Last week’s parliamentary proceedings proved combative with both the government and the emasculated opposition hurling allegations at each other triggering much heat in the chamber. Observers must therefore be excused for wondering whether arrangements now being made to conduct the long postponed local government elections followed by provincial council polls have enervated political players months after last year’s presidential and parliamentary elections. The NPP/JVP cannot be happy about its performance at recent cooperative elections and opposition parties must be anxious to demonstrate they are not total write-offs as last year’s polls suggested.

Subjects over which angry words were exchanged ranged between luxury Colombo residences being provided to former presidents at taxpayer expense and other privileges enjoyed by government functionaries paid for by the exchequer. The news also broke last week that, on a decision of the House Committee, the elected representatives of the people will no longer be fed sumptuous heavily subsidized meals in the parliament restaurant. Prices will be cost reflective, no less than the president has said. It was reported that MPs will henceforth have to pay Rs. 2,000 for breakfast, lunch and afternoon tea at the parliament restaurant against Rs. 450 in the past.

We need hardly labour the fact that there is deep seated public resentment about ministers and parliamentarians being pampered at public expense. Former prime minister, Sir. John Kotelawela, once famously said “handa athey thiyanakan bedaganilla” (as long as the spoon is in your hand, serve yourself!). The ruling elite has been doing just that over the years. The present regime has earned brownie points, probably translating to votes, for its determination to end or at least trim this state of affairs hopefully for all time.

President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, appearing on a television talk show a few nights ago, repeated the promise that pensions for parliamentarians will be abolished although there is no word yet about when this would be done. The KT Chitrasiri report of a committee headed by a retired Supreme Court judge on perks and privileges conferred on politicians, past and present, is in but has not yet been published. But it is known or widely believed that the first steps are being taken regarding the Colombo mansions provided to former presidents is a result of these recommendations.

The present scheme of pensions to parliamentarians is an abomination. A minimum five years of parliamentary service entitles the beneficiary to a lifetime’s pension which will continue to be paid to a surviving spouse, also for life. These pensions are non-contributory. This is quite in contrast to what prevails where government servants are concerned. A public servant must work for 30 years to qualify for a full pension. While both public servants and MPs enjoy non-contributory pensions, government employees must contribute to what is called the Widows and Orphans Pension Scheme (W&OPS) for their families to benefit from their pensions after their death. MPs enjoy that without payment. Also there is no minimum retirement age for parliamentarians unlike in the public service. MPs continue in office until they are defeated or decide not to seek re-election without loss of pension benefits.

While there is no reason to disbelieve the president’s assurance that MPs pensions would be abolished, the question is when? A very large number of pensionable parliamentarians were defeated or decided not to run at the last election as they saw their chances of re-election either as slim or non-existent. We are told that those who became entitled to parliamentary pensions following the last election are already being paid. Where public servants are concerned, it is always not that easy for pension payments to begin soon after retirement. They have to wait for months and years sometimes to be paid as papers from various offices, schools and departments where they served in different parts of the country must be collated to begin such payments. This difficulty will not arise where parliamentarians are concerned. Nevertheless withdrawing privileges, especially from long time beneficiaries, is not as easy as granting them.

Last week’s parliamentary proceedings as well as press reports revealed that three former presidents, Chandrika Kumaratunga, Mahinda Rajapaksa and Maithripala Sirisena enjoy state-owned residences in Colombo. Gotabaya Rajapaksa and Hema Premadasa have given up such homes they once occupied – Mrs. Premdasa for many years after the assassination of her husband. Mind-boggling government valuations running into millions per month of these perks have been bruited around by the president and others in the ruling hierarchy. CBK is already on record saying she’s spent a fortune, raised by selling her own property, refurbishing and maintaining her official residence. This seems not to be the case where MR is concerned; at least he has not claimed to have done so.

MR’s mouthpieces are on record saying he would go if he’s asked to go. This neither appears to have been done nor has he been asked to pay the true value of the property he occupies. Rajapaksa is entitled to a third of his pension – about Rs. 30,000 – if he is not provided suitable accommodation by the state. While acolytes say there are plenty of people to provide MR with a home if he needs one, the cabinet spokesman says “don’t wait to be asked, just go.” All this, of course, is useless talk. Ministers did occupy state owned mansions over the years. So also did (and do) many state officials. Are valuations placed on state-owned residences they occupy and are they asked to pay commensurate rent?

