President under pressure to walk the talk after three years in office

BY GAGANI WEERAKOON-2018-01-28

They says this is not a national election that would change Governments and is the chance to elect competent groups of people that could ensure you are living in a developed, resourceful, healthy, peaceful, clear of all kinds of pollution and safe environment. Yet, with just a fortnight to go for the Local Government Elections to be held on 10 February 2017, the election campaign by all main political parties has set the atmosphere of a General Election or of a Presidential Election, with the Head of State going for almost every SLFP/UPFA rally. President Maithripala Sirisena was seen even at election rallies that were held at Technical College Junction and Colombo Central, giving the aura of an intense political battle between political stalwarts.

All party leaders including President Sirisena, Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, former President Mahinda Rajapaksa and JVP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake are engaged in giving either new promises or renewing their old promises which have not been kept after lapsing so many years in power. All these talks involved matters of national importance and finding fault with each other. It appears like everyone is in a race to prove that he is a better crook than the other. They discuss everything other than how each candidate would address burning issues in that particular area. While, each voter is sensible enough to understand that all these cat-fights displayed before the public by rulers will come to an end by 11 February, it would be normal for anyone to be confused about who actually is speaking the truth after listening to four different versions of the same incident.
President Sirisena meanwhile, promised to launch a national anti-corruption movement after 10 February, especially against white collar and VVIP criminals. If implemented it will in fact be re-launching a programme that he promised three years ago yet, failed to adhere to.

Even though it is unclear whether they are genuine remarks, President Sirisena has been targeting his coalition partner UNP and PM Wickremesinghe directly and indirectly at almost every public rally he addressed in the recent past, fuelling speculations that the honeymoon between UNP and the SLFP may come to an end. All did not seem to be ok between the President and the UNP ever since the establishment of Presidential Commission of Inquiry to investigate the Treasury bonds scam that was alleged to have key UNPers involved in it. Things turned from bad to worse with the final report of the Bond Commission being made public as UNP members started openly criticizing the President to the extent that they even called him a 'pickpocket president'.

After much drama, two days were allocated for the debate on both Bond Commission and PRECIFAC reports. However, President Sirisena renewed his mission by challenging both UNP and SLPP to hold the debate before LG Polls - a desperate and final attempt by the SLFP Leader as many view it, to stop the SLFP from undergoing an embarrassing defeat.

He said, it is the belief of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) that two or three days should be set aside, by Parliament to debate the reports of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry (PCoI), which investigated the issuance of Treasury Bonds and the PCoI probing into Serious Acts of Fraud, Corruption and Abuse of Power, State Resources and Privileges, prior to the Local Government (LG) Elections, which are to be conducted on 10 February.

Speaking to the media in Colombo on Friday (26), he said the Party Leaders, at their meeting, had decided to postpone a debate on the reports, but that the SLFP still wants it as "the country will get a good idea of what is in the reports if there is a debate."

He charged that an 'alliance of corrupt Very Important Persons' has been formed and that they would prevent the investigations into the offences listed in these reports.

He said: "As soon as the PCoI report on the Treasury bonds issue was sent to me, there were demands from certain political parties for me to release its contents."

"I had intended to conduct a deep study of the issue before taking any action or making a statement, but because of the insistent demands, I consulted lawyers and the President's Secretary and made the statement to the nation," he added.

"This is the first time in my life that I made a statement of that nature, not on my own but on the advice of others."

He also assured everybody that there is nothing missing in the report.

"The papers that were collected, in order to create this report, can fill two large trucks and in order to file charges, many of these documents will have to be examined. A level of secrecy has to be maintained so that the cases can be filed," he went on to say.

He also pointed out after he sent the two reports to Parliament, those who were clamouring for them to be released 'have strangely fallen silent.'

"It was a coincidence that both reports came within days of each other. I think if only one of them had come out, then those affected on the other side would have demanded a debate."

Elsewhere, Joint Opposition (JO) Parliamentary Group Leader Dinesh Gunawardena said despite the JO and the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) making repeated requests to hold the debate, related to the report compiled by the PCol into the Central Bank bonds scam, in the Parliament before 10 February at the last party leaders meeting, those in the Government ranks had rejected such requests. JVP Parliamentarian Vijitha Herath has requested the Speaker to facilitate the holding of the debate before 10 February on the report compiled by the PCol, which probed the CB Bonds scam, having considered the challenge issued to political parties recently by the President.

Gunawardena said that hence it should be the Government that should take the rap for failing to hold the debate before the staging of the 2018 LG Poll on 10 February.

The Parliamentarian challenged the President, the Prime Minister and the Speaker to facilitate the holding of the proposed debate before 10 February, rather than on the scheduled dates of 20 and 21 February.

Meanwhile, Leader of the House, Minister Lakshman Kiriella said that the decision taken to debate the PCol report, on the Central Bank Bonds scandal on 20 and 21 February had been taken with the full consent of all political parties represented in the Parliament and that even those from the United National Party and the SLFP too had agreed to hold the debate after the completion of the 2018 LG Poll on 10 February.

He added that when the decision had been taken to hold the debate in late February, senior SLFP Ministers such as Nimal Siripala de Silva and Mahinda Samarasinghe had also been among those who had attended the Party Leaders meeting.

While the Bond Commission report has allegedly caused much damage to the UNP, the Presidential Commission of Inquiry to investigate and inquire into Serious Acts of Fraud, Corruption and Abuse of Power, State Resources and Privileges (PRECIFAC) would eventually cause much damage to the Rajapaksa family.

The Commission which has held former President Mahinda Rajapaksa and former Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa responsible for causing colossal losses to the Government through the abuse of power, has given a detailed account of how former Minister of Economic Development Basil Rajapaksa allegedly misused Gama Neguma project money.

The PRECIFAC, in its final report, observed that even though a Cabinet Minister is entitled to three vehicles, former Minister Basil Rajapaksa's fleet had eight State vehicles worth around Rs 612 million and another six vehicles of which the value has not been estimated. These included bulletproof vehicles too.

In addition, Basil Rajapaksa, deviating from accepted norms, has had 20 Sailors and 72 Army officers in his security detail as at 1 January, 2015. According to the report, Basil Rajapaksa has had a security detail of 64 Sailors and 84 Army officers from 10 January 2010 to 10 January 2015 by paying State allowances and Very Important Persons security allowances at a cost of Rs 264,370,800 to State coffers.

The Commission report, which points out that the findings should be referred to the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption and to the Attorney General for further legal action, also noted that Basil Rajapaksa and his officials had made arrangements to pay Rs 155.4 million to the Sri Lanka Air Force (SLAF) from the capital funds of the Gama Neguma project.

