Still Undecided?

If there are too many things to consider, the integrity of the individual and their commitment to get rid of corruption should be the number one criterion at this point. If one cannot decide, based on that, staying out of this election, and returning to the parliamentary elections to work with whoever comes to power for the sake of country may be the right thing to do. Let us not forget that the presidential election is not the end, a parliamentary opposition that is willing to work for the country but not for self-interest is the crucial element that has been missing in our culture.

by Geewananda Gunawardana

My grandfather was an ardent supporter of the UNP all his life. The reason? Its founder got independence for the country. In addition, if the communists, like NM and Colvin, came to power, they would confiscate everything we had and take children away from their families. My grandfather passed away 60 years ago. Today, the country’s sovereignty is not at risk, the civil war has ended, and, most importantly, the communist ideology has vastly changed all over the world. Yet, there are many voters who think and act the same way as my grandfather did 60 years ago, while some others cannot decide what to do at the upcoming election.

They cannot be blamed; there is an information gap and a surplus of misinformation. The single most threat that the country is facing is the perilous condition its economy is in. Despite the rosy picture some would like to paint, nothing has changed over the last decade to put the country on a recovery path. As one successful US President put it during his campaign, the slogan should be ‘It is the economy, stupid.’ There are other issues, but most of them are the result of the economy, or economic disparity, and we would not have the resources to fix them without restoring the economy first.

Now that the leading contenders for presidency have published their manifestos, and we know their political history very well, it should not be that difficult to decide who could get us started on the right path to recovery. Let us be clear, the goal should be to put us on the right path to economic development, lay the foundation. This mess has been in the making for 75 years, and not even a superhuman will be able to solve all our problems during the first six months, or during the entire term of their presidency. All they need to do, and we can expect them to do, is to put the economy on the right path. The recovery will take time, hard choices will have to be made but let us not be deceived by bogus election promises yet again.

If we pay attention to our past and current economic indicators or see what other countries, like ours, have done to succeed or to fail in such situations, it is not difficult to see what policies will work for our country. If a candidate is promising to continue in the same path, it is insanity to believe that it would magically work this time around. Let us not forget that we have been on this path for 75 years, led by the same group of people and their progeny, who have done very well for themselves.

The most crucial factor, besides policy, is the elimination of corruption. Sri Lanka corruption index has more than doubled during the last 20 years, and now it stands at 80%. That is a grave situation. Not only it is a massive burden on people, but it also keeps potential foreign investments from coming to the country. Without investments, there is no way to resurrect the broken economy. Corruption takes many forms; lack of transparency, accountability, and disregard for rules and regulations are also part of corruption. Elimination of corruption is the responsibility of all citizens as it continues to siphon billions that rightfully belong to the people. However, the leadership must come from the top. Therefore, preventing the corrupt and those who would protect the corrupt from sneaking back into power should be the highest priority. How can you entrust the future of a nation to someone who has no integrity?

Making promises is one thing, keeping them is another. As the saying goes, there are no free lunches. It is true that there must be some relief for those who suffer due to no fault of their own. But they should be in the form of temporary measures to get them back on their feet. Otherwise, anyone offering free anything unconditionally is either ignorant or a fraud not fit to lead.

The next crucial factor is to see who has the political will to implement what they promise. If one comes to power with the backing of the corrupt, even if their economic policies are sound, how can they work to eliminate corruption? Same goes for those who are supported by special interest groups. They will have to pander to their supporters’ interests at the expense of public welfare when they come to power. Haven’t we suffered enough under cronyism and nepotism? There are practices that can be done away without any additional costs to the government to alleviate the burden on the populous. Think of the current condition of the so-called free education and free healthcare. There are no reliable statistics, but one can guess that the public spends out of its pocket as much as the government does on education, for example. What a waste of resources. Corrective measures are unfavourable to some, but would the new leader have the courage and political will to stand against such special interests? Which candidate has a history of taking a stand in such situations?

There are no perfect economic models or governance systems that would always apply to all countries. Every country must carefully adopt what suits its own situation. There is a lot of misinformation circulating currently in this regard. Even the correct information can be presented selectively, in a biased manner, when the purveyor of news has an agenda. There is a lot of talk about the perils of the socialist system, but we rarely hear the evils of the capitalist system. The food insecurity rate in the United States in 2023 was 13.5%. That is about 47 million Americans, or more than 1 in 8, were unable to consistently get enough food for themselves or their families, while the country has the capacity to feed them. Similarly, the US spends the highest on healthcare per capita in the world, but ranked 21st in terms of quality, and only 90% of the population is covered compared to 100% in most developed countries. We must look at how the economies of so-called socialist countries, like China, Vietnam, and Cambodia, are doing today. They have recovered from much worse situations than we face. Is the socialist system still the same monster that my grandfather dreaded? We have two choices: continue with the same failed system with a predictable outcome or try something different and work collectively to give it the best chance possible.
Another factor to consider would be the fate of the executive presidency, which has been a curse on the whole country, not just the economy. Many parties have promised to abolish it ever since it was established 46 years ago, but have they done so when they had the opportunity? Who can we trust to keep that promise this time around?

If there are too many things to consider, the integrity of the individual and their commitment to get rid of corruption should be the number one criterion at this point. If one cannot decide based on that, staying out of this election, and returning to the parliamentary elections to work with whoever comes to power for the sake of country may be the right thing to do. Let us not forget that the presidential election is not the end, a parliamentary opposition that is willing to work for the country but not for self-interest is the crucial element that has been missing in our culture.

The US system may not be a posterchild for good governance, but it has the strongest economy today. The secret is that despite the bitter partition divide of the country, 70 percent of the bills passed in the current Congress were passed with bipartisan support. The fight for power can be ugly, but they work for the country when in power. We need to elect politicians who work for the country, and not for their descendants or henchmen. One more thing: is it an unbreakable rule that only the descendants of former politicians must be chosen for our leadership as we have done many times in the past 75 years? Are we a democracy or a monarchy? Is it that difficult to decide?