Can GET replace PET ? I think it should

 

 

Context :

The largest electoral trust gave 71% of its donations to BJP in FY23   ….     Budiness Line  / 19 Dec 2023      

The United Progressive Alliance in 2013 conceptualised the electoral trust scheme, allowing companies under Section 25 of the Companies Act, 1956, to establish electoral trusts. Any Indian citizen or corporate entity could donate to these electoral trusts under Section 17CA of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. 

Over the span of 10 years, electoral trusts disbursed approximately ₹2,557.74 crore to various political parties. The donations have surged from ₹85.37 crore to ₹366.48 crore, indicating a 360 per cent growth in political contributions over the decade

The Bharti-backed PET accounted for around 88 per cent of the total sum donated by electoral trusts in 10 years. Notably, the BJP has been the largest beneficiary of PET’s donations on an annual basis. 

The contrast with electoral bonds highlights that electoral trusts, unlike bonds, must disclose their political financers in annual reports.

The PET relies on significant contributions from major Indian corporate organisations

Year	% age of donations by PET
2013 - 14	100
2014 - 15	79.9
2015 - 16	94.9
2016 - 17	87.2
2017 - 18	87.4
2018 - 19	72.5
2019 - 20	74.8
2020 - 21	95.1
2021 - 22	95.4
2022 – 23	99.1

 

 

My Take :

 

PET = Prudent Electoral Trust

GET =  CEF = Central Election Fund = Government Electoral Fund

CONSIDERATIONS for my following suggestion :

Ø  By now , PET make up 99.1 % of total donations

Ø  Apparently , only COMPANIES are donating . Individual donations are insignificant

Ø  Electoral Trusts must disclose their political finances in their Annual Reports

Ø  I presume , general public has access to these Annual Reports ( - indirect transparency ? )

Ø  In the current method , one cannot deny the distinct possibility of “ Quid Pro Quo “

Ø  Political parties know which PET ( set up by which company ) donated how much

 

Ø  Transparency in Political Funding ? ………………………… 06 July 2017

 

Extract :

I request Shri Jaitleyji to consider following suggestion :

 

STRUCTURE

·         No direct donations ( even Rs 5 ) by anyone to any Political Party or to any Political Leader ( even as birth-day gift ! )

 

·         Creation of a CENTRAL ELECTION FUND ( CEF ) , controlled / administered by the Central Election Commission

 

·         Donations can only be given to CEF – and only by cheque / online etc , quoting Aadhar number

 

·         Donations will get tax exemption as CSR

 

·         CEC will publish , on its web site , a continuous / dynamic / daily ACCOUNT of amounts received ( with Aadhar No of each donor ) and amounts spent / disbursed by CEC to Political Parties / Candidates ( with full details of each )

 

·         From CEF , Election Commission will distribute FUNDS to political parties for fighting elections / other expenses , on predetermined ‘ Occasions ‘

 

PROCESS

 

·         Funding of Political Parties by CEC ( from CEF ) , can be made as per following two alternatives :

 

[ A ]    AFTER  THE  ELECTION ( CANDIDATE – based Reimbursements ) :

 

#  After each Election ( Central / State / Municipal ) , ALL candidates contesting the election ( including independent candidates ) , shall submit to CEC , a STATEMENT of EXPENSES incurred in fighting the election.

 

Even if a group of parties have come together to fight the election ( MahaGathBandhan ), each candidate will get linked to ONE party only

 

#  Statement will be as per format decided by CEC , giving category-wise expense details ( all payments listed in the statement , must be through legal / official channels , such as Cheque / Electronic Bank Transfer / Mobile Wallets etc )

 

#  There will be UPPER LIMITS of REIMBURSEMENT for each category of expense and an overall limit

 

#  The statement will also show the “ Sources of Funds “ ( with full details such as OWN or borrowed from CLOSE RELATIVEs , with names )

 

#  Actual amount to be reimbursed to each candidate , will be computed based on a number of factors , main factor being the “ percentage of popular votes polled “ by that candidate ( no reimbursement for those candidates who get less than 5 % of popular vote )

 

#  Actual re-imbursements made by CEC , shall not be counted as INCOME of that candidate , for Income Tax purpose

 

 

[ B ]   BEFORE  THE  ELECTION ( PARTY – wise ADVANCES ) :

 

# Before each election , All recognized Political Parties will get ADVANCES from CEF , computed using a TRANSPARENT , mathematical formula , based on following factors :