While noting that individuals, including Parliamentarians Dayasiri Jayasekara, Wimal Weerawansa, Namal Rajapaksa and one of former President Mahinda Rajapaksa's sons, Yoshitha Rajapaksa owed millions of rupees to Heli Tours - the commercial domestic air service by the SLAF - they had in fact taken steps to pay that amount to the SLAF while the investigations were continuing. The Commission recommended another investigation to ascertain from where these individuals had found such large sums to pay off the said amounts.

Also, the Commission noted that the monies owed by Namal Rajapaksa and Yoshitha Rajapaksa were in fact paid by an Army Corporal on behalf of the President's Office, and therefore it needs to be investigated further as to how a Corporal was able to pay off an amount of over Rs 26 million.
Among the controversial issues considered by the PRECIFAC are the following:

The misuse of State media to publish and broadcast election campaign messages of former President Mahinda Rajapaksa.

The loss caused to the State by using 'Rakna Arakshaka Lanka' security company employees for former President Mahinda Rajapaksa's election campaign.

The case of the former Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa being questioned on the investigation into handing over Rakna Arakshaka Lanka weaponry to the Avant Garde Security Services.

Statements recorded from individuals including prominent artistes over allegations of fraud and corruption in organizing the opening ceremony of the Hambantota Port.

Basil Rajapaksa being questioned over the misuse of State-owned helicopters during the Presidential Election campaign.

Competent, Empowered Auditor General

2018-01-28

What Sri Lanka needs is teeth to prosecute white collar crime/criminals in Government if such empowerment is lacking in law.

It's nice to have various reports, official or otherwise, highlighting financial irregularities and waste in Government and in Government institutions. But if such findings are confined to reports only, those by itself are a waste of public funds, especially with respect to official reports in particular.
The country's 219-year-old Auditor General's (AG's) Department, year-in-year out publishes audit reports in respect of the financial performances of various Government bodies, as the Government auditor.

The AG, acting as the devil's advocate relating to public finance, goes through the financial reports of various Government bodies, covering departments, boards, corporations and such like and gives his opinion in respect of expenditure incurred by these institutions.

Being it his duty to highlight any irregularities and/or questionable expenditure pertaining to such accounts, the AG discharges those responsibilities. Government accounts, in this instance, the historical performances of such institutions, are expected to be prepared annually.

It is in respect of such annual accounts that the AG gives his opinion.

The AG maybe considered as being the first line of defence to check any financial irregularities in State institutions. The other being the Committee on Public Enterprises (COPE) and/or Committee on Public Accounts (COPA), two Parliamentary oversight committees on public finance, seemingly having more teeth than the AG as COPE and COPA members comprise the country's lawmakers.
But the reality is that neither the AG nor COPA or COPE has powers to ensure that their opinions and/or recommendations are implemented. Implementation is in the hands of the Government in power.

Therefore, if a Government so wishes, it can simply wait, doing nothing over the recommendations made. This brings into question the validity of the AG, COPE and COPA.

If the AG, COPE and COPA lack teeth, having such bodies in place, coupled with the reams and reams of reports they annually prepare, are also a waste of public funds and time.

For the AG, COPE and COPA to be valid, those bodies need to have teeth. COPE and COPA may comprise a mix of Opposition and Government lawmakers, thereby ensuring to an extent, if not more, the impartiality of the findings of such Parliamentary oversight committees, though implementation may be another matter.

Meanwhile, the AG functions as a public servant, where his rights, in the first line of defence, are protected by the Public Service Commission and if that fails, by Court. However, the AG, being a mere mortal, may also be prone to err.

His findings, vis-à-vis the accounts of State institutions, may also be prone to error. Therefore, there may be a need to strengthen the professionalism of the Auditor General's Department, while ensuring its independence.

One of the biggest challenges that the Government may face if it's keen on strengthening the AG, is to attract professionals to serve in this Department. For that, two ingredients will have to be fulfilled. Those are to lure professionals by offering them attractive salaries and the other, to ensure their independence.

While luring professionals by offering them higher salaries and at the same time ensuring the independence of the AG go hand in hand, the third most important ingredient needed, after the first two are fulfilled, is to act upon the recommendations given by the AG.

The combination of all of these three ingredients will make a functional AG, fulfilling the aspirations of the taxpayer. It's hoped that the proposed Audit Bill will take all of these three matters into consideration.

To attract the best of talent, remuneration on par with those offered by private audit companies will have to be made. That may be challenging because the Government since 1978 has been running continuous budget deficits.

The planned uplift in revenue by computerizing revenue collection starting with Customs, the island's largest revenue collector, if implemented, may be the beginning in finding the funds needed to make the AG professional, if the Government is serious in this endeavour.

Independence may be fortified by having an Audit Commission, functioning under the Constitutional Council, in place, which hopefully will transform the Auditor General's recommendations to implementation.

Sri Lanka: Surviving the bloodletting

The people are very well aware that shenanigans of massive proportions, both financial and otherwise, abounded during the previous regime.

by Manik de Silva -Jan 28, 2018

( January 28, 2018, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) With less than a fortnight to go before countrywide local elections, it is patently clear that the gloves are off between constituents of the incumbent yahapalana government who have now become combatants. The question on how long the present arrangement between the UNP and President Maithripala Sirisena’s faction of the SLFP can last is now wide open. Undoubtedly the election result will be a determinant, some would say the determinant, of how future events would unravel. The president publicly threw out a challenge last week to debate the bond commission report before the polls are held on February 10. Obviously that arrow was aimed at the UNP. He followed this up on Friday when he met editors and heads of media institutions saying that apart from the so-called bond scam, there has been large scale diversion of government funds to private business interests. Though unstated, it is clear that that there too the barb was directed at the Ravi Karunanayake headed finance ministry.

Former Central Bank Governor Ajith Nivard Cabraal took instant umbrage over the president’s statement that trillions of rupees of foreign loans taken by the previous regime is unaccounted for. He said this claim is “ridiculous” and “untrue” and may even “border on lunacy.” Exclaiming that the 2014 GDP was Rs. 10.2 trillion, he made the point that the president’s figure of unaccounted funds amounted to 90 percent of that. It seems to us that the president was not referring to a single year’s borrowing but to total borrowing during the 10-year tenure of the previous administration. But we would take Cabraal’s caution about the dangers of throwing numbers like these around very seriously. Foreign lenders, whether they are multilateral institutions or bond market investors, can become most disturbed when no less than a president of a country makes such allegations. Hopefully the figures were checked and double checked before they were made public. The same caution the president requires before arresting high profile personalities of the previous regime, like Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, that there is watertight evidence against them would be commendable in these matters too.

