It must be nice being a popular chief minister of a populous state: loyal followers entangle themselves in endless queues to bring their leader cash presents. Mayavati’s disclosed wealth is around Rs 52 crore, nearly four times the amount she declared three years ago. All this, she has stated, has been gifted to her by her party faithfuls. She must be having an equally credible explanation for having soared up the popularity scale at such remarkable speed. That she has owned up to this vast amount, divided into the worth of five prime properties, diamonds, silver, gold, cash and bank deposits, is startling enough. It is a mystery why she did it, being part of a political culture contemptuous of both ethics and accountability. It may be that the recent contretemps over Jaya Bachchan’s forgetfulness regarding full disclosure impelled her towards wisdom. On top of that, her predecessor and enemy, Mulayam Singh Yadav, is being embarrassed by the investigation into his assets of around Rs 100 crore. There is, in this context, the additional kick of appearing more honest — or at least more forthright. Or else, Ms Mayavati is simply cannier than them all.

That is a possibility. Ms Mayavati is on top at the moment and, as a good politician, she knows she must make the most of it. She has stared down prosecution in the Taj corridor controversy, she holds the reins of a kind of power in the country that only the chief minister of Uttar Pradesh can have, and her regionalism has triumphed — now that she has brought both the higher and the backward castes to the same waterhole. Although people believe that all politicians have hundreds of crores stashed away in cash and kind and in kinsmen’s pockets, Rs 52 crore is a sufficiently impressive figure to suggest that Ms Mayavati is being open. Whatever fanciful explanation she gives for her sudden increase in wealth, no opposition leader is going to question her. They would rather she kept quiet. This is her characteristic style: she enjoys setting the cat among the pigeons. The question lies elsewhere. Making the declaration of assets mandatory for election candidates is one of the most positive steps towards transparency in public life. But it is no good if the more daring politicians try to take the mickey out of it. Not just the declaration, but the explanations that follow, must also be assessed. Till that is done, the principle of transparency too will be made ridiculous.