How do India's Members of Parliament spend their constituency development funds? Do they spend it at all? Public Affairs Centre (PAC), Bangalore conducted a study on MPLADS to analyse and understand the utilisation pattern among the MPs ( Sabha & Rajya Sabha) in Karnataka. Public Affairs Centre is a non-profit organisation based in Bangalore dedicated to promoting good governance through research, advocacy and action.

1. How do MPs utilise MPLADS in
Karnataka?
K Prabhakar
Patibandla Srikant
A Venugopal Reddy
1

2. Objectives & Methodology
 To evaluate the utilisation of MPLADS funds
in Karnataka; (2004-09 & 2009-11)
 To analyse spending patterns by region,
party and other criteria;
 To rank MPs based on their utilisation of
MPLADS.
 Data-base from MPLADS website
 <http://www.mplads.nic.in/sslapps/mpladsworks/masterrep.ASP>
 Limitations of the Study
 26 MPs (2004-09) – Belgaum & Chikkodi data not available
 22 MPs (2009-11) – 6 constituencies data not available
2

3. MPLADS in India
 Rs. 2 Crore per each MP per year for both Lok
Sabha & Rajya Sabha (now increased to Rs. 5
Crore) for constituency development.
 Nearly Rs. 8000 crores allocated for MPLADS (all
India) for 2004-09.
 Of this, Rs. 5450 crores for LS MPs were allocated
during 2004-09. Karnataka share is 5% (Rs. 280
crores).
 Rs. 2500 crores was allocated for Rajya Sabha MPs
(2004-09). Karnataka share is 4.8% (Rs. 120 crores)
 Total share for Karnataka is Rs. 400 crores.
 How is MPLADS utilised in Karnataka?
3

4. How Lok Sabha MPs performed (Top & Bottom five)?
Amount in Lakhs
Note: Numbers in parenthesis denote ranking on spending and number of works carried out
respectively.
According to CAG report, at the national level minimum utilisation of funds is 37.4%
and maximum 52.4%. Around 50% of funds went unutilised for 2004-09 Lok Sabha. 4

5. Spending against Entitled Amount (2004-09)
S.No. Constituency Name of Member Party % of spending on actual entitled
1 Hassan Devegowda, H.D. JD(S) 100.0
2 Davanagere Siddeshwara, Gowdar Mallikarjunappa BJP 100.0
3 Kolar (SC) Muniyappa, K.H. INC 97.8
4 Bijapur Patil, Basangouda BJP 94.9
5 Shimoga Bangarappa, S. BJP/SP 94.0
6 Tumkur Mallikarjunaiah, S. BJP 92.2
7 Chitradurga Hanumanthappa, N. Y. INC 85.7
8 Bangalore North Sangliana, H.T. BJP 75.4
9 Dharwad South Channappa, Kunnur Manjunath BJP 74.5
10 Udupi Madhwaraj, Manorama BJP 71.6
11 Kanara Hegde, Anant Kumar Dattatreya BJP 63.5
12 Mysore Vijayashankar, C.H. BJP 61.5
13 Bidar (SC) Suryawanshi, Narsing Hulla INC 56.4
14 Koppal Virupakshappa, K. INC 54.9
15 Gulbarga Saradgi, Iqbal Ahmed INC 47.6
16 Chikkballapur Jalappa, R.L. INC 41.2
17 Mangalore Gowda, D.V. Sadananda BJP 40.9
18 Mandya Ambareesh, M.H. INC 37.9
19 Chamrajanagar (SC) Shivanna, M JD(S) 28.8
20 Kanakapura Gowda, Tejasvini INC 26.5
21 Bellary Reddy, Karunakara G. BJP 25.2
22 Bangalore South Ananth Kumar BJP 24.3
23 Raichur (ST) Naik, A. Venkatesh INC 19.3
24 Bagalkot Gaddigoudar, Parvatagouda Chandanagouda BJP 18.7
25 Dharwad North Joshi, Pralhad Venkatesh BJP 18.0
26 Chikmagalur Srikantappa, D.C. BJP 14.1
Total Total state level spending percentage as against entitled 57.0
Devegowda (JDS) and Mallikarjunappa (BJP) ranks top in utilisation, while
Srikantappa ranks lowest in utilisation 5