The people are very well aware that shenanigans of massive proportions, both financial and otherwise, abounded during the previous regime. They voted this government in to end all that and bring the perpetrators to book. The ongoing process in this regard is painfully slow and what is worse that the present rulers are not without cronies to whom patronage is extended to play the same games or worse with gay abandon. The former president wants the February 10 election to be a referendum on the present government. If he demonstrates more support than the current incumbents, who are no longer presenting the common front that enabled the regime change in January 2015, he would no doubt proceed from then onwards on the basis that the mandates of 2015, both presidential and parliamentary, are no longer valid. From the perspective of the ruling side, how the UNP and the Sirisena faction of the SLFP fare vis-à-vis Rajapaksa’s Joint Opposition will be indicative up to a point of their standing in the electorate. Certainly the UNP as the country’s biggest political party will be at an advantage in this regard despite the flak it is taking even from the president. But often people vote at local elections, particularly in the rural countryside, for candidates rather than parties. The picture may be different in big Municipalities like Colombo, Kandy and Galle. In any case, do you add up the councils that the president and the UNP take on the basis that they are together in government – for however long that may be – and compare the result with the JO tally?

The president’s meeting with the media did not reveal whether he plans to seek another term. However short our collective memory is reputed top be, the people have not forgotten the solemn statement that he made at Independence Square that he will not run again for president. When this subject was broached on Friday, there was no clear answer with the president saying he tackles issues of the day rather than those of the future. Yesterday’s The Island editorially said the question may have been phrased better leaving less room for evasion, if he was asked whether the solemn pledge he made immediately after his swearing in January 2015 was still valid. The answer to that question still remains wide open though the president did make clear that he is very much a political animal and will remain active in politics, whether in or out of office, during his lifetime.

Local elections necessarily are less exciting and raise less dust than national hustings be they presidential or parliamentary. Voter turnouts are also smaller. While there is a degree of visible interest (though thank God no polythene) on how Colombo particularly will vote reflected in the media, less is known how things are going in the rural hinterland. Are the people fired-up by the fact that they have got an opportunity, however delayed, of choosing their representatives to run their local bodies? A colourful parliamentarian of yesteryear coined a slogan ooth balla, mooth balla, apita hondai gamey balla at an early post-Independence parliamentary election where two candidates with naughty reputations were running against each other. That description no doubt fits the contending parties this time around. We don’t have long to wait to see how events unfold a fortnight hence. But the question bigger than that is ‘whither the yahapalanaya government?’ Can its constituents wounding each other in the ongoing campaign survive the blood letting?

( The writer is the chief editor of the Sunday Island, a Colombo based weekly newspaper where this piece first appeared)

Privatisation and re-nationalisation

Critical infrastructure and ‘common-goods’ should be in public hands

The iconic Flying Scotsman at speed; 1950s
https://fineartamerica.com/featured/flying-scotsman-on-broadsands-viaduct-mike-jeffries.html

628-Kankesanthurai heads Matara-Colombo Ruhunu Kumari
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Locomotives_of_Sri_Lanka_Railways#/media/File:M2loco.jpg

Kumar David-January 27, 2018, 12:00 pm 

The purpose of private enterprise is to make profits; shareholders and managers are not asses who invest time and money to waste the former and lose the latter. Capitalism is not charity; rich people who wish to do good find a cause, to donate to, and/or work voluntarily with. Businesses are happy to do "their bit" such as sponsor scholarships, donate to good causes and feel virtuous about contributing to national development, but this makes sense only if the company is doing well, that is if it is profitable. I am not discrediting the private sector, just making obvious observations.

This comment is a lead into the government’s intention to "privatise loss-making institutions". But why would anyone but a plain lunatic wish to be saddled with a loss-making venture? Only if the state writes off losses of prior profligacy, as with SriLankan Airlines, and prices are raised to make the enterprise commercially viable; that is profitable for the purchaser. Or privatisation may be a way out for a government which dares not raise prices ‘for fear of losing the next election’. If you privatise the CEB or the railways and the new owner doubles electricity tariffs or quadruples train fares, you will have profitable enterprises with plenty of funds to reinvest. A third case is where a buyer runs an enterprise to the ground and dumps the wreckage back on the state.

UK experiences

Privatisation of the Central Electricity Generating Board (CEGB) in UK was an example of the first type. British Railways (BR) and construction giant Carillion are doleful examples of the third model under Thatcher-New Labour neo-liberalism. The CEGB, epitome of professionalism, planning and research, was doomed by the "rush for gas" when oil was found in the North Sea. Neo-liberalism (Thatcherism) saw a golden opportunity to make a killing and forced a break-up of generation first; transmission and distribution were spun off into separate companies later. Suffice it to say that this has led to no efficiency gains, no fall in prices apart from fluctuations attributable to gas prices, no research and nothing useful in dispatch management. The consumer pricing system is a nightmare. Jeremy Corbyn has vowed to renationalise electricity supply when the Theresa May government falls and Labour takes office. So, privatisation will be followed by re-nationalisation!

Privatisation of British Rail has turned into catastrophe. BR was formed in 1947, in the spring of Attlee-Labour, by nationalising four great railways (LNER of Flying Scotsman fame, LMS, GWR and SR). Privatisation (1994) can only be described as neo-liberal madness. BR was split into twenty-five passenger train operating companies and six freight operating companies – but the insanity doesn’t end there. A private company called Railtrack took ownership of railway lines, signalling and stations. Railtrack franchised-out 2,500 railway stations and subcontracted track maintenance and signalling. Train companies paid for use of track and station. Quality of service plummeted, delays proliferated, accidents increased, all due to the mule headed system. In desperation the government created an organisation called Network Rail under court orders; in effect Railtrack was renationalised.

BR was good, though not in the same class as the Chinese railway system, France’s famed SNCF, Swiss Federal Railways – all state owned - or Germany’s public-private Deutsche Bahn. But dear god it ran a decent railway. There is public outrage now and Corbyn has vowed to renationalise the entire railway system as soon as Labour comes to power, which now seems a certainty.

Carrying neo-liberalism to ridiculous lengths has backfired in another sector, outsourcing. This is a popular, and on the whole a useful practice, since small operators and individuals can do a one-off job efficiently and cheaply. When your wife hires a small contractor to tear down and redo the kitchen, you may cuss and swear, but it’s outsourcing. When governments and companies outsource to cut employment, it may lead to complications. US telecom operators are pulling back call-centre spin-off to Asia due to customer dissatisfaction. E-commerce outfits outsource distribution and delivery but, often, as in the case of Alibaba, it leads to chaos.