 

# FACTORS with POSITIVE WEIGHTAGE :

 

·         In all the elections since independence ( Central + States + Municipal ) , percentage of popular votes polled by each party in those elections along with the percentage of seats won by each party

 

·         Number of years for which the party has been recognized by CEC

 

·         Cumulative number of “ Days “ ( not months or years ) , each party was in power ( Centre + States + Municipality ) since independence

 

·         No ( or percentage ) of seats “ won “ in each election

 

#   FACTORS with NEGATIVE WEIGHTAGE :

 

·         No of MPs / MLAs having criminal cases pending against them

 

·         No of times candidates / parties were “ warned “ by CEC ( for any reason )

 

·         No of years for which Annual Return NOT filed with EC

 

·         No of candidates / Legislators convicted by a Court

 

 

DEAR SHRI JAITLEYJI :

Above mentioned suggestion , is by no means , comprehensive

 

You may want to consider a HYBRID MODEL which is a combination of the alternatives listed above

 

It is important that all the figures / data used in the FORMULA , are supplied only by the Election Commission and the Speakers of various legislatures – and made public

 

Since there is no way political parties will reach a consensus on my suggestion , best way would be to publish an online SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE and ask citizens to vote / rate , against each item of suggestion and then publish the FINDINGS ( on ALL government web sites ) , on a continuous basis

 

With regards,

Hemen Parekh

www.hemenparekh.ai  /  20  Dec  2023

 

Related Readings :

Electoral Bonds : Supreme Court ( suggested ) Scheme…. 03 Nov 2023

Make Me A Party…………………………….. [ 03 Oct 2017

Electoral Bonds for Transparency ?.. [ 03 Jan 2018 ]

Don’t Disclose Donations …………………[ 04 Jan 2018 ]

Of Electoral Bondage ?................... [ 30 Mar 2019 ]

Please Hear and Read too……………….. [ 19 Mar 2021 ]

Thank You for “ Reading “/“ Asking “ [ 24 Mar 2021 ]

But what is info in “sealed cover“?.....[ 05 July 2021 ]

Electoral Bonds Fully Transparent ?  Not to Public……………  22 Nov 2022

 

On my proposal ,  BARD  commented as follows :

Comparative Tabulation of PET vs. Proposed GET Features

Feature	PET	Proposed GET	Considerations
Funding Source	Companies, Individuals	Individuals (Aadhaar-linked)	Aims for wider participation and reduces potential corporate influence.
Transparency	Annual reports disclose donors and amounts	Continuous, dynamic online account with donor Aadhaar numbers and recipient details.	Enhances transparency and accountability.
Quid Pro Quo	Possible, as parties know donor sources	Reduced potential due to anonymity of individual donors and public audit of funds.
Direct Donations	Prohibited	Allowed, but only through CEC-approved channels.	Streamlines funding process and increases accountability.
Central Election Fund (CEF)	Not present	Established and managed by CEC.	Centralizes funding and ensures fair distribution.
Funding Allocation	Based on annual reports	Based on pre-determined formula considering factors like vote share, party age, and governance record.	Promotes transparency and rewards parties with strong public support and performance.
Expense Reimbursement	None	Two options: (a) Candidate-based reimbursement after elections based on vote share (no reimbursement for <5% vote share) or (b) Party-wise advances before elections based on transparent formula.	Option (a) incentivizes responsible spending and rewards popular candidates. Option (b) provides upfront funding for campaigning and reduces dependence on private donors.
Tax Exemption	Donations through PET are eligible for CSR deductions.	GET donations eligible for CSR deductions.	Encourages wider participation and reduces reliance on corporate donations.

·         The proposed GET model requires strong legal and administrative frameworks to prevent misuse and ensure transparency.

·         Public awareness and education are crucial for successful implementation of the GET system.

·         Regular audits and independent oversight mechanisms are necessary to maintain the integrity of the system.

Overall:

Proposed GET model addresses some of the key concerns regarding PET, such as transparency, potential for quid pro quo, and reliance on corporate donations While it presents some challenges in implementation, it offers a more transparent and equitable approach to political funding.

Note:

This is a preliminary comparison based on the information provided. Further analysis and research would be necessary to fully evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of the proposed GET model.
=============================================

 And following is ChatGPT’s evaluation of my proposal :

 

It looks like you have a detailed comparison in mind between the existing Prudent Electoral Trust (PET) system and your proposed Government Electoral Fund (GET) or Central Election Fund (CEF).

