Using your phone's internet browser
go to:  qna.rediff.com
Click and drag this link to
the Home icon in your browser.
Q.

The Supreme Court Friday expressed concern over the taxpayers' money being spent on providing security to people who do not deserve it.'How much are we spending on the security of the people who don't deserve it?' observed a bench of Justice G.S. Singhvi and Justice Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya, while hearing a petition for its directions on the use of vehicles with beacon lights given to VIPs coupled with security personnel.- Is security is functional necessity or status icon ?

Tags: people, supreme court, court
Asked by venkatesaldevarajan, 09 Dec '11 08:23 pm
  Invite a friend  |  
  Save  |  
 Earn 10 points for answering
Answer this question  Earn 10 points for answering    
4000 characters remaining  
  
    
Keep me signed inNew User? Sign up

Answers (8)

 
1.

SC is right in making an issue out of this .We cant afford to mismanage the taxpayers money so lavishly where it is not must . Budget deficit and fiscal deficit are already mounting because of slow-down . There is every need to control the govt expenditure . It is here and also in many other areas the govt can think of austerity .
Answered by sk singh, 09 Dec '11 08:32 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
2.

I suppose a reasonable amount of security should be provided by teh govt . to important ministers and if someone wants extra cover , let the person spend from his own pocket.
Answered by HEMANT MEHTA, 09 Dec '11 08:26 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (1)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
3.

It is absolutely true and Supreme court must do something for this and give justice to poor middle class salaried class tax payers.
Answered by ajit ramdas vaidya, 09 Dec '11 08:33 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
4.

India could not save Mahatma Gandhi, Smt. Indira Gandhi & Shri Rajiv Gandhi.In fact adequate security ought to be for all persons performing public service and the public of India.There must not be ostentious security at the cost of government for the politicians, if they needed they shold pay for it.
Answered by Ravindra Yadav, 09 Dec '11 08:33 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
5.

It is a pure status icon
Answered by dhanendra kumar jain, 09 Dec '11 08:29 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
6.

People's leaders do not need out side security.Only those self styled leaders who r afraid of people need security.Besides,politicians like Lalu,Mulayam,Mayavati etc. consider security as a status icon.They should learn that Anna refused security.
Answered by Damodar Biswal, 09 Dec '11 08:29 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
7.

It is more a status symbol now than the security necessity I feel
Answered by rajnikant raiyarela, 09 Dec '11 08:26 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
8.

Considering that on one Kasab we have already spent 46 Cr, there are 100s of them outside and inside parliament - hence the total will be easily in 4 digit crores
Answered by Shashi LS, 09 Dec '11 08:25 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received

Ask a Question

Get answers from the community

600 characters remaining