Connect with us

Opinion

Why this Shamelessness?

Published

on

By Dr. Mahim Mendis
Response to the Article, “Shamelessness”,
by Prof. Sasanka Perera

 

Prof Sasanka Perera’s article published in The Island on 16 June, 2021, under the title, “Shamelessness”, helps us in “soul searching”, as to who exactly we are, ideologically, emotionally, and even spiritually. The only disadvantage right now is that the people are heavily burdened, as victims of multiple shocks by a regime that has no sense of dignity, public accountability, respectability, and credibility in addition to “shamelessness”, that Prof Sasanka Perera has added.

Prof Perera makes an enlightening statement with reference to Chinese Philosopher Meng Ke, that “Feeling shameful for doing something wrong is necessarily a core foundation for the emotional and ethical development of a person, as well as the society in which he or she lives”.

Yet, what has gone wrong for us as a nation, to be devoid of these traits, when compared to another island nation like Singapore with its post- colonial background? They were in fact an insignificant port city in the 1950’s, when Lee Kuan Yew was elected. Extremely Visionary with a very strong personality, Lee was however, humble enough to gain inspiration from Sri Lanka; a nation with great stature, comparatively during the same period.

ARE WE IN A NATIONAL CRISIS WITHOUT PROPER ETHOS/GRAND CONVICTIONS?

One could argue that it is a shame not to be driven by a formidable ethos in life as without an ethos, a person or an entire nation will be like a “Rudderless Boat”.

As much as Meng Ke, it is important for us to make sense of shamefulness. Let me refer to the Greek Philosopher, Aristole,who explained that an Ethos refers to a man’s character or personality, especially in its balance between passion and caution. Today ethos is used to refer to the practices or values that distinguish one person, organization, or society from others.

Aristotle, according to Krista C McCormack of Washington University, recognized the inherent truth that we believe good men more fully and more readily than others. Furthermore, Aristotle recognized, that the personal goodness revealed by the speaker, or the leader, may be called the most effective means of persuasion he possesses.

A fundamental question in the context of Sri Lanka is whether we are a people with a clear ethos as individuals, as a society and as a country? Do we know what we in fact stand for now and stood for in the past ideologically? Adding to this burden, I often meet university academics, including so called professors from the present generation, who have not heard about Sir Ivor Jennings, the founding father of the University of Ceylon, and how he perceived the University as an institution.

LYING AND WORKING AGAINST OUR CONSCIENCE

Aren’t we a people, who probably know what is right and wrong, but willfully implement what is wrong without any shame? We even tend to lie without principles. History records clearly how Justice Mark Fernando, in 1991, gave a judgment from the Supreme Court in the Impeachment Case of Ranasinghe Premadasa, that Lalith Athulathmudali was guilty of “Lies and Deception”.

Such a verdict could have been avoided by Oxford-educated Athulathmudali, if he had an honourable ethos. So to be without shame is not a recent trait, but an old trait that we carry ever since Prince Vijaya landed in this island, having been deported by his father for being immoral in his own land.

LACK OF CONSCIENCE AS A NATIONAL TRAIT: CASE OF SRI LANKAN LEADERSHIP ON ENGLISH EDUCATION

To give a random example, an elderly person asked me recently, how I perceive the way the late Solomon Dias Bandaranaike named his son, as Solomon West Ridgeway, in the presence of the British Governor West Ridgeway. He said that his own illustrious father, a distinguished product of St. Thomas, College that Bandaranaike himself attended, would not have done such a thing, as this is a shameless opportunism without a conscience.

He said that such a standard of opportunism also inspired the son, Solomon West Ridgeway Dias Bandaranaike (SWRD), who benefitted from the Western Protestant ethic at St. Thomas’ College, Mount. Lavinia, and the University of Oxford. As a politician, SWRD became the father of the Sinhala Only Act, while knowing so well that this policy would deprive the ordinary people, the model of education that made him a polished personality during that time.

These issues are raised in good faith to provoke the imagination of the readers as to what would constitute “honour” or “dishonour”, as our leaders should have been role models with the type of privileged education they received. Role models in influencing fellow countrymen to act with a conscience. Also role models sharing with the countrymen what benefited them and their children.

WORKING WITH A CONSCIENCE: CASE OF SINGAPOREAN LEADERSHIP ON ENGLISH EDUCATION

Writing to the Time Magazine, in 2005, Simon Elegant and Michael Elliott, described Lee Kuan Yew as, “The Man Who Saw It All”, as the founding father of Modern Singapore, transforming an insignificant port city as a model state for the world.