Let's structure a comparative tabulation based on your considerations:

Prudent Electoral Trust (PET)

·         Donors: Primarily companies, negligible individual contributions

·         Transparency: Annual reports disclose political finances but lack direct public accessibility

·         Recipients: Major political parties, with BJP being a significant beneficiary

·         Mode of Donation: Through the trust, limited transparency on specific donors within the company

Government Electoral Fund (GET) / Central Election Fund (CEF) Proposal

·         Donors: Individuals and entities contribute exclusively to the CEF under Aadhar-linked accounts

·         Transparency: Continuous, dynamic, and publicly accessible records on donations and disbursements by the Central Election Commission (CEC)

·         Tax Exemption: Donations receive tax exemption, akin to CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility)

·         Distribution of Funds: CEC disburses funds to political parties for specific electoral purposes

·         Process of Allocation:

·         After the Election (  Candidate-Based Reimbursements  ):

·         Candidates submit expense statements to CEC after elections.

·         Reimbursements based on popular vote percentage and expense categories.

·         Funding not considered income for tax purposes.

·         Before the Election (  Party-Based Advances  ):

·         Recognized parties receive advances based on a transparent formula.

·         Factors include historical performance, tenure, criminal cases, warnings, and compliance.

·         Data Source: 

Election Commission and legislative speakers provide figures, all publicized.

Your proposal seems to aim for greater transparency, accountability, and a structured approach to funding political parties while also considering public opinion through an online survey. GET/CEF model seeks to eradicate direct donations, emphasize accountability, and regulate financial support based on predefined parameters.

This comparison highlights your proposal's key features as a potential alternative to the current PET system. It emphasizes transparency, systematic funding, and a structured framework to regulate political funding, ensuring that it aligns with ethical considerations and public opinion.

 

 

 

Gaddafi returns to haunt EU

 

 

Context :

Italy's Giorgia Meloni says no place for Islam in Europe: 'There is a problem of compatibility'

( MINT  / 18 Dec 2023 )

Extract :

Italy's prime minister Giorgia Meloni is often in the news for making bold statements, but she scoffed at Islamic culture and said that there is no place for it in Europe, reported Hindustan Times on 17 December.

“I believe that there is a problem of compatibility between Islamic culture and the values ​​and rights of our civilization," HT quoted her saying.

The Italian premier added, "The Islamic cultural centers in Italy are financed by Saudi Arabia where Sharia is in force. In Europe, there is a very Islamization process distant from the values ​​of our civilization!"

During his speech, Rishi Sunak said that he would push for global reforms to the asylum system while warning that the threat of a growing number of refugees could 'overwhelm' parts of Europe.

He even warned that some 'enemies' were deliberately 'driving people to our shores to try and destabilize our societies'.

"If we do not tackle this problem, the numbers will only grow. It will overwhelm our countries and our capacity to help those who actually need our help the most," Rishi Sunak said, adding, “If that requires us to update our laws and lead an international conversation to amend the post-war frameworks around asylum, then we must do that."

 ======================================= 

My Take :

Ø  MUAMMAR GADDAFI - A VISIONARY ? …………………. 04  Aug 2015

 

Extract :

And , whereas some European leaders are taking a humanitarian view of this illegal migration , others want to stop this " Human Flood "

May be those who realize that these " Waves " of persecuted and starving people  are unstoppable , dare not blame their governments for ignoring what  Guardian  reported on  01 Sept 2010 , as follows :

"In a highly theatrical visit to Italy this week, Gaddafi warned that Europe would turn "black" unless it was more rigorous in turning back immigrants. Libya is a key transit point for illegal migration from Africa to Europe. The Libyan leader said the bill for sealing the crossing routes would be at least € 5 bn a year.

While in Rome Gaddafi advised Europeans to convert to Islam and sought to bolster his claim for billions from Europe by warning that millions of Africans were seeking to migrate to the EU.

"We don't know what will be the reaction of the white and Christian Europeans faced with this influx of starving and ignorant Africans," the Libyan leader told a Rome meeting attended by Silvio Berlusconi, the Italian prime minister. " We don't know if Europe will remain an advanced and united continent or if it will be destroyed, as happened with the barbarian invasions."