A recent giant scale disaster is Carillion PLC, a huge construction and enterprise management outfit executing contracts in UK, Ireland, USA and Canada. The Financial Times on Jan.15, 2018 says: "Papers seen by FT show the insolvent construction company owes more than £1.3bn to banks, including £790m revolving credit and £349m private placement notes. It also had £630m bonding facilities and £350m invoice finance, taking the total exposure to above £2bn". The Conservative government, hostile to National Health, and besotted with private enterprises like Ranil and Mangala, outsourced hospital management to Carillion. Now all hell has broken loose. Carillion also manages courts, schools, government infrastructure and is the biggest manager of military bases for the MoD. The jobs of 43,000 employees are at risk; hundreds of subcontractors and small businesses, owed money, will go under as Carillion flops. (Mis)managed hospitals, courts of law, schools and defence bases will falter.

CEB and SL railways

I am leading up to the possibility of this government privatising the CEB and the railways. The CEB can benefit from restructuring but privatisation will be an unmitigated disaster.

The railways are a mess and need to be taken by the scruff of the neck and shaken. Capital from private or foreign-government (Chinese or Indian) sources needs to be injected, brain-dead old-timers should be shown the door. However, privatisation should not be considered in the light of experience elsewhere.

Chaos in electricity generation planning - potential power cuts stare us in the face - is the fault of government and the intellectually challenged, politically pressured, Public Utilities Commission. The mess is not a creation of the CEB which has kept its head above water and adapted/updated its plans as conditions evolve. I was impressed by a presentation "Present Status of the Power System" by Buddhika Samarasekera and Wijekoon Banda at the Institution of Engineers (SL) on Jan. 16. Three things are worthy of mention; the authors took a holistic system-wide approach to power system expansion planning instead of banging on about irritants and controversies, second it was clear that the CEB is quick to update its plans in response to global price, technology and renewable trends (solar and wind advances, LNG-coal relative price swings). Thirdly, the presenters were sensitive to enhancing the role of renewables; 100 MW of wind power is in place or under construction and ambitious solar parks are on the drawing board.

This shows that, by and large, the CEB is a healthy and forward-looking organisation. Recall the old American adage: "If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it", so it may be useful to consider restructuring, only in regional redistribution, for now. Instead of a monolithic (generation-transmission-distribution) corporate entity, maybe it would be better to loosen up and let regional distribution have autonomy; coupled at arms-length, or freely floated. What can we learn from the LECO experience?

The railways cannot be described as healthy or forward-looking. Management is as near death as the dilapidated trains. Here is what tourist says on a web-site "Sri Lankan trains are crap just like the rest of their country. Due to weight restriction per axle, bad state of tracks and speed restrictions there is very poor service. The tracks are unable to handle the tractive force of many locomotives. Due to the general low technology in Ceylon, the M2 and M4 locomotives of the 1950s and 60s have done well through maintenance. The high technology M9 locomotives on the other hand have not fared well at all".

Dr. Prianka Seneviratne pointed out in a recent lecture that infrastructure resource utilisation in Sri Lanka railways is abysmal. He shows that it is a crappy waste of money and opportunity. A video put on You Tube by Barry Esteben comparing Sri Lankan and Indian railways is depressing:

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XDXKHL_bwY).

I add a personal note. On a recent visit to Jaffna I discovered that ONLY four passenger trains ply in each direction per day, and no goods trains at all, pass through the station. The entire Vavuniya to KKS sector carries only this amount of traffic. There are over a dozen stations staffed by maybe five hundred personnel (three shifts). If we including maintenance and engineering costs I reckon the public purse is burdened to the tune of Rs 500 million a year on this bit of railroad junk. Ask staff at Jaffna station "why no better utilisation and more passenger and freight trains?" (there is a big demand; trains are crowded, bookings are hard to make) and all you get is a shrug of the shoulders.

Is privatisation the answer? No, it is not; privatisation will achieve nothing because no private investor will buy and build a basic infrastructure enterprise for the sake of the public good. Yes, huge investment, probably syndicated with Indian Railways which is currently undergoing a massive ($6.6 billion) refurbishment, is essential. The simple lesson is that public goods and critical infrastructure should never be privatised. Huge investment in track, signalling, motive-power and rolling stock in the main system is essential and without a new suburban railway, gridlock in Colombo and its suburbs will reach standstill soon. All this envisages investment in the region of $1 billion. Well?

Bigotry sends wrong signals

Lanka is at the early-middle modernisation stage; energy and transport are critical. Cultural and intellectual obscurantism is an impediment to modernisation, but President Maithripala Sirisena is a bigot who revealed his mindset by banning liquor sales and jobs in service facilities to women. Backward, dishonest, hypocritical! Is it women who get stoned, perpetrate domestic violence and beat up husbands? Is it women in the President’s home town, Polonnaruwa or wherever, who get pissed out of their minds and create a fracas on the streets? Let’s show this joker around Sri Lanka and welcome him to the real world. The Health Minister is an even shoddier fraud: "It’s against Buddhist ethics and our culture!" Those who bury their heads in counterfeit culture are humbugs; nor will the economies of such countries improve.

Uva Chief’s Bail-Out Ceremony: Monks Of The Lumpenproletariat

By Shyamon Jayasinghe –January 28, 2018

It is reported that this chief hasn’t passed beyond  standard three in school. He is now Minister in charge of education in addition to being Chief. It is also stated that he was seen those days selling wade at the station.

Profile of the Chief

Have you seen the video  going round showing the Chief Minister of Uva, Chamara Sampath Dassanayake, getting bail over the police charge of his having ordered a principal of a school in his area to kneel before him? This ugly episode had been an occurrence during the era of the Rajapaksas where those in power had an easy ride with knavery. Remember how Dr Mervyn tied a poor  government official onto a tree during those days that many want to bring back? The Uva Chief is about to get his desserts after three years of Yahapalanaya. We have good reason to doubt his escaping justice from our liberated judiciary. Let us wait in hope!

It is reported that this chief hasn’t passed beyond  standard three in school. He is now Minister in charge of education in addition to being Chief. It is also stated that he was seen those days selling wade at the station

Celebration for What?