This they said because Lee’s actions were firmly grounded on an ethos that he should share with the people of Singapore, what he himself benefited from. To think in terms of the big picture where all would live with dignity on a level playing field, enjoying the fruits of public policies for the Common Good of all Singaporeans.

Ironically, Sri Lankan leaders believed in the opposite and sabotaged the progressive reforms of C.W.W Kannangara, even going to the extent of depriving him of the Education Portfolio, in 1952.

Lee who was almost 24 years junior in age to SWRD who was educated at Oxford, had his university education at the University of Cambridge. About English education, he states in “My Lifelong Challenge: Singapore’s Bilingual Journey”, that, “We learn that there were four changes at the helm of the Education Ministry in four months in 1975. We learn that there were Chinese-medium schools in Singapore right up to the mid-1980s. We learn of the pain of “teachers who had to switch from teaching in Chinese to teaching in English, almost overnight”, and likewise that of students who were “caught mid-stream” in the transition from a Chinese medium of instruction to an English one.

As stated by a Singaporean analyst, “We learn why the National Day Rally of 1986, was a milestone and why he “was a proud man that day”: For the first time since Singapore’s independence, 21 years earlier, the Master of Ceremonies for the event did not have to use three languages – Chinese, Malay and Tamil – to lead the audience, as finally, English had become a language understood by all Singaporeans.

The lesson we should learn as Sri Lankans is that we should be sincere in heart and mind; in other words, decent men and women who will be objective enough to perceive issues without bias.

THE OPPOSITION LED BY SAJITH PREMADASA

The Opposition, led by Sajith Premadasa, decimating one of the oldest political parties that formed many Governments since independence, namely, the UNP, should be accepted without bias. SJB performance was a formidable achievement, that not even SWRD Bandaranaike was able to achieve after breaking away from the UNP, led by D.S Senanayake.

The JVP/JJB group, even with their vote base stagnating, continue to do their best, maximizing their own potential as a Left Wing alternative. To be fair by all, during the first year of the Gotabaya Rajapakse regime, with Covid- 19 dictating terms to all, they as an Opposition have been extremely active.

CYNICISM WILL UNDERMINE DEMOCRACY

In the case of the SJB, can any rational person say that he or she has seen the SJB functioning as a branch of the Government, as stated by Dr. Sasanka?

I would argue that to get out of this shameful political culture, we could achieve nothing by being cynical about the Opposition. All what we should do is to ensure that these parties represent an alternative socio-economic, political and cultural order to sustain democracy in Sri Lanka; not to undermine the democratic process and the parties vying for power.

In this context, we all know that Sajith Premadasa clearly represents a Social – Democratic alternative to the present regime, that will ensure economic development with the government and the private sector enabled to perform maximally. Today, with crony capitalism in Sri Lanka, no one can survive if one is not a close affiliate of the influential elements of the Government.

SJB also firmly believes in a foreign policy which is favourable, to relations with all countries irrespective of their ideologies, defined as “Positive Alignment”. This is driven by the national interest and the wellbeing of the majority, unlike what would happen for example, through the proposed Port City.

SJB’s policy on national security has much to do with social, political, economic and cultural security and not acute militarization of institutions that has today undermined the status of armed forces by taking over the functions of the trained officers of the Sri Lanka Administrative Service. Also to ensure that we would arrive at a viable political solution to the ethno-political crisis, by going beyond the 13th Amendment that the present regime threatens to abolish.

Similarly, the JJB believes in its own alternative. It would be dishonest to say that the SJB and the JJB do next to nothing as an opposition.

WAY FORWARD FOR GREATER DEMOCRACY

The role of the Opposition is to provide a viable alternative to the present regime with sound policies. The Government ironically with all the power it enjoys, continues to make a mockery of themselves, without a sense of direction.

Are we now saying that after one year of governance, the Government should be sacked immediately, and in this context, the Opposition has failed to organize street protests in the middle of the Covid-19 pandemic?

If they did that, the same people would blame them for sabotaging the government. In my perception, we can be happy that Sajith Premadasa who polled 42% of the vote, against 58% by Gotabaya Rajapakse is not accused by anyone that he is sabotaging the work of the Government, as was the case of the Rajapaksa led constitutional coup, in 2019.

Let the people at this stage see for themselves and opt for a better alternative legitimately next time.

“Our ethos is all that we currently hold to be true. It is what we act upon. It governs our manners, our business, and our politics”.-

Howard Zinn, American Historian, Playwright.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Opinion

What is wrong with Sri Lanka?

