Then regarding (4),–a voter shall have the right to election and the cost of election shall be met by the State–I say so, because to come to the Assembly is not a profession or a profiteering business. If that is the concern of the State and if a person who comes to the Assembly comes to serve the people, it is necessary that the State must see that his election expenses are borne by the State. Otherwise some landlords and some capitalists will build up a party to set up candidates and those candidates will be returned. Let us say here is a poor man, a good worker, an honest man; but he has neither the money nor the party backing. The result is he cannot stand for election. It he stands he comes to ridicule. If you say that the election is as much in the interest of the State as the President or the Ministers or the bureaucracy, you must say that in the same manner as they are brought to being, legislative members should also come to the Assembly, the State bearing their election expenditure in a regulated and therefore in the least expensive and most organized manner. This may be laughable, but this is just and fair and unless we make such a provision no sincere, honest and real worker can be returned at least for the next fifteen or twenty years. If we do not do so now, we invite only revolution. And revolution will make everything topsy-turvy. It will have to be done, then by the fire of the people instead of our intelligent understanding, if we chose it now. Therefore the cost of the elections must legitimately and in fairness to the cause be borne by the State because election as such is a State affair and is not a private concern. It need not stagger us now. We must not allow members to come calculating profit and loss, calculating how much money they will be making in five years and therefore how much they may beg, borrow or steal for this parliamentary investment.