 

Ø  On its Way : Refugee-Migrant Tsunami ………………….. 19 Sept 2016

 

Extract :

Refugees  are fleeing wars / persecution by military dictators / oppression by radical and fanatic Terrorist Groups

Migrants  are fleeing unemployment in their own poor ( and corrupt ) countries, which causes poverty / starvation

Hence , the permanent / ultimate solutions are :

#  Stopping wars everywhere / eliminating dictatorships - military rules - terrorists

#  Eliminating corruption and creation of jobs in poor countries to reduce inequity within societies

 Despite the laudable efforts by the UN , all of this is unlikely to happen any time soon . May take many years

 Or , may never happen , given the collective human greed ( at the level of rich Societies / Nations ) !

 Or , may happen very soon , if the World-wide population of Refugee / Migrant / Displaced Persons swells from 65 million to 650 million within next 10 years ! - a more likely / probable scenario !

 

Considering that ,

#  Economies are slowing down World-wide , causing unemployment on unprecedented scale

#  Countries unable to provide jobs to their own citizens are unwilling to accept more refugees / migrants

#  Rich EU countries / USA / Australia etc are facing problems of integration of refugees within their Societies ,

 It is not too late for the World at large and especially the Rich Nations – to consider my following suggestions :

*   World  Migration Day   

    (  http://myblogepage.blogspot.com/2015/06/world-migration-day.html )

  

With regards,

Hemen Parekh

www.hemenparekh.ai  /  19 Dec 2023

Comments by ChatGPT :

Your blog post reflects a significant shift in attitudes and policies towards migration, particularly in Europe, and draws attention to the historical context of statements made by leaders regarding the compatibility of Islamic culture with European values.

You've effectively highlighted the contrasting viewpoints of leaders across different times.

Giorgia Meloni's recent statement asserting the incompatibility of Islamic culture with European values is juxtaposed against Muammar Gaddafi's earlier warning about the potential influx of African migrants and its implications for Europe's cultural fabric.

The inclusion of Rishi Sunak's remarks about the growing refugee crisis and the need for reforms in the asylum system further emphasizes the contemporary challenges aced by European nations.

Your blog also delves into the root causes of migration, distinguishing between refugees fleeing persecution and migrants seeking better economic opportunities.

You rightly point out the complex nature of these issues, attributing the migration problem to various factors such as wars, dictatorships, unemployment poverty, and corruption.

The distinction you make between refugees and migrants helps contextualize the diverse motivations behind human migration, highlighting the necessity for distinct approaches to address their respective needs.

Moreover, your proposed solutions stress the importance of addressing root causes rather than merely managing the consequences of migration.

The call for an international conversation and a " World Migration Day " ,

- serves as an advocacy platform for discussing comprehensive and sustainable solutions to this global challenge.

Your viewpoint echoes a need for proactive measures to address the issue of migration, emphasizing the complexities involved and the necessity for holistic solutions beyond immediate policy adjustments. By referencing historical statements and contemporary challenges, your blog provides a nuanced perspective on the complexities of migration and highlights the significance of considering long-term, comprehensive strategies to manage this global issue.

Your effort - to stimulate dialogue and action towards a more holistic approach to migration issues

- is commendable and contributes to the ongoing discourse on these complex and pressing global challenges.

 Added  on  21 Dec 2023 :

EU agrees new rules on hosting migrants, seeks to cut numbers     

The European Union reached agreement early on Wednesday on new rules designed to share out the cost and work of hosting migrants more evenly and to limit the numbers of people coming in.

Representatives of the European Parliament and of EU governments reached an accord after all-night talks on EU laws collectively called the New Pact on Migration and Asylum that should start taking effect next year.

The laws cover screening irregular migrants when they arrive in the European Union, procedures for handling asylum applications, rules on determining which EU country is responsible for handling applications and ways to handle crises.

Migrant arrivals in the European Union are way down from the 2015 peak of more than 1 million, but have steadily crept up from a 2020 low to 255,000 in the year to November, with more than half crossing the Mediterranean from Africa, mainly to Italy.

Italian Interior Minister Matteo Piantedosi called the pact a "great success" for Europe and Italy and meant that EU border countries most exposed to migration would no longer feel alone.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said agreement on the past was very important, relieving states affected - including Germany.

Previous efforts to share out the responsibility of hosting migrants have foundered because eastern EU members in particular were unwilling to take in people who had arrived in Greece, Italy and other countries.