By Shamindra Ferdinando

Senior lecturer in economics and head of the IT Department at the University of Colombo, Professor Priyanga Dunusinghe, recently declared that the new National People’s Power (NPP) administration had neither a clear economic policy nor a tangible action plan to address the plethora of serious issues facing the nation.

Prof. Dunusinghe warned of dire consequences unless the government took meaningful measures to overcome the challenges.

Appearing on Derana, the outspoken academic claimed that the investors and the public were in the dark as to the overall government economic policy. Asserting that the NPP government now primarily addressed the day-to-day issues, Prof. Dunusinghe alleged that economic reforms required to stabilize, consolidate and strengthen the economy weren’t being implemented. Therefore, the government seemed to be already late in that regard.

Obviously Prof. Dunusinghe summed up the situation on the economic front quite accurately. The academic seemed to have contradicted former President and UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe who had both publicly and privately applauded President Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s economic policy recently. It could be a case of him wanting to appease NPP as he, too, has many a skeleton in his cupboard, like the bond scams or the precipitating of the ongoing debt crisis by borrowing as much as USD 12 billion from the international bond market, at high interest, without having achieved anything tangible to show with such high borrowings, all during the Yahapalana rule or misrule.

Readers should always remember Mahinda Rajapaksa and his team fought a debilitating war to a finish against the world’s most ruthless terrorist outfit, the LTTE, and defeated it against the predictions of all types of pundits, while at the same time kept the economy humming and completed some impressive infrastructure projects, like building a brand new international harbour and an airport, among so many other achievements. Need we say more?

No doubt there were some utter mistakes that can be directly attributed to some of his close relatives he had around him, but Mahinda never betrayed the country. For that matter, who is infallible in this world? The bottom line reveals only one thing that is, he was the best leader to pull the country out of the rut we were in at the time.

President Dissanayake also holds the Finance portfolio, in addition to Defence. In terms of the Economic Transformation Bill, approved by Parliament on July 25, 2024, without a vote, the NPP government has no option but to adhere to the Act. Prof. Anil Jayantha Fernando is the Deputy Finance Minister.

The agreement with the IMF, negotiated by Wickremesinghe and accepted by Dissanayake, in his capacity as the President, is the basis for the controversial Act. In spite of attacking the Economic Transformation Bill, the then Opposition conveniently refrained from seeking a vote on the Bill.

Prof. Dunusinghe has been always forthright in his criticism of questionable economic matters, regardless of who wielded the political power. The government should take such criticism seriously as the overall situation remained volatile though the parliamentary Opposition seems wholly inadequate and indifferent to the challenges ahead.

The pathetic and shoddy handling of severe shortage of rice in the open market badly exposed the government. What really surprised the hapless public is the NPP’s thinking the ‘Rice Mafia’ can be reined in by the issuance of gazettes. The NPP basically repeated President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s strategy by declaring price controls on essential commodities, like rice, by issuing gazettes. The NPP placed Nadu, Samba and Keeri Samba at Rs 230, Rs 240 and Rs 260 respectively a couple of weeks ago, following talks with rice millers, but it didn’t make any difference.

During the debate over the failed bid to control the private sector running the show, as it pleases, it was revealed that one of the biggest rice dealers in the country and identified as one of those who had been accused of earning unconscionable profits at the expense of the suffering people is on the National List of the SJB though he didn’t get an opportunity to enter Parliament this time. How did he end up in the SJB National List?

The NPP appeared to be making the often repeated mistake committed by previous governments in believing in the strength of their parliamentary group. In the face of public anger caused by wrong decisions, very often even such monolithic parliamentary groups crumble under pressure. The NPP wouldn’t be an exception unless it quickly realized and addressed the shortcomings.

Real challenge outside Parliament

The situation in Parliament is deceiving. It may give the NPP a somewhat false sense of security. Having handsomely won the presidential election in Sept, 2024 by polling 5.7 mn votes, though he couldn’t obtain 50% plus 1 vote, Anura Kumara Dissanayake consolidated the NPP’s position with a staggering 2/3 majority at the parliamentary election in Nov, 2024.

The NPP increased its tally to 6.8 mn votes from 5.7 mn polled at the presidential. Both the executive and the legislature are in the NPP’s hands. The main Opposition Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) has been reduced to just 40 seats against the NPP’s 159 and down to just 1.9 mn votes at the parliamentary election. The SJB performance is nothing but pathetic.