Published

on

By Dr Laksiri Fernando

It is not the country per se, but the politicians and the people who are wrong. While politicians should take 70 percent responsibility, the people also should take 30 percent. It is true that these wrongs on the part of the politicians or the people are not limited to Sri Lanka. Even in a country like Australia where I now live, there are intermittent corruption, crime, gender abuse, killing, and misguided politics. However, the difference is extremely vast. Sri Lanka’s wrongs are perhaps 50 times higher than a country like Australia.

One may pinpoint this to the economic difference or development. There is some truth in it. However, the whole truth is not that. It is rooted in the political culture and social culture in general. That is one reason why Sri Lanka was not being able to develop after independence like Singapore, Malaysia, South Korea, etc. India also has come to the forefront of development today. Sri Lanka became caught up in a vicious cycle where political culture prevented development, while underdevelopment influenced the political culture.

What is this political culture? It is mainly renovated feudalism with family at the core of politics that dominates the political culture. It is also the same in social culture, families dominating business, religion, entertainment, and the media. Only female members are set apart. It is in a way natural for members of a family to follow their fathers, brothers, or other close members. Or it can happen the other way around, fathers or uncles helping and promoting their siblings.

Even in America or the UK, this could be seen. The Kennedy family promoted members into politics. However, in Sri Lanka this is overwhelming, some families completely dominating politics and social arena. While the Rajapaksas are the most prominent example with abhorrent practices, the Bandaranaikes, the Senanayakes and the Jayewardenes (Ranil Wickremesinghe with links) were also playing the same game. In Australia, I have not come across this process. When John Howard was the Prime Minister, his brother Bob Howard continued to serve as an academic at the University of Sydney whom I used to meet often.

In 1995, I decided to come back to Sri Lanka to serve the country. I applied and got the appointment as the Director of the Sri Lanka Foundation Institute (SLFI) through a competitive interview. It was a great institute with many capabilities and the people working there were quite flexible and committed. However, when it came to filling vacancies and expanding the staff for new tasks, I came across political influences and pressures.

I managed to overcome them luckily as the SLFI came under the purview of Chandrika Kumaratunga as the President and as she did not make any interference at least in my case. However, I resigned and came back to Australia within six months as the situation was unbearable. People who tried to influence me were either top ministers or bureaucrats.

Again, when I finally came back in 1997, I first joined the University of Colombo before undertaking any other appointments. By that time, I had fairly learned how to overcome political influence. The university system was fairly reasonable (not completely) and on that basis it was possible for me to follow my impartial principles. However, there was at least one instance where a former friend of mine tried to blame me publicly, claiming that I myself asked for favours! It was heartrending.

Sri Lanka’s public service is large and widespread. There are around 1.5 million people working in its various institutions, departments, and branches. Although there is the Public Service Commission which is supposed to be independent, even in its appointments political and other influences are paramount. The most discriminated people in this service are Tamils, Muslims, and Women. Although there are over 15 percent of Tamils in the population, their presence in the public service is less than 10 percent. Apart from discrimination on the reason of ethnicity and gender, there are discriminations on the basis of caste, religion and region. The dissolution of Provincial Councils since October 2019 has enlarged these discriminations overwhelmingly.

It is mistakenly claimed that the ‘large state sector’ is the primary defect of Sri Lanka’s economy. It is not the size of the sector that has mattered but its inefficiency, incapacity, unproductivity, and sometimes duplication. In Australia, out of the total workforce, 20 percent are in the state sector. But it is sufficiently productive and provides necessary services even to private enterprises. In Sri Lanka, if we count 12 million as the workforce (adult population 14 million), the state sector comprises only around 12 percent.

The state sector undoubtedly should be restructured, and the workforces should be retrained or even dismissed. There is no point in keeping people like Sirimanna Mahattaya in the public service if we take an example from the teledrama, Kolam Kuttama (Funny Couple)! Even privatising certain (loss-making) state enterprises is in order. However, there are certain sectors and services that the state should hold on to. Education and Health are the most priory sectors among others, depending on national dialogues. It could allow the private sector to participate, but the state should not give up its primary responsibilities.

There can be other strategic sectors where the private sector could be allowed like the ports, airports, airlines, electricity, gas, oil, and even water, but the state should not give up its responsibilities completely. Public-Private partnership can be a model in certain areas in this respect.

The stagnation of the education sector has been a primary problem area in Sri Lanka now for a long time. This applies both to school education and university education alike. In the case of university education there have been some curricula and teaching methodology changes but those are not up to modern and current needs.

