Newly released statistics show that the state has spent nearly MVR 18.9 million on health insurance for former members of Parliament over the last 10 years. The information was made public after a citizen requested the figures under the Right to Information Act.
According to the data, 173 former members of Parliament benefited from the scheme between 2014 and 2025. Some of these members have since passed away, but the overall health insurance bill during this period still reached MVR 18.9 million.
The figures also highlight a significant increase in annual costs over the years. Until 2017, the state paid MVR 12,500 annually per member. From 2017 onwards, the amount nearly doubled, rising to MVR 24,000 each year.
The statistics only cover former Parliament members and do not include details of health insurance spending on current lawmakers. This has raised questions among the public, as the level of transparency differs between sitting and former MPs.
While former MPs continue to receive state-funded health insurance, individuals in other senior state roles are not entitled to the same coverage. Instead, they rely on whatever health insurance scheme is offered by their specific organization.
The arrangement for MPs has long been a topic of discussion, particularly when compared with the benefits available to ordinary civil servants.
The benefits for Parliament members go beyond health insurance. According to existing policies, any member who serves at least one term in office and reaches the age of 55 becomes eligible for financial incentives. These incentives increase depending on the length of service, providing greater rewards to long-serving members.
The release of these figures has renewed debate about the cost of maintaining benefits for former MPs. While the policy was designed to provide support for those who served in Parliament, critics argue that such spending adds pressure on public funds.
With almost MVR 19 million spent in just a decade, the issue of benefits and entitlements for former lawmakers is likely to remain part of the larger conversation on government spending and accountability.