6. How Rajya Sabha MPs performed 2004-09?
% of spend on actual
Sl.No. Name of Member Party State of Origin entitled
1 Prema Cariappa INC Karnataka 84.7
2 Oscar Fernandes INC Karnataka 79.0
3 Janardhana Poojary INC Karnataka 74.4
4 Bimba Raikar INC Karnataka 45.9
5 K.B. Krishna Murthy INC Karnataka 31.7
6 B. K. Hariprasad INC Karnataka 27.5
7 K. Rahman Khan INC Karnataka 23.5
8 M. V. Rajashekaran INC Karnataka 19.6
9 Vijay Mallya IND Karnataka 8.5
10 M. Venkaiah Naidu BJP Andhra Pradesh 5.5
11 K.B. Shanappa BJP Karnataka 5.3
12 M. A. M. Ramaswamy JDS Tamil Nadu 2.0
13 M. Rajasekara Murthy JDS Karnataka 0.9
STATE AS A WHOLE 30.4
Prema Cariappa ranks top in utilisation, while Rajasekara Murthy ranks
lowest 6

7. MPs from which region spent more – Backward or
forward?
Note: Belgaum and Gulbarga Divisions are considered under North Karnataka; Mysore
and Bangalore Divisions are considered under South Karnataka
MPs from backward region (North Karnataka) show lower utilisation.
Are MPs from backward region less sensitive to the needs?
7

8. Does higher education of MPs mean higher
utilisation?
Are the more educated less sensitive to the needs of the people?
8

9. Which party leads?
57
1. 57 denotes Karnataka state average
2. Late Mr. Bangarappa utilised 94%. He left BJP to join SP during this period.
He is not included here. 9

10. Who spends more: Experienced MPs or First-
timers?
100
56 54 56 58
50
29 28
JDS-(1+1) INC-(3+6) BJP-(8+6) Overall (13+13)
Frist Time Experienced
Note: Values in parenthesis denote number of First timers and Experienced MPs
Late Mr. Bangarappa who spent 94% is not included here.
Overall, experienced MPs showed marginally better utilisation than first-timers.
First-timers from BJP did better than experienced MPs, while first timers from
Congress did marginally better than experienced MPs
10

11. Sector-wise utilisation by Lok Sabha & Rajya Sabha
MPs
Drainage/culverts Street lights , 0.4
Drainage/culverts , Sanitation, 1 Health ,4 Sanitation, 0.5 Health , 3
2 Irrigation , 2 Street lights , 1 , 1 Irrigation , 1
Water, 2 Water, 2
Bus Shelters, 3 Bus Shelters, 0.2 Community halls,
15
Others, 5 Others, 9
Education, 13 Community halls,
48
Education, 28 Roads, 37
Roads, 21
Lok Sabha Rajya Sabha
Community halls are more popular among LS MPs. Do they meet genuine needs?
Roads are popular among RS MPs.
Health and sanitation show low priority consideration for both LS & RS MPs.
11

12. % of utilisation for 15th Lok Sabha (2009-11)
Sl.No Constituency Name of the Member Party % spend on actual
1 Dharwad Joshi, Pralhad Venkatesh BJP 100.0
2 Bangalore North Gowda, Chandre D.B. BJP 100.0
3 Uttara Kannada Hegde, Anant Kumar Dattatreya BJP 100.0
4 Udupi Chikmagalur D. V. Sadananda Gowda BJP 83.4
5 Dakshina Kannada Kateel, Nalin Kumar BJP 75.1
6 Mysore Vishwanath, Adagooru Huchegowda INC 73.7
7 Bagalkot Gaddigoudar, Parvatagouda Chandanagouda BJP 59.8
8 Hassan Devegowda, H.D. JD(S) 53.5
9 Bijapur(SC) Jigajinagi, Ramesh Chandappa BJP 52.0
10 Chikkballapur Moily, M. Veerappa INC 50.3
11 Haveri Udasi, Shivkumar Chanabasappa BJP 44.4
12 Bangalore Central Mohan, P. C. BJP 28.6
13 Bangalore South Ananth Kumar BJP 24.8
14 Koppal Shivaramagouda BJP 24.6
15 Bellary (ST) Shantha, J. BJP 23.6
16 Shimoga Yeddyurappa, Raghavendra BJP 22.4
17 Chitradurga(SC) Swamy, Janardhana BJP 20.1
18 Bidar Singh, N.Dharam INC 15.9
19 Bangalore Rural Kumaraswamy, H.D. JD(S) 7.0
20 Tumkur Basavaraj,Gangasandra Siddappa BJP 4.9
21 Davanagere Siddeshwara, Gowdar Mallikarjunappa BJP 2.6
22 Chamrajanagar(SC) Dhruvanarayana, Rangaswamy INC 1.3
TOTAL 47.0
Note: Data for 6 constituencies is not available.
 3 MPs utilised 100% (all from BJP), while Rangaswamy Dhruvnarayana
(INC) ranks lowest for 2009-11 period.
12