We still get a huge number of Arts students while the country’s need is in the direction of Science, Technology, Medicine, Nursing and Business Management. Those who come from the Arts streams in schools, if it is not possible to change in the short run, should be able to move to scientific areas, if capable. In Australia, there is no prohibition of changing the stream if the students show high capability in whatever area that they qualify in. School education should be totally reformed with emphasis on scientific and international knowledge.

The discarding of English education (since 1956), in my opinion, has been the major mistake that the country has committed in degrading the educational system, the economy, and the country’s international profile. In recent times young generations are trying to overcome these barriers through private education, tuition, and social media. However, this is mostly limited to the well to do. English should not be considered as a superior or imperial language, but a practical and international language.

While this short article, with word limits, confine to only few areas of ‘wrongs’ that Sri Lanka is committing, a possible conclusion is to call for an overall change in the political and economic system in the country. Those political leaders and parties responsible for the country’s present political and economic crisis should be completely ousted.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Plan to transform country into an export economy

Published

on

Dear Mr. President,

A Presidential Media Division statement, titled “Country set for rapid transformation into an export economy” quoted remarks made by you at the inauguration ceremony of a historic temple in Kegalle.

As a caring citizen I said, “three cheers”, happily thinking that at last, the country was on the correct governance path focusing on the creation of new strategic leadership options and policy changes to encourage present and new investors to produce tradable goods and engage in external services. I was delighted that the statement began with a reference that Sri Lanka can no longer continue to rely on borrowings (presumably external?) to address the imbalance between imports and exports, which if pursued will inevitably lead to another economic crisis within a decade.

As I read the rest of the statement, I noted that your plan for achieving such a transformation by holding discussions with the World Bank, ADB and the IMF to initiate a programme and passing two new laws in April. The only other reference even as a vague statement was in relation to implementing an agricultural modernisation programme, where you anticipated results only after 6-7 years. Are you planning in addition to leverage the National Trade Facilitation Committee (NTFC) and its Secretariat as a part of your implementation strategy[ii] ?

I am sure that many highly competent Sri Lankan trade economists (including those who have guided you in the past), will be able to advise you on more important winning strategic policy/implementation and change management options.

They would surely stress the relative importance of developing strategic networking options with supply chains in the region, assisting capable SME’s to upgrade quality/productivity, and enhancing public infrastructure productivity; along with the need to remove para tariffs, enhance ease of doing business, and one stop facilitation center benchmarking services in South Indian states. These can bring big gains, well before dreaming as your short-term goal, leveraging Free Trade Agreements with India, China, Thailand, Singapore, Vietnam and attempting a high jump by  joining RCEP.

Chandra Jayaratne

Continue Reading

Opinion

Solar and wind power projects

Published

on

There has been a delay in finalising the unit cost for the proposed 500 Mw wind power project initiated by India’s Adani Group. This is surprising and disturbing as there was a news item that the Cabinet had approved the payment of US dollar cents 14.6 per unit, nearly Rs. 50 in our local currency, without the knowledge of the Ministry for Power and Energy or the Ceylon Electricity Board. If so, what is the reason for the delay in going ahead with the construction of the Wind Power Project at Mannar? The snag may be that other private suppliers too are demanding the same payment as agreed with Adani Group.

As I handled this subject at the Ministry of Power and Energy, I still take interest therein, in my retirement. In my earlier letters to the press, I pointed out the negative aspects of wind and solar projects, mainly, Sri Lanka being an island with a limited land area of 65,610 sq. km, where land is required for agriculture as is seen by the desperate attempt of the government offering uncultivated land both state-owned and private to grow more food.

It is said that four to five acres of land is required to produce 1 Mw of electricity. If so, consider the land requirements for major solar parks. In addition, no plant life is possible under these solar panels, which has multiple effects on the atmosphere. The scenic beauty of this country, which attracts tourists will be lost and thereby foreign exchange which we desperately need. This goes for floating solar projects on hydro reservoirs and lakes which the government has already approved contracts to the private sector. In wind farms, there is the danger to birds and flying insects. It is also reported that due to the noise people cannot settle down in adjacent areas.

It is not my intention to discourage the projects to produce power from renewable sources of energy. I intend to make the authorities concerned seek alternative sites, along the sea coast, avoiding beaches frequented by tourists, rooftop solar panels in all buildings. Do not forget we are actively pursuing the connection of our grid to India and when this project materialises, the energy requirement of this country will be eased to a great extent.

It is strange the Ministers in charge of land and agriculture and also tourism have not objected to setting up solar parks and wind farms on land.

G. A. D. Sirimal

Via e-mail

Continue Reading

Trending