In the meantime, let us study the video and try to discern the manifest and latent expressions and implications in that. The first thing that hits my eyes, is the presence of a large crowd to “felicitate” the occasion. Does anyone anywhere in the world celebrate being released on bail? Or does this ignorant chappie think that bailing out is the equivalent to being discharged  upon not being found guilty?

I am sure the crowd is too intimidating to the poor principal who was the subject of the Uva Chief’s puerile exercise of power. The principal must be quite nervous and would have given anything to avoid the embarrassment and the potential threat to him in a  broadcast of the video.

Crowd

Can you imagine how a large crowd like this could be mobilised to back the Chief? Rural villagers consider schools as  sacred institutions and teachers as even more sacred than the institution. Are these old and outdated values today? It is a serious social problem in that case. Can an ignorant, corrupt and abusive political chief override that culture? In Sri Lanka, yes.  In India, the politician would have been assaulted. That is the difference in the Thrice Blessed Country!

The quality of this politician is there for all to see. He represents the standard Parliamentary material Sri Lanka has today. Empty-headed thugs unexposed to basic education.

Did the crowds gather at the scene because they shared the negation of values by the Uva Boss? I doubt. Although reluctant to agitate, the ordinary villager will frown at these incidents and hold their hands against their cheeks in shock or despair. Those who are coaxed to gather like these are the corrupt in the villagers and the town. This is the lumpenproletariat that Marxists speak of.In the original German, the term stands for “rabble proletariat.” According to Karl Marx in The Communist Manifesto, these form the lowest stratum of the industrial working class, including also such undesirables as tramps and criminals. These elements are also in towns and villages. By nature, these fellows like to take risks.

Australia Example

The problem in our villages is that well- meaning populations don’t want to come out in protest. Herein also lies the  fertile ground for the success of rogue politicians. Some kind of awakening and mobilisation of villages must happen if our country is to keep the political crooks out of their game.

It is all different here, in Australia, where it is easy to gather hundreds of people if something like an old and imposing tree is to be felled by authorities. The other day on Australia Day, thousands of Whites joined in the protest asking for a change in ‘Australia Day,’ as the present -day represents the day that the white settlers got hold of the land at New South Wales. Aborigines call this Invasion Day and a preponderant number of white young men and women joined in support of them. That is the beauty of social awareness!

Dilan

Going back to the Uva Chief, many more aspects cry for comment: Watch the man going about like a hero! Full of guts, pomp and confidence at a time he should be remorseful. Getting hold of a poorly paid but respectful guru or Disapamok! No, this idiot was swagging away left and right as if he was just appointed President of the country. Notice, too, that the artificially-haired Minister Dilan Perera who had lost the elections but managed to enter Parliament through the grace of President Sirisena, our new crusader or swordsman against corruption. This guy has an amazing way of dominating  others, even though carrying a weak profile. He wanted to share the glory! Watch the bloke grandstanding as though he is in charge. President Sirisena who has begun screaming against corruption should sack Dilan and the Chief together. Monks Chanting

Read More

One step forward Two steps backward women’s rights gender equality & alcohol

Mangala Samaraweera

by Rajeewa Jayaweera-January 27, 2018, 6:20 pm 

Finance and Mass Media Minister Mangala Samaraweera deserves full marks for taking the initiative to reform the archaic 1955 law prohibiting women from purchasing alcohol at a tavern and working in an establishment that manufactures and sells alcohol. He also deserves zero marks for the manner he went about amending the law resulting in the withdrawal of Gazette Extraordinary containing the Excise Notification No 3 of 2018 within a few days.

Since the advent of the Yahapalana government, it has been forced to retract its decisions on many occasions including budget proposals due to objections from some of their own, the unofficial opposition or various interest groups. Prevarication is necessarily a hallmark of a coalition government in the Wonder of Asia.

After three years in office, cabinet ministers are yet to learn, their proposals are best discussed, and consensus reached with the President, Prime Minister and cabinet of ministers, before implementation. Failure to do so often results in opposition from some cabinet members and the government having to back down under pressure with egg on its face - not the smartest of moves.

Returning to the issue at hand, this writer worked in the hotel industry for ten years in the 1980s and had since patronized hotels regularly. I must plead ignorance of the law prohibiting a female from purchasing alcohol at a hotel bar, the more sophisticated name for a tavern, and prohibition from working in an establishment manufacturing or selling liquor. It is not due to lack of observation powers, but because I have regularly observed female customers, foreign and local, sit in hotel bars and swimming pools and purchase alcoholic beverages. Furthermore, both alcoholic and non-alcoholic drinks are often served by waitresses (females). A recent web poll conducted by a leading newspaper resulted in an 85.1% negative awareness factor.

Thanks to Minister Samaraweera’s modus operandi of implementation without consultation followed by retraction under pressure, a dormant law, mostly observed in the breach, has taken center stage with the distinct possibility of serious consequences.

Should politically motivated hotel union employees decide to abide by the law which most of them like this writer were unaware of until last week, the government would be compelled to make some hard choices. It would have to inform tourists of the inability for female tourists to purchase alcoholic beverages at hotels and kiss goodbye to its ambitious tourist arrival targets. It would also have to prohibit females from working in hotel bars and restaurants resulting in at least some job losses or else withdraw the ban.

As ridiculous as it may sound, the excise notification does not prohibit the purchase of alcohol by females in supermarkets as no consumption takes place!

There are other more critical issues such as infringement on fundamental rights of women, equality before the law and gender-based discrimination. The Yahapalana government implemented regulations requiring 25% representation for women in local governments bodies, considered progressive and in sync with global trends. Retraction of Minister Samaraweera’s gazette notification which merely formalized what has been in practice in the breach for decades can by no means be termed progressive. It is regressive.

The issue of extended hours of taverns is as nonsensical as closing them on Poya Days resulting in liquor sales on the previous day skyrocketing. No tippler forgoes his tot due to the Poya Day ban. Similarly, consumers of alcohol will consume their hearts content irrespective of closing time. Some years ago, UK stipulated closing times for Pubs. A gong would be rung 15 minutes before closing time announcing; ‘Drink up gentlemen, last orders please’ which resulted in customers purchasing not one but two or three beers. Pubs never closed until customers had consumed all they had purchased.

The justification for revocation of Minister Samaraweera’s Gazette was: it was against the nation’s cultural and Buddhist values. President Sirisena and his band of opportunists in the cabinet objecting to the Gazette need give serious thought, how does one reconcile the recent altercation in Parliament on January 10 to the grating rendition of ‘Hora, Hora’ with Sri Lanka’s cultural and Buddhist values.