The dismal results at the national elections had made the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) that obtained a staggering 145 seats at the 2020 general election irrelevant with their tally reduced to just three seats in the current Parliament.

But, the NPP cannot be lulled into a false sense of security, under any circumstances, as the real challenge is not the Opposition but the promises made by the party to the masses for a system change in the run-up to the presidential and parliamentary elections. That is the undeniable truth. Having come to power as an all-knowing lot, the NPP leadership will have to answer for developments, come what may.

The recent declaration that those earning a monthly salary up to Rs. 150,000 would be exempted from the PAYE (Pay As You Earn) tax to please professionals and at the same time announced the increasing of the withholding tax on fixed deposit interest to 10 percent from 5 percent, thereby hitting those living on already depleted interest incomes below the belt, underscored the crisis the country is in.

President Dissanayake, in his capacity as the Finance Minister, told Parliament on Dec. 18 that this was done in line with a fresh agreement reached with the IMF. In other words, in spite of the change of government and their severe criticism of Wickremesinghe’s policies, the NPP is also on the same track.

The bottom line is that Sri Lanka’s economic direction is firmly in the hands of the IMF and whatever the NPP leaders uttered to the contrary from election platforms to impress the public in the run up to national elections, the government will have to toe the IMF line when it presents a formal Budget in February for the next financial year.

An interim Budget/vote on account covering the first four months of 2025 was approved in Parliament on Dec. 06, 2024 without a vote, at the end of a two-day debate.

Deputy Finance Minister Fernando told Parliament that the delay in debt restructuring, over the last two years, had cost the country an additional USD 1.7 billion in accumulated interest.

Fernando is on record as having said: “We are hoping to complete the restructure of the bilateral debt and international sovereign bonds by December 31.”

The interim Budget would cover the cost of debt servicing and the government expenditure for the first four months of next year. The NPP government has assured the international community that it would continue to honour the international commitments on debt restructuring commenced by the predecessor Wickremesinghe’s government.

Ground realities

During the presidential election campaign followed by the general election, the NPP talked as if it could address issues that plagued Sri Lanka over the past decades. However, over three months after the presidential election, the public now realize that the NPP had no magic wand in its hand and some issues can never be settled.

Of course, some of those who exercised their franchise in support of the NPP at the two national elections are deeply worried and disappointed. But, the fact remains that those who exercised political power had been appropriately dealt with by the electorate and they wouldn’t be in a position to regain public confidence within a short period. That is the reality those who represent the SJB and NDF (National Democratic Front) had to contend with.

It would be pertinent to mention that two of the oldest political parties in the country, namely the UNP and the SLFP, are not even represented in the current Parliament. The UNP and SLFP leaderships are baffled, but that wouldn’t make things easy for the NPP, regardless of its numerical unconquerable position in Parliament. So did the previous Gotabaya Rajapaksa government that was ousted by violent street protests, most probably staged managed from abroad.

Let me briefly discuss the huge challenge faced by Sri Lanka in dealing with large scale poaching carried out relentlessly by the Tamil Nadu fishing fleet in addition to them destroying fish stocks here by bottom trawling. The joint statement issued following talks between President Dissanayake and Indian Premier Narendra Modi quiet clearly indicated that New Delhi wants Sri Lanka to turn a blind eye to the ongoing rape of fishery resources belonging to the people here.

President Dissanayake raised the massive destruction caused by bottom trawling practised by the Tamil Nadu fishing fleet but the joint statement and the comments made by the Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri on this issue at a special briefing indicated in no uncertain terms that India wouldn’t under any circumstances take necessary measures to prevent Tamil Nadu fishing fleet crossing Indo-Lanka maritime boundary.

India seemed to be hell-bent on allowing destructive fishing practices in Sri Lankan waters though it doesn’t allow the same in their territory.

India often emphasises the responsibility on the part of all concerned to deal with poachers in a humanitarian manner. The joint statement went a step further. Referring to the talks, Premier Modi had with President Dissanayake on Dec 16, 2024, the joint statement declared the two leaders ‘underscored the need to take measures to avoid any aggressive behaviour or violence. Would it be fair to pressure Sri Lanka, now beholden to New Delhi for swift economic assistance provided during 2022 and 2023 crisis period, to allow poaching?

