Members of Parliament Should Not Hesitate to Request Personal Secretaries
Members of Parliament (MPs) need personal secretaries; however, no one is willing to openly discuss this within the context of good governance and frugality. The main reason for this reluctance is the fact that in the past, some MPs appointed their relatives as personal secretaries. Some MPs have made inappropriate appointments instead of hiring qualified individuals. Among these, some have employed people with education below the eighth grade in roles equivalent to officer-level jobs, thereby distorting the system. A few personal secretaries have even become intermediaries known locally. As MPs, who are responsible for lawmaking, started violating these laws, questions have been raised about the necessity and justification of the personal secretary system. Journalist Makar Shrestha had submitted an investigative report about the distortions caused by the personal secretary system one and a half years ago. Due to these distortions, the government led by Sushila Karki was compelled to abolish the personal secretary arrangement. The Karki administration amended the Federal Parliament Members’ Remuneration and Facilities Act of 2016 (2073 BS), removing the personal secretary benefits of MPs.
On October 22, 2025 (2082 Ashoj 5), the newly elected government faced dissatisfaction among federal parliamentary officials regarding this decision. The move was made to uphold frugality at all levels of government. While some provinces, including Sudurpaschim, were slow to implement the abolition of personal secretaries, a few days ago MPs from Koshi Province requested Prime Minister Balen Shah to reinstate the personal secretary arrangement. According to parliamentary representatives, operating MPs’ offices has become extremely difficult under current conditions. They are unable to answer phone calls or reply to messages, and lack sufficient time for personal work. During elections, MPs pledge to work 24/7 for public welfare, but practically this is not feasible.
MPs need to read draft bills and manage minor parliamentary tasks. With an increasing number of young MPs, workload and stress have also grown. Yet, MPs remain silent about requesting necessary support because many have previously abused the personal secretary position. Jobs were given to family, relatives, and friends, and salaries were misappropriated by the MPs themselves, leading to a poor image of this benefit. Some personal secretaries merely act as assistants to the party or leaders. However, this is a personal weakness of the MPs, not the system.
Personal secretaries can also be respected advisors to MPs. They can assist MPs by conducting thematic research. Some MPs regularly perform outstanding work in parliamentary meetings and committees, thanks to their teams. However, not all MPs have teams, which is why government support is necessary. To ensure personal secretaries’ investment is not wasted, regular attendance must be maintained. A deep understanding of subjects is essential to make bill discussions and performance effective. Personal secretaries are also responsible for handling constituency work and addressing voters’ expectations. Voters want to call MPs by name. The role of proportional representation MPs is even greater as they must deliver equitable service to the entire nation.
If necessary, the constitution can be amended to reduce the number of MPs. To have strong and effective MPs, minimum resources must be provided. Leaving MPs helpless renders election promises meaningless. Like former MPs such as Subas Nembang, Gagan Thapa, and Pradeep Giri, who maintained efficient personal secretariats and performed well, this approach facilitated the management of constituency and parliamentary work. It also enhanced public perception that their leaders were accessible.
Considering foreign examples, the United States federal parliament provides senators with a budget for facilities. In the United Kingdom, MPs receive staffing allowances to hire private secretaries. In Germany, MPs get allowances and resources for research and administrative assistance. The European Union and other organizations also allow MPs to employ private secretaries, but strict action is taken if relatives are appointed. In several countries, separate employees are appointed for parliamentary work and constituency duties. Some countries even have MPs functioning without personal secretaries. In India, MP Shashi Tharoor from Thiruvananthapuram has admirably balanced constituency work and writing. Eight years ago, I shared Tharoor’s time management example with former UML MP Pradeep Gyawali, who remarked, “Here, such harmony is impossible.” Tharoor actively writes on economics, history, geopolitics, literature, and governance policies, with influence not only in India but globally. Imagine what would happen if he did not have a personal secretariat team.
It is necessary to monitor the misuse or proper use of personal facilities. Mechanisms are needed to ensure that regular work is carried out. Neglect by MPs in parliamentary sessions may anger voters. What the future holds is awaited. Prime Minister Balen has already expressed commitment to reform the MPs’ personal appointment system. Instead of leaving MPs powerless, reestablishing the personal secretary system is essential to make them effective. It is time to create clear rules to control the distortions observed in this system.