A weak Speaker, despite his assertion, the incident may have been a planned event has failed to assert his authority and take the culprits to task. Is it so difficult to identify the first ten MPs to enter the parliament well, using CCTV footage and mete out the maximum punishment permitted under standing orders? Or else, will he allow culprits to go unpunished in the same manner unruly parliamentarians have escaped punishment in the past?

About politicians, two leading female politicians, namely the former lady President and current Colombo Mayoral candidate are known to imbibe the occasional glass of wine. They have, in the past, campaigned for women’s rights and gender equality. Their silence indicates a sudden change of heart. Ideals would appear to have been dumped in favor of political expediency.

Some female candidates including at least one from the celluloid industry contesting the forthcoming local government elections have voiced their support for the ban in the media. What they fail to understand is: this is not a matter of alcohol. It is a matter of women’s rights and gender equality, guaranteed in the constitution. Such is the caliber of those aspiring to be future parliamentarians.

Let all Colombo voters insist, the Mayoral candidate and all others seeking their vote take a stand and publicly state if each of them endorses Samaraweera’s original gazette thus upholding the rights and equality of women or the subsequent gazette as directed by President Sirisena which downgrades the rights and equality of women. Feminist movements should mobilize their membership to advise all voters, male and female, to make their vote dependent on the reintroduction of the Finance Minister’s original gazette. That is the only option left for women to win their rights and gender equality, guaranteed in the constitution.

Gutless leaders in both the executive and legislative branches of government prone to making politically expedient decisions regardless of consequences need be made to do the right thing. The threat of an anti-UNP and SLFP (Maithri wing) vote might have the desired effect.

Alternatively, is the government awaiting a diktat from USA, European Union or UNHRC as observed on such issues since January 2015?

Meanwhile, all kudos to the women who have taken the matter to the Supreme Court.

One can only hope, the judiciary, the third arm of government, will put matters right keeping in line with current progressive trends around the globe and defeat the politically expedient culture vultures in other branches of government.

Let us reverse this post-independence trend of taking one step forward two steps backward.

Japan says some Ceylon tea are not up to required standards

2018-01-27

Japanese authorities have informed Sri Lanka that some of the Ceylon tea exports to that country are not up to the required standards because of the presence of a chemical component, Plantation Industries Minister Navin Dissanayake said.

He said the issue was discussed at the highest level and that the Sri Lanka Tea Board Chairman was also scheduled to leave for Japan at the end of this month.

“They have not issued any warnings but they have said that some of our teas that are coming to Japan are not meeting the standards. There is a particular chemical component (MCPA) in tea and that is over and above the standards they have set. Our tea exports are up to the standards set by the European market. Now the Japanese standard is much higher than the European standard. The chemical level found in some exports is higher than accepted by the Japanese,” the minister said.

He said Sri Lanka had asked Japan for ‘some time' to resolve this issue.

“What we are requesting them is to give us some time, about six months. We can adapt our procedures and introduce a new chemical that they can accept within the given timeframe so that this problem will be resolved,” the minister said.

He said the chemical levels in tea have increased with the use of weedicides introduced as an alternative for Glyphosate.

“We have told the companies not to use this alternative. We have to have a better weedicide. If Glyposate was not banned, we wouldn’t be having this issue,” he said. (Lahiru Pothmulla)

Money laundering: Sri Lanka listed among ‘high risk’ countries

Civil Society activist Chandra Jayaratne this week wrote to Presidential Secretary, Austin Fernando warning that there was a risk of Sri Lanka being further downgraded from a ‘light grey’ area classification to ‘dark grey’ after the next FATF country review.

( January 28, 2018, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) The inter-governmental Financial Action Task Force (FATF) has listed Sri Lanka among eleven ‘high risk and monitored jurisdictions’ that have taken insufficient measures to combat money laundering, terrorist financing and other threats to the international financial system. The other countries are Bosnia and Herzegovina, North Korea, Ethiopia, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Vanuatu and Yemen. The list is published on the website of FATF.

The FATF sets standards and promotes implementation of legal, regulatory and operations measures for combating money laundering terrorist financing and related threats to the integrity of the international financial system. It monitors countries’ progress in implementing its recommendations; reviews money laundering and terrorist financing techniques and counter-measures; and, promotes the adoption and implementation of the FATF Recommendations globally.

In October 2017, Sri Lanka made a high-level political commitment to work with the FATF and the Asia/Pacific Group on Money Laundering (APG) to strengthen the effectiveness of its anti money laundering and counter-financing of terrorism regime and to address any technical deficiencies. The Central Bank’s Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) aspires to implement some 40 recommendations encapsulated in an action plan by the end of 2018, an official source said. He said there had been a “lack of interest” in the past but that Sri Lanka is now invested in fulfilling its commitments. Other agencies of the Government must also play their part.

Among other things, Sri Lanka has promised to amend the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act to ensure cooperation may be provided on the basis of reciprocity; to issue a revised Trust Ordinance and demonstrate that implementation has begun; and to establish a Counter Threat Finance and Sanctions (TFS) regime to implement the relevant UN Security Council Regulations related to Iran and North Korea.

Civil Society activist Chandra Jayaratne this week wrote to Presidential Secretary, Austin Fernando warning that there was a risk of Sri Lanka being further downgraded from a ‘light grey’ area classification to ‘dark grey’ after the next FATF country review. He called for early action to ensure that serious violations of FATF recommendations and misuse of or engaging in irregular and unauthorised foreign exchange transactions were made a predicate offence under the money laundering legislation.

Mr Jayaratne has also recommended the creation by statue of a Serious Frauds Office and an Independent Public Prosecutor and the enactment of a standalone Proceeds of Crime Act, among other measures.

Courtesy: Sunday Times, Colombo

Sri Lanka, Australia Day & Australian Values

By Lionel Bopage –January 26, 2018

A national day such as Australia Day needs to reflect upon their ideal social and moral values and contribute to educating the younger generations to appreciate and adhere to those ideals. It should be a day where those people could feel that the country belongs to them and their future generations; and in doing so to a feel being united and reconciled with each other. This poses a conceptual question. If a country had been subjected to colonial rule after armed subjugation and suppression, could the people of that country feel free with a sense of belonging and united, if the day of that subjugation of their country is being celebrated as the national day? Let us take an example close to our hearts.

