Monitoring Elected Representatives with Data Insights

1

2

NO. OF QUESTIONS ASKED PERTAINING TO THE PERIOD IN PRAJA S REPORT CARDS OF THE CORRESPONDING YEARS In each year three sessions were taken, while in 2014 four sessions were taken 3

Note: 1) Scores for the corresponding year (2012) in the last term have been given for comparison with the current year (2017). 2) This year, we have changed the methodology for assigning weightages for questions. We have combined the weightages given for the importance of the issue with its classification under the seventh schedule of the constitution. 4

PERCEIVED CORRUPTION & ITS IMPACT ON QUALITY OF LIFE In 2015, because it was the first year of the MLAs new term, they were not ranked 5

The Constitution as a Basis for monitoring of Elected Representatives ERs derive their powers for functioning through the Constitution They are mandated to Attend Sessions, Raise people s Issues, Debate, Participate in Discussions and Pass legislations. The Constitution defines their powers and rules of functioning, hence only the Constitution can provide the parameters for their monitoring. 6

7

Parameters for Rating MLAs (1/4) Parameter Marks Present1(Attendance, No. & Quality of Questions, Usage of Area Development Fund) Past2(Education qualification, PAN Card, Criminal cases) Perception(through an citizen survey of 20,317 people for their perception on their MLA s accessibility/availability, performance, corruption, and satisfaction with quality of life, services provided by government) Negative for new FIR cases after 2014 election 3 Negative for pending Charge Sheet 3 Total 52 8 40 Minus 5 Minus 5 100 RTI Data Source: 1 Vidhan Bhavan and City & Suburban Collector Offices; 2 Election Commission of India s Website; 3 Mumbai Police. 8

2016 2017 Party INC INC INC INC SS BJP INC BJP SS BJP BJP BJP BJP BJP SS SS SP BJP SS BJP SS SS BJP SS SS SS AIMIM SS SS BJP SS BJP MLAs Name Score 84.33 72.54 75.76 72.13 80.97 67.98 79.40 78.35 75.63 67.40 65.71 68.81 59.27 58.60 57.77 68.80 63.04 67.13 Rank 1 7 5 8 2 11 3 4 6 12 16 9 21 22 24 10 17 13 Score 78.25 74.93 74.12 73.87 73.17 72.79 72.28 70.20 69.26 68.56 68.32 65.84 62.52 60.79 59.81 59.15 58.46 58.20 57.84 57.54 56.94 55.83 53.91 52.63 51.65 51.41 51.24 48.11 46.50 46.18 44.70 41.96 Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Amin Amir Ali Patel Kalidas Nilkanth Kolambkar Aslam Ramazan Ali Shaikh Md. Arif (Naseem) Lalan Khan Sunil Waman Prabhu Atul Bhatkhalkar Varsha Eknath Gaikwad Yogesh Sagar Sunil Govind Shinde Ashish Babaji Shelar Manisha Ashok Chaudhary Sardar Tara Singh Ameet Bhaskar Satam Raj Purohit Sunil Rajaram Raut Ajay Vinayak Choudhari Abu Asim Azmi Mangal Prabhat Lodha Trupti Prakash Sawant Parag Madhusudan Alavani Prakash Vaikunt Phaterpekar Mangesh Anant Kudalkar Bharati Hemant Lavekar Prakash Rajaram Surve Sanjay Govind Potnis Sadanand Shankar Sarvankar Waris Yusuf Pathan Ramesh Kondiram Latke Ashok Dharmaraj Patil Selvan R. Tamil Tukaram Ramkrishna Kate Ramchandra Shivaji Kadam 54.51 65.88 53.96 60.14 56.25 58.37 66.38 57.71 54.39 60.85 57.21 59.70 49.55 28 15 30 19 27 23 14 25 29 18 26 20 31 12

MLAs with criminal cases as per Representative of People s Act 1951 50% MLAs have criminal cases. 18 MLAs out of 36 have criminal cases (FIRs) registered against them and of the 18 MLAs, 12 have charge sheets filed against. Note: This data includes all four designated ministers along with 32 MLAs. 13

14

Note: This year, we have changed the methodology for assigning weightages for questions. We have combined the weightages given for the importance of the issue with its classification under the seventh schedule of the constitution. 15

16

Note: (*) While we evaluated the performance of 12 Shiv Sena MLAs in 2016, but this year we have evaluated the performance of 13 Shiv Sena MLAs, because one MLA was newly elected in April 2015. 17

Note: Scores for the corresponding year (2012) in the last term have been given for comparison with the current year (2017). 18

THANK YOU!!! 19