Bharat’s VIP Culture: A Drain on Resources and an Urgent Need for Reform

Kumar Rakesh

New Delhi, 10th Feb. In every democracy, a certain number of individuals are accorded VIP status, usually comprising top government officials, judges, defence personnel, and select public figures. However, in Bharat, this list has expanded to an unsustainable number, crossing 5,79,092 VIPs, far exceeding any other country. To put this in perspective, the United States has only 252 VIPs, the United Kingdom has 84, France has 109, Japan has 125, Germany has 142, Russia has 312, and even China, a country known for its centralized power structure, has 435 VIPs. The Bharatiya VIP list includes not just high-ranking government officials but also bureaucrats, retired officials, politicians at multiple levels, business figures, and even religious leaders.

This culture of entitlement has placed an enormous financial burden on public resources, widening the gap between the privileged few and the common citizens. The mounting bills for security, foreign travel, personal luxuries, and government-funded benefits paint a grim picture of resource misallocation. As Bharat strives to become a global economic power, reforming its VIP culture should be at the forefront of governance priorities.

VIP Culture Around the World: A Comparison with Bharat

VIP status across the world is tightly regulated. In the United Kingdom, only 84 individuals are designated as VIPs, mainly the Monarch, Prime Minister, Cabinet Ministers, and Supreme Court Judges. Even former prime ministers do not enjoy lifelong privileges unless specific security concerns are raised. France follows a similar model, where 109 individuals, including the President, Prime Minister, key ministers, and defense officials, are considered VIPs.

Germany has 142 VIPs, including the Chancellor, President, and select judicial and military officials, but their privileges are strictly regulated. The United States, despite being the world’s largest economy and a superpower, has only 252 designated VIPs, including the President, Vice President, select Senators, Supreme Court Justices, and military commanders. Even former US Presidents are given Secret Service protection but must fund most of their own expenses.

Russia, with 312 VIPs, and China, with 435, have relatively higher numbers, but their lists are carefully controlled. Most security and benefits are limited to high-ranking Communist Party leaders and military personnel in China, while in Russia, VIPs primarily belong to the political and intelligence spheres.

Bharat’s staggering 5,79,092 VIPs far exceed these numbers, reflecting a culture where political influence and bureaucratic power translate into privileges for thousands of individuals who should not be on such a list.

The Burden of Bharat’s VIP Culture

The vast number of VIPs in Bharat places an enormous financial and logistical strain on public resources. One of the most visible costs is the security cover provided to these individuals. Thousands of police officers and paramilitary personnel are deployed daily to protect VIPs, often at the cost of public safety. In Delhi alone, over 20,000 security personnel are engaged in VIP protection, while crimes against ordinary citizens continue to rise.

The financial cost is equally staggering. VIPs in Bharat enjoy free or subsidized electricity, water, fuel, travel, accommodation, and healthcare at the expense of taxpayers. Government canteens serve highly subsidized meals, sometimes as low as ₹10 for high-ranking officials and politicians, while ordinary citizens struggle with rising inflation. The foreign travel expenses of VIPs, often disguised as “official visits,” run into hundreds of crores each year, with first-class flights, luxury hotel stays, and large delegations accompanying them.

The impact of VIP culture is felt on the roads as well. VIP motorcades cause massive traffic disruptions, delaying ambulances, school buses, and daily commuters. Hospitals and religious places often prioritize VIPs over common citizens, reinforcing the inequality between those in power and the general public.

Public Perception and Growing Discontent

There is growing resentment among Bhartiya citizens toward the unchecked VIP culture. A survey by Local Circles in 2023 found that 64% of Bhartiya believe VIP culture has worsened in the last three years, particularly in government offices, public spaces, and religious institutions. The frustration stems from the visible disparity in treatment between VIPs and common people. While ordinary citizens struggle with long lines at hospitals and bureaucratic delays, VIPs bypass these obstacles with ease.

Public anger has also been directed at the unnecessary spending on VIP privileges, particularly when Bharat faces pressing economic and social challenges. With millions of people lacking access to proper healthcare, education, and employment opportunities, the disproportionate allocation of resources to a privileged class seems unjust.

Why VIP Culture Must Be Reformed

The unchecked growth of VIP culture in Bharat is not just a matter of inefficiency; it undermines the principles of democracy and governance. Bharat cannot afford to spend an exorbitant amount of public money on unnecessary privileges while essential services remain underfunded. Reforming VIP culture is not about denying security to those who genuinely need it but about ensuring that public resources are allocated judiciously.

Reducing the number of VIPs to below 300, in line with global standards, would free up thousands of security personnel for public safety and allow significant budget reallocation to healthcare, education, and infrastructure development. Ending subsidies on electricity, water, and fuel for VIPs would save millions of rupees annually. Transparency in government spending on VIPs must be increased, allowing citizens to scrutinize how their tax money is being used.

The removal of VIP-only lanes, exclusive airport privileges, and special access at religious places would help restore equality in public services. Security should be granted based on genuine threats, not political status or bureaucratic rank. Most importantly, a shift in political culture is necessary—one that prioritizes public service over personal privilege.

Conclusion: Time for a Change

Bharat’s VIP culture is a legacy of its bureaucratic and political history, but in a rapidly modernizing democracy, it is an outdated and harmful practice. With over 5,79,092 VIPs, the nation has far surpassed any reasonable limit, draining public funds and widening the socio-economic divide. While countries like the United States, the United Kingdom, and Germany manage with a few hundred VIPs, Bharat’s unchecked expansion of privileges reflects a deeper governance issue.

The solution lies in reducing the number of VIPs, cutting unnecessary expenditures, and restoring public services to the people who truly need them. The movement against VIP culture must not just be a public outcry but a structural reform led by policymakers committed to a fairer, more accountable system. For a country that prides itself on democracy and equality, dismantling the VIP syndrome is not just a recommendation—it is an urgent necessity.