The ongoing tussle between the ‘young brigade’ and the ‘senior citizens’ in the Congress party could well bring to the fore the debate on whether there should be a retirement age for politicians. The question faced would be how to define the concept of ‘young’ and ‘old’ as far as politics is concerned.
It is understood that the average age of the members of the recently appointed Pradesh Election Committee (PEC) is about 58 years. Incidentally the eldest leader of the Congress party in the state is the Leader of the Opposition Pratapsingh Rane at 77. It is true that young people should be given an opportunity to enter politics and even contest the elections. The Youth wing of the Congress party prepares young leaders in the party for the future. Hence it is logical that at some point in time in their political career these youth leaders should be given an opportunity to contest the elections.
Any political party needs the exuberance of the youth coupled with the experience of the old. Hence it is necessary to strike a balance between youth and experience. But power can be very intoxicating. Hence the old politicians who have tasted power in the past would not want to let go off this desire and hence would want to contest the elections. Whether they are capable of winning the seat seems secondary. That brings us to the all important question. Should there be a retirement age for politicians in the country? Like government employees our politicians are elected to do a job. If there is a retirement age for government servants why should there not be a retirement age for the politicians? When old politicians retire it gives an opportunity for the young brigade to come forth with new ideas and gives an exposure to new talent. It will also reflect the changing times.