How could there be a mutually acceptable solution to the poaching issue when the Indo-Lanka maritime boundary is being violated almost on a daily basis? Although the joint statement referred to the matter at hand as fisheries issues it is nothing but poaching sanctioned by the centre in India.

The joint statement, however, gave the game away when it asserted that the issue should be dealt with taking into consideration, what it called, the special relationship between India and Sri Lanka.

Hats off to President Dissanayake for taking up two related issues at a joint media briefing addressed by him and Premier Modi. A statement issued by the Presidential Media Division (PMD) quoted the NPP and JVP leader as having said that he requested Premier Modi to take measures to stop bottom trawling that caused irreparable ecological damage and also curb illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing (IUU fishing). President Dissanayake also reminded them that bottom trawling is banned in both countries. The President took up the position, therefore tangible action should be taken to stop bottom trawling.

But Indian Foreign Secretary’s response to Sachin Vadoliya of UNI query on President Dissanayake’s request pertaining to bottom trawling and IUU fishing revealed that New Delhi had no intention of addressing the issues at hand. The Foreign Secretary conveniently interpreted President Dissanayake’s comments as meaning the Sri Lankan leader calling for the problem to be solved by both countries together.

The supreme irony is that India exploited the situation to its advantage. The ongoing bid to formalize poaching by the Tamil Nadu fishing fleet under the pretext of some bilateral agreement cannot be condoned under any circumstances.

While declaring New Delhi’s immediate readiness to finalize what Premier Modi called a Security Cooperation Agreement, Sri Lanka is being asked to allow rape of its fish resource. The Illankai Thamil Arasu Kadchi (ITAK), the largest Tamil political party that represented the Northern and Eastern regions remained unsure of its stand on the fisheries issue.

The ITAK must take a clear stand on this problem. But, the NPP, having secured the highest number of seats in the Northern and Eastern regions at the expense of the ITAK at the recently concluded general election, needs to represent the interests of the Tamil fishing community here.

Resumption of debt repayment

The primary challenge faced by President Dissanayake is nothing but preparing the economy over the next four years to restart paying the massive foreign debt owed by the country in 2028. The government’s capacity to meet this particular challenge should be examined taking into consideration Prof. Dunusinghe’s criticism of the NPP’s economic plans.

Sri Lanka, in April 2022, made a unilateral statement on stopping debt repayment. Regardless of promises made during the presidential and parliamentary poll campaigns, the NPP is slow in taking tangible measures to revive the sick economy. The absence of long queues at fuel and gas stations doesn’t mean Sri Lanka is out of the woods yet.

Unfortunately, the Opposition is waiting for problems created by previous administrations to overwhelm the NPP. Having declared that the NPP administration couldn’t last for not more than a couple of months, the Opposition realized that their only salvation is the NPP causing its own downfall.

Perhaps, the NPP should reveal its stand on accusations that the failure on the part of the Parliament to amend the Foreign Exchange Act No 12 of 2017 that allowed unscrupulous people to park billions of US dollars overseas.

Various politicians have given different figures in this regard. Then MP Gevindu Cumaratunga estimated the total amount parked abroad owing the lacuna in the Act at USD 36 billion. His colleagues Wimal Weerawansa and Vasudeva Nanayakkara, too, agreed with the figure declared by Cumaratunga.

Former Justice Minister Dr. Wijeyadasa Rajapakse, PC, estimated the amount of funds parked overseas to be over USD 50 billion. Interestingly, he was among those who voted for repealing the old Act that ensured that exporters brought back export proceeds within a stipulated time period.

The Yahapalana administration repealed the time-tested Exchange Control Act of 1954 at the behest of the then Premier Ranil Wickremesinghe who refrained from voting for it.

The NPP never addressed this issue during campaigning. The NPP also owes the country an explanation as to why the price of a litre of 92 Octane couldn’t be further reduced as during the campaign the then Power and Energy Minister Kanchana Wijesekera was repeatedly accused of taking kickbacks at the expense of consumers.

So far, a litre of Octane 92 has been reduced to Rs 309 from 311 by the NPP. The government has also earned the wrath of the public for putting off the stipulated electricity price revision at a time much of the electricity is generated by hydro power stations at low cost.