13. Percentage of spending as against entitlements by Party (2009-11)
JDS which led in 14th LS (2004-09) in utilisation of MPLADS is ranked
lowest for 15th LS (2009-11) period.
13

14. Past 7 Years average utilisation of MPLADS
57.1 54.5
60
47
50
40
30
20
10
0
14th Lok Sabha 15th Lok Sabha Past 7 Years
(2004-09) 26 (2009-11) 22 spending (2004-11)
Average utilisation has declined among Karnataka MPs from 14th LS to
15th LS.
State average for past seven years (2004-11) is just above 50% 14

15. Comparative Ranking of 14th & 15th LS
14th Ranking 15th Ranking 14th Ranking 15th Ranking
SECTOR
(works) (works) (Amount) (Amount)
1 1 COMMUNITY HALLS 1 1
2 2 ROADS 2 2
3 3 EDUCATION 3 3
4 4 OTHERS 4 4
5 9 DRINKING WATER 5 6
6 6 DRAINAGE/CULVERTS 6 8
7 5 BUS SHELTERS 7 5
8 7 SANITATION 8 9
9 10 STREET LIGHTS 9 10
10 8 IRRIGATION 10 7
11 11 HEALTH 11 11
There is no priority change in top three sectors – community halls, roads,
education – between 14th & 15th LS.
Health continues to remain the least favoured. 15

16. Major Findings
 On an average LS MPs (57%) showed better utilisation than RS
MPs (30%). Since RS MPs are not directly elected, it appears that
there is no incentive/pressure on them to utilise MPLADS.
 The utilisation trend seems to be deteriorating from 14th (57%)
to 15th (47%) LS.
 Among the current RS MPs Vijay Mallya (IND,) did not utilise
any funds till 2011.
 Backward region MPs (47%) from North Karnataka utilised less
than forward region MPs (63%) from South Karnataka.
 High utilisation seems to be associated with the less educated
MPs. PUC qualified MPs topped the spending followed by
Matriculates and Graduates.
 Tejasvini Gowda with Ph.D spent only 26.5% of funds, while
Devegowda with diploma and Mallikarjunappa with matriculation
spent100%.
16

17.  On the whole experienced MPs (58%) had fared slightly better than first
timers (56%) in utilisation of funds.
 Only first timers from BJP fared better with 54%, while experienced MPs
spent only 28%.
 Party-wise (2004-09), JDS leads with 70% utilisation followed by BJP with
56% and INC with 52%
 BJP leads in utilisation for 15th LS (2009-11) with 52% utilisation followed
by INC with 35% and JDS with 30%
 Two MPs (Devegowda, Mallikarjunappa) utilised 100% of the allocated
money (2004-09).
 Community halls seem to be the most preferred works for MPs of LS,
while roads is the preferred sector for Rajya Sabha MPs during 2004-09.
 Devegowda tops spending on community halls with 95.6% of his total
funds (2004-09).
 RS MPs nominated from outside Karnataka have no interest to spend --
Venkaiah Naidu & MAM Ramaswamy from other states had very low
utilisation.
 Spending pattern varies significantly between the MPs of LS & RS.
17

18. Policy Implications…
 When nearly 50% of MPLADS entitlements remain
unutilised, was there a need for increasing the
allocation to Rs. 5 crores per MP?
 The poor record of RS MPs clearly reflects their lack
of constituency linkages, as they are nominated by
parties. What is the need and rationale of the fund
for RS MPs?
 What needs to be done to improve greater
responsiveness and interest in the use of the Fund by
MPs from Northern Karnataka where the needs are
in fact greater?
 How can the public be better informed about the use
of the Fund, so that MP’s accountability is enhanced?
18

19. Thank You
19