Sri Lanka was a Portuguese colony since 1505, next a Dutch colony from 1640, and then a British colony in 1815. Would it be palatable for any of us, particularly those living in Sri Lanka, if they were asked to celebrate their national day on one of those days knowing that they had been subjugated on that day? Or would we want to celebrate the 10 March 1815, the day the Kandyan Convention was signed as the national day? I believe, the answer is a definite and resounding “no”, because the people wouldn’t feel free, united or reconciled. Yet, this could be done by compulsion and repression? Even now, questions are being raised in Sri Lanka about the 4th of February 1948 being celebrated as its National Day of Independence. This is because some feel that complete independence was achieved only in 1972 with the new constitution proclaiming the country a republic. Still there are others, particularly those of Tamil community concerned about the genuineness of such a proposal, as they feel that the very same constitution did stipulate them to be secondary citizens. Despite the fact that February 4th does not identify with any of the known days of colonial subjugation, the day continues to be a controversial subject.

The Australian values are conceptualised as inherent in the Australian way of life. Among those values are respect, dignity, individual freedom; freedom of speech, association and religion; secular government; parliamentary democracy, the rule of law and equality under the law; merit-based equality of opportunity; a discrimination free environment regardless of race, religion, ethnicity, or gender; and a spirit of egalitarianism that embraces mutual respect, tolerance, fair play and compassion for those in need. These values are not a constant in the sense that some of those values are being degraded at the behest of vested parties.

 

For many of us, (i.e. expatriates) who have migrated from diverse lands, nations and nationalities as professionals or asylum seekers, Australia and its peoples have offered us better freedoms, better opportunities and better equitable conditions than those in the countries from where we have come. To many of us this provides the feeling of better times of our lives and a better future, despite Australia’s political system failing to deal with the deteriorating living standards of the people. So, no wonder, when “almost 80 per cent of new migrants and refugees and 70 per cent of the population in general believe January 26 is their national day which makes them feel more welcome in the new country.

Nevertheless, most of them apparently are not aware of the significance of January 26 as the date the First Fleet of British ships landed at Sydney Cove in 1788 and the ongoing controversy about that day being celebrated as Australia Day. The conversion of January 26, the day of arrival in Australia of colonialism to the Australia Day appears to be only a recent phenomenon. Australia Day was not considered a sacred day to be celebrated on January 26. It only became important prior to the Bicentenary celebrations in 1988. This used to be a holiday that celebrated the foundation of Sydney. Australia Day has only been celebrated on January 26 since 1994.

Captain Arthur Phillip sailed the First British Fleet into Botany Bay in New South Wales (NSW) on January 26 in 1788. So, in NSW, January 26 was referred to as First Landing Day and in 1818, it was declared a public holiday. In 1988, all state and territory governments agreed to call this day, the Australia Day. The same year, the First People of Australia renamed this day as the Invasion Day. On January 26 1994, the official celebration of Australia Day began under Prime Minister Paul Keating of the Australian Labour Party (ALP). Since then, nationalism has surged in an extraordinary fashion, particularly since the time of Prime Minister John Howard of the Liberal National Party (LNP). Both the LNP and the ALP wish to stick to January 26 as the Australia Day on the grounds that this day is for all Australians. Despite this political impasse, the First Nations have continued to fight for recognition, respect and their rights.

Nationalism has been on the rise the world over in the form of patriotism parallel to the rising opposition to the socio-economic and cultural problems the neo-liberal phase of capitalist development has caused. With nationalism being increasingly used to cover up the neo-liberal economic project working for the benefit of the top end of society, the campaign for globalisation and against multiculturalism and refugees began in earnest during this period. With September 11 terror attacks, the US and Australia started developing ever more closer ties as the nationalist and neo-liberal rhetoric emanating from both countries closely resonated with each other. This nationalism has nothing to do with championing for a higher human cause in the form of peoples’ freedom, social justice and protection of human and democratic rights.

Australia comprises of a spectrum of cultures representing more than 200 languages and dialects including 45 indigenous languages with English as its national language. More importantly, Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islander peoples (the First Nations) are an important part of Australia’s history, culture and national identity. They were the first inhabitants of Australia and have lived here for up to 60 000 years. The First Nations have their own unique beliefs, traditions and reverence of the land depending on where they lived. They have made valuable contributions including in the spheres of the arts, media, business and sport. So, in such a multicultural country, a national day such as Australia Day should be a day that all Australians can be proud of and celebrate together as a united and strong nation. However, for some of us migrants including those of Anglo-Saxion origins, this feeling may not be mutual. So, Australia Day can be hardly said to be a celebration for everyone resident in Australia.

 

Read More

A question of ethics

"In matters of conscience the law of the majority has no place"
- Mahatma Gandhi

Morality in political
decision making

Gnana Moonesinghe-January 27, 2018, 6:12 pm 

Contrary to the above quote the law of the majority is all that matters in the Sri Lankan political culture. It is shrouded with appeals to the majority among the voter base, pampering their whims, shaping public opinion to acquiesce to the strategies put forward by politicians for their success. Success is measured by culling the vote base of a majority of individuals regardless of the morality of the issues concerned. Provision is not made any longer for a conscience vote in the constitution. Conscience driven choice is no longer an objective in a society encouraged to live bereft of ethics. Politics in Sri Lanka is therefore one of expediency, it relates to benefits and the advancement of the politician and the political party they belong to. There is no reference to any code of morality beneficial to society.

Value based decisions are not considered necessary or practical if it does not carry the majority with it. Moral values do prevail among large sections of the people influenced as they are by their respective religions. However what people think privately, if it be morally correct or not, is not relevant to politicians. All that matters is to have the thinking of the public to coincide with theirs. Such is the political environment within which politicians have shaped their past and continue to shape the present and the future. All politicians come within this barometer and changing one lot for the other does not make a significant difference.

Coalition between the

Sirisena SLFP and the UNP

Yet hope springs eternal. There remains hope that changing politicians through elections can make a difference at least for a while. It is with this belief that the 2015 coalition was secretly and skillfully put together. As is well known a section of the SLFP broke away from the main party and aligned with their traditional bête noir, the United National Party.

The raison d’etre for the two parties to get together was to change the national profile which was defaced under the then existing government. Charges of widespread corruption, overall lawlessness, personal insecurity, a captive media, and creeping authoritarianism made effective through the instrumentality of the Executive President worked out through an oligarchy composed of family, relatives and friends. A powerless citizenry was compelled to be onlookers fearful of the breach of their personal and family security by goons attached to important personalities in the government and others closely connected to the powers that be.