The government seems caught in a vortex of problems-ranging from never ending problems faced by the farmers to Indian and US pressure to extend the moratorium on foreign research vessels visiting Sri Lankan ports. The moratorium declared by Wickremesinghe for a period of one year 2024 ended yesterday (Dec 31, 2024). Would it be extended, to allow Chinese vessels to resume visits or would some committee be appointed to take time to appease India, while Sri Lanka sought to reach some sort of understanding with China.

by Tissa Jayatilaka

(This article is based on a talk given to the members of the Sri Lanka Foreign Service Association on the 10th of December, 2024).

I was invited to address you today on the topic of what the second coming of Donald Trump, as President of the United States holds for the United States and the wider world outside of its shores. I was also requested to explain to you the Electoral College process by which a president is elected in the United States. This is a process that baffles even those familiar with the United States and the way its institutions function, as it is markedly different from the way in which other democracies elect their presidents and prime ministers.

I shall try my very best to not confuse you in my attempt to explain the manner in which the POTUS, to use the abbreviation for the President of the United States first used by telegraphic code operators in the 1890s, is elected.

I shall focus, initially, on the second part of my assignment and get it out of the way as soon as possible. That is, I will attempt to explain the US Electoral College process first and then deal with the more fraught and the more alarming first part – which is to deal with the likely consequences that would stem from the return of Donald Trump to 1600, Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, District of Columbia – the White House.

In the United States, the Electoral College is the group of presidential electors that is formed every four years during the presidential election for the sole purpose of voting for the President and Vice President. How this election should be held is described in Article 11 of the Constitution of the United States which says:

Each state shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States shall be appointed an Elector.

The 23rd Amendment to the Constitution ratified in 1961, allowed the citizens of the District of Columbia to participate in presidential elections as well: The District constituting the seat of Government of the United States which is treated like a state has consistently had three (3) electors.

As stipulated by the Constitution, every state has a number of electors or members of the Electoral College equal to its number of senators and members of the House of Representatives. Each of the 50 states of the United States, regardless of its size and population, has two senators. The number of members of the House for each state depends on the population of that state. Hence, smaller the population of a state, smaller will be the number of members of the House it is entitled to. Conversely, the bigger states are entitled to a bigger number of House members. So, if we take Oregon as an example, with its six House members and two senators, the state has eight electors, Montana with two House members and two senators has four electors, while California, with a far bigger population than both Oregon and Montana, has 52 members of the House and two senators, which entitles it to 54 electors.

Besides California, Texas, Florida, and New York have the highest number of electoral votes. Except for Nebraska and Maine, 48 of the 50 states in the US and the District of Columbia use a winner-take-all system, awarding all of their electoral votes to the popular vote winner. The Electoral College system also means a candidate can win the election without winning the popular vote, as seen in Donald Trump’s 2016 victory over Hillary Clinton who won 2.8 million more votes than Trump.

One major criticism of the winner-take-all system is that the candidate who receives a majority of the popular vote in a given state gets all of that state’s electoral votes. Let us take Oregon again as an example. As we noted earlier, Oregon has eight electors. If a candidate wins Oregon, even by one vote, he/she gets all eight of its Electoral College votes.

Critics of the winner-take-all system think it is undemocratic for a winner of the popular vote of a state, to get all of that state’s Electoral College votes. Bruce Lohof, a valued friend, congenial colleague and former United States Foreign Service Officer, in an article titled What Must the Other Democracies Think? compares US democracy with fellow democracies and observes:

But how is it that in the 21st century, a Montana Elector represents only 282,000 Montanans while a California Elector represents 720,000 Californians. Worse, how is it that the candidate who receives a majority of Montana’s – or California’s – popular vote gets ALL of the state’s Electoral College votes? Shouldn’t voters be represented equally? And shouldn’t candidates who get, say, 55% of the popular vote, get 55% of the electoral vote? Why do they get to clear the table, poker style?

On five occasions, including two of the last six elections, candidates have won the Electoral College, and thereby the presidency, despite losing the nationwide popular vote. The Electoral Count Reform Act of 2022 addresses some of the shortcomings in the Electoral College process but not all of them. There are those Americans who argue for the dismantling of the Electoral College. According to a September 2024 report of the Pew Research Centre, 63 percent of Americans support the abolition of the Electoral College. According to the US National Archives, public opinion polls have shown that Americans favoured abolishing the Electoral College by majorities of 58% in 1967; 81% in 1968; and 75% in 1981.

