive on the salary and allowances he gets as a prime minister. He thinks he can earn much more through his lectures and writing.
Perhaps you know, yet there is no harm in saying it again that as Johnson earns £150,402 as salary and perks from the UK treasury. If calculated in Indian rupees, this is close to ₹1.45 crore. According to Johnson, he is financially strapped since he has six children and, according to the divorce agreement with ex-wife Marina Wheeler, he has to pay a hefty alimony. Right now his salary is not enough even for the education of his children. Before becoming the leader of the Tory party, he used to get £275,000 a year from The Telegraph. Also, if he had given two lectures in a month, he would have earned an additional income of £160,000. Apparently, Johnson ‘misses’ those days and now wants to return to the world of writing and lectures.
His predecessor, Theresa May is probably motivating him in this matter. Theresa earned £1 million by delivering speeches and writing in just one year after resigning. There was a time when politicians used to make solitude their home after taking leave, but the world is changing. People want to know everything. They believe that those who have spent time at the helm of power know the secret of decision-making at the top. Such dignitaries also have a lot to tell beyond the scope and limitations of the constitutional oath of office and secrecy. May is just one example. This has been now a favourite pastime of most former US presidents, the world leader in business and trade. It has been four years since Barack Obama left office, but he is still one of the world’s most expensive orators. According to The Bogotá Post, last year he earned $600,000 for lecturing at ‘Exma’ in Colombia. Even before Obama became president, he used to earn a lot of money as a writer.
Obama has maintained the popularity and elegance for a long time, but Bill Clinton, who retired with some kind of disgrace, made a lot of money from his autobiography My Life. It has sold more than 2.25 million copies and he earned about $20 million from it. He and his wife, Hillary Clinton, had made more than $153 million from 729 ‘paid lectures’ until Hillary’s election as US senator in February 2001. Lectures and books account for about 60% of Clinton’s total earnings.
It is not that the former American presidents have always filled their bag with so much money after leaving the White House. Ronald Reagan, who as a president raised the flag of abject nationalism, was greatly reprimanded in this case. After completing his tenure at the White House, he went to lecture in Japan. He was reportedly paid $2 million for the two 20-minute speeches and some public appearances. Suddenly he became a target of fierce criticism in the media and among the American Intellectuals. As a result, Reagan swore that he would no longer be part of any public lecture.
Now, this trend is also gaining momentum in our country. It is a different matter that we have a shortage of politicians who can give thoughtful lectures. Most do not even need it to earn money. Their income tax returns bear witness that in politics they had entered with the cry of penury and over a small period of time became millionaires. Voters are also their fans only because politics is still considered a means of feudal power and its associated glory. There is no need to go too far, right now the assembly election is being fought in Bihar. The data released by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) claims that about 60% of the candidates from the two main alliances are millionaires. They have assets of ₹1-60 crore. Besides, on the basis of the affidavits filed with in the Election Commission last year, the ADR stated that 439 members of Parliament out of the 539 members in the Lok Sabha are crorepatis.
Let me make one thing clear. There is no harm in the influx of millionaires in Parliament and state legislatures, provided the people of the country are as affluent as they are. However, India ranks 94th in the ‘Global Hunger Index’ of 107 countries and our per capita income is just ₹1.35 lakh annually. More than 250 million people live below the poverty line. It should also be remembered that a person spending ₹32 a day is not considered poor by our government. With this much money, a person can’t fill his stomach twice a day. We can’t even think about spending on education and health. India has been different in this case, where people are poor and their representatives are rich.
Can I plead with such politicians to do some soul searching on the pretext of Boris Johnson?
Shashi Shekhar is editor-in-chief, Hindustan The views expressed are personal
Unlock a world of Benefits! From insightful newsletters to real-time stock tracking, breaking news and a personalized newsfeed – it's all here, just a click away! Login Now!