It was a dark period and people stood divided as well. However, persons associated with the government were insulated from the aggressive reach of the then government; others stood silent in fear wanting to be ‘neither victims nor executioners’ (Albert Camus)

Lack of 2/3 majority

handicaps coalition

The present government is slow in putting into effect much of the promises to the people preoccupied as they were and are to have the majority back their policy decisions. Sadly, those who came to make the changes fell into the same trap much too soon. Perhaps the lack of a 2/3 majority in parliament aggravated the situation and made the present power elites to get sidetracked from the straight and narrow path they had promised the people. The trust placed on this government too remains questionable. Considerations to gain support of the majority remains the reality. Morality is once again put on the backburner and opportunism appears to be the winner.

To make up for the lack of a 2/3 majority this government should have demonstrated the moral strength of its convictions which was how they defeated the strong government of their predecessor. A show of a strong government, a government with promise would have been sufficient to win the public over and have those sitting on the fence to jump over to join the government. For want of numbers the coalition showed its weakness in having to be dependent on its opponents for support, the selfsame people against whom they carried a successful campaign and won the support to form a government.

One of the very first acts that sacrificed ethics for friendship was the enabling of defeated candidates to enter parliament through the national list contrary to choices the people had made at the elections. This is a grave violation of the franchise rights of the people. Coming close on these footsteps was the appointment of a foreign citizen as Governor of the Central Bank. This became a serious misstep when the bond scam surface and the accused and the Governor are seen to have a close relationship revealing an obvious conflict of interest, certainly unethical.

The 19th Amendment was introduced to terminate the institution of the executive presidency, seen as the source of injustice. But those who gave support to make the 2/3rd majority in parliament were keen to retain this institution having been the main exploiters of the institution under the former regime. Therefore the Executive Presidency was retained but with reduced powers. The tenure of office of the President was reduced from six to five years and the two term limit reintroduced; and the threat of dissolution of parliament after the first year that put severe strain on stability was changed and substituted with the clause - not before the expiration of four years. The number of cabinet ministers was reduced to 30 which had since been violated to accommodate the horse trading in membership drive to join the government to add up to the numbers in parliament.

Attempts to breakup

thecoalition

Attempts to unite the divided SLFP, the Maitripala Sirisena faction and the Rajapaksa faction has been touted for quite some time. Why would anyone want to unite with the man they had dubbed ‘traitor’ unless the secret motive is to weaken him and make him a ‘has been’. What indeed can be the moral base for such a move? A demand of the Rajapaksa supporters is for the Sirisena group to break away from the UNP, their coalition partner to build the dream of a united SLFP. At what cost and for whose benefit will this be executed? This sends wrong signals to the public. One, that the President is not loyal to those who gave him a helping hand in his hour of need and two, that the newly elected coalition government is weak and troubled with contradictions. The request to make a break with UNP maybe to ensure SLFP victory, isolate the president and banish him into political wilderness. The former President and his men cannot be expected to forget or forgive the fact that Maitripala Sirisena broke away from the party and was successful in defeating them.

On the other hand constant suggestions of abandoning the UNP will create instability in the government and within the country. The present and future becomes bleak and hopeless; suspicion, mistrust and cracks begin to surface between the partners slowing implementation of strategies making them unpopular with their supporters for not fulfilling their pledges.

Demands made or suggested for negotiations appear equally reprehensible. One of the demands is for all electoral organizers of the former President to be reinstated. What do they expect to do with those already nominated by the coalition partners and working already on the field? The other demand was that in the event the former president cannot be appointed PM, he should be made Leader of the Opposition ‘as leader of the numerically largest group in the opposition’.(island Nov 27, 2017) Fulfilling these conditions will be to deny the reality of the coalition wherein Ranil Wickremesinghe was installed as PM on the election pledge to the country to appoint him PM if the coalition wins the elections. Again removing the ‘symbol’ of national unity with the former President who is not perceived as a friend of the minorities would wreck what is left of the mood for reconciliation. As it is there are complaints of a slack in the government’s progress towards the reconciliation process. This situation calls for diffusion and not aggravation. The individuals agitating for rebuilding bridges between the two factions of the SLFP have only their personal interest in mind and not that of the nation. This is an obvious attempt at currying favour with the former President.

Today this country has a leader of the opposition from the minority and he along with his party are participating as an integral unit in the governance within this country. What would be the constructive path for healthy peace building?

The moral base for continuance of this government gets a little nod as a result of some very significant achievements: The most important are the fact that considerable media freedom is ensured; so it is with personal security, and to some extent improvement in inter racial relations. It is an accepted position that for the first time the government has unequivocally stated that to have national development national unity is essential. This is a positive signal given to the country.

Moral Agenda of the

Coalition government

The horror over the extent of corruption during the previous regime and consequently its moral bankruptcy was the main agenda during the elections. But within the three years since the coalition came to power no important political personality had been charged or committed apparently for want of hard evidence. Was the corruption story a fabrication or are there other reasons why no culprit had been netted so far? Alarmingly the present government too had come under a cloud of suspicion, for there is talk of bribery and corruption in the present government as well. Three Ministers have been compelled to resign within the three years of this government’s duration. After a short lapse in time one of the Ministers who resigned has been reappointed as Minister once again. The logic behind the reappointment is unclear. What kind of ethical code can guide people in high profile to reappoint a minister who had resigned and his resignation accepted?

Indecisiveness in

decision making

Imminent local elections and the greed for permanence in their political positions have brought a slack in decision making. No one wants to alienate one section or other of the people. Such contemplations have shown up the government as an indecisive one. For instance hate speeches that create disharmony and violence had gone by unchecked while the fallout arising out of such actions by anti-social elements had created unrest and hostility among ethnic communities. Even so the government has shown reluctance to legislate against hate speech.

Again regarding the SAITM matter the government took a long time to come to a decision and sadly the matter was allowed to escalate so much it became as though it was a confrontation between two equal partners, the government and the GMOA. It went from bad to worse when the GMOA began to make demands from the government on matters outside their professional purview.

Similarly confrontation has snowballed with the Sangha because this government did not commit themselves on various issues that came up from time to time for fear that their utterances might be taken advantage by the former president and his supporters which would help him to take a lead in electoral politics. The various confrontational voices make the government appear to be weak. The Sangha too as can be seen from the news reaching us has shown interest to protest on a variety of issues best left to politicians and law makers to work on.

If policies are decided upon, committed and implemented with determination and conviction, the government will be appreciated by the people. A strong government calls for respect as long as it acts responsibly and not become a bully.

Need for value based decisions

Being guided by value judgment is something all governments should adopt instead of pursuing the Machiavellian approach to governance. Moral judgments will keep a government out of mischief and on the rails on which it must travel. Pronouncements made on the merit of the issue concerned without other extraneous considerations will be a laudable approach. This will bring about a value based governance process possible.