The United States came close to abolishing the Electoral College when the late Democratic Senator Birch Bayh (Indiana) led an attempt to amend the Constitution in September 1969 in order to do so. The House voted 339 to 70 in support of the measure. However, led by the Southern senators and helped by extremely conservative Midwestern Republicans, the proposal was defeated in a filibuster.

Be the above criticisms and observations as they may, what we know is that during a presidential election, a citizen does not vote, odd as it may sound, directly for the president, but for a slate of electors pledged to vote for one or the other candidate. In the months leading up to the presidential election held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday of November, the political parties in each state typically nominate their own slates of would-be-electors. The state’s popular vote determines which party’s slate would be made the eventual electors.

In total, the Electoral College comprises 538 members (made up of two senators for each of the 50 states =100 + 435 members of the House of Representatives from all of the 50 states and three from the District of Columbia). A presidential candidate must win a majority of the Electoral votes cast to win – that is, at least 270 if all the 538 electors vote.

Members of the Electoral College meet and vote in their respective states on the Monday, after the second Wednesday after election day. Then, on 6 January, a joint session of Congress meets at the Capitol to count the votes and declare the outcome of the election, paving the way for the Presidential inauguration on 20 January.

We must bear in mind that the Electoral College is neither a place nor a permanent body. As I stated at the beginning, it is only a process and also as noted above, in each state, political parties designate their slate of potential electors well before the November presidential election. The Electoral College of 2028 will most likely be different from that which elected the President of 2024.

Now, for the second part of my presentation today. What are we to expect from the 47th President of the United States once he is inaugurated on 20 January, 2025? Crystal ball gazing or trying to forecast anything about the future as I plan to do in the next several minutes is, to say the least, a colossal undertaking, especially so when attempting to predict what an unpredictable man, such as Donald Trump, would do once he is back in the saddle as President. In addition to all of the foregoing I must confess that I strongly dislike Donald Trump, the man who is more flawed than most of his predecessors. And this fact makes a dispassionate assessment of him and what his second term might be like, an enormous challenge. Subject to these caveats, let me chance my arm. And I take heart from a comment made by the well-known journalist David Brooks in his recent piece in the Atlantic titled How America got so mean in which he says:

America became a place where 74 (sic) million people looked at Trump’s morality and saw Presidential timber.

It has been said that there is no Republican Party any more, only a Trump Party. And this distorts everything. The Republicans have signalled that they will render complete loyalty to the agenda of their leader. Troy Nehls, a sycophantic, Republican congressman from Texas recently said of the President elect:

He’s got a mission statement, and his goals and objectives, we need to embrace it (sic). All of it. If Donald Trump says jump three feet high and scratch your head, we all jump three feet high and scratch our heads.

If Nehls’ language is extreme, the sentiment behind it, is not. Many Republicans have vowed nearly unquestioned support for Trump’s policies and decisions. Many invoke what they call Trump’s mandate to justify their unwavering support, the kind of rationale normally reserved for a large electoral victory. Yet Trump did not actually win in a landslide. According to available statistics, Trump won less than 50% of the popular vote, beating Kamala Harris by a mere 1.6 points. That is, the smallest margin of victory in a US Presidential Election since 1888!

Trump’s picks for his Cabinet to-date and to other major positions leave much to be desired. Not only are most of them seriously unqualified but are uncouth and allegedly guilty of criminal conduct. Matt Gaetz, Trump’s former nominee for Attorney General, who consequently withdrew his candidacy, is a good illustration of the foregoing. A Trump loyalist with little legal experience, he has been investigated by the House Ethics Committee over allegations that he may have “engaged in sexual misconduct and illegal drug use, accepted improper gifts, dispensed special privileges and favours to individuals with whom he had a personal relationship, and sought to obstruct government investigations of his conduct”.

(To be continued)

By Lynn Ockersz

It’s the Hour of the Outer Man,
And the gormandizer’s delight,
The sage may solemnly ponder,
Amid frenzied big bargaining,
And revelry reaching fever pitch,
Not forgetting merry cash counters,
As a New Year is heralded in,

But wait for the morning after,
When restive brains go groggy,
Hangovers heavily weigh-in,
And empty wallets begin to pinch,
To be reminded that the Inner Man,
Like a dimmed flame at a lonely shrine,
Is crying to be fueled into life.