The present ministers don’t occupy state-owned residences unlike their predecessors where some even built swimming pools for themselves and one installed a lift for his elderly mother. The prime minister, we know, lives in her own home and not at Temple Trees. The president too does not live in government owned premises. Duty free vehicles for MPs, also a past abomination, will be no more. We remember a JVP MP of the past bringing her own buth packet to parliament. But we have not heard of anybody refusing a parliamentary pension he/she was entitled to and wonder whether a single individual has drawn not one but two parliamentary pensions in the past!

Friday 24th January, 2025

The Ceylon Chamber of Coconut Industries (CCCI) has called upon the government to import 200 million coconuts immediately to meet a shortfall in the domestic supply. Otherwise, the prevailing coconut shortage will take a turn for the worse during the upcoming festive season, the CCCI has warned. Widely consumed varieties of rice are also in short supply, and their prices are soaring. Red rice has become as rare as a snowflake in summer. The government is all at sea, and when the shortages of rice and coconuts will be over is anybody’s guess. It is busy sorting out issues related to food served in the parliament restaurants, which never experience shortages.

Leader of the House and Minister Bimal Ratnayake announced the other day that the government would ensure that the prices of food sold in the parliament restaurants reflected the costs, and the MPs would have to pay as much as Rs. 3,000 for breakfast, lunch and tea a day. The government has made another about-turn; it has lowered the aforesaid amount to Rs. 2,000, according to media reports.

It was the Opposition that raised the issue of subsidised food in the parliament canteens. SJB MP Hesha Withana told a media briefing in November 2024 that he would bring in a motion seeking to do away with subsidised meals, allowances and loans for the MPs and to have the Madiwela MPs’ housing scheme turned into a university hostel. He did not fulfil that pledge. So, the government members alone cannot be blamed for ‘overpromising’ and ‘underdelivering’. Their Opposition counterparts are also all mouth and no trousers, so to speak.

Denying anyone the pleasure of gratifying his or her gastronomical desires amounts to a breach of ingrained cultural norms of hospitality and generosity cherished by Sri Lankans. But shouldn’t the elected people’s representatives, who come to power, promising to share in the economic hardships of the masses, be reminded that they must not feast on delectable victuals while the electors are struggling to dull the pangs of hunger? The MPs shed copious tears for the ordinary people skipping meals, and the children affected by malnutrition and resultant growth disorders. Isn’t it morally reprehensible for the elected to feast while the electors are starving?

Before last year’s presidential and parliamentary elections, the JVP/NPP politicians had the public believe that, if elected, they would not live in the MPs’ quarters at Madiwela or eat subsidised food in the parliament canteens; they also said they would travel in crowded buses and trains like the ordinary people. Those who voted for them may have expected them to do as they had done while they were in President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga’s UPFA government from 2004 to 2005. The JVP had 39 MPs in that administration, and some of them including Anura Kumara Dissanayake held Cabinet portfolios. They earned the admiration of the public for their simple living.

The NPP government’s promise to discontinue the practice of serving the MPs subsidised meals will resonate with the public who cannot even afford rice and coconuts. But proof of the pudding is said to be in the eating. One cannot decide whether food prices are actually cost-reflective in the parliament restaurants until one sees what the menus feature there.

The holier-than-thou NPP politicians are in overdrive, asking the former Presidents occupying state-owned houses to pay rents commensurate with the government valuation of those properties or vacate immediately. They say they are also planning to auction the vehicles used by politicians during the previous government. So, why can’t they close down the parliamentary restaurants and ask all MPs to brown-bag their lunches?

Thursday 23rd January, 2025

Donald Trump is no stranger to controversy, but his nonconsecutive second term is going to be even more controversial than the first one if some of the executive orders he signed immediately after being inaugurated as the 47th US President on Monday are any indication. He rescinded about 78 executive actions of his predecessor, Joe Biden. He ordered that the US withdraw from the World Health Organization (WHO), causing much concern to the entire world. He levelled some unsubstantiated allegations against the WHO in a bid to justify his decision. One may recall that during his first term, the US withdrew from the United Nations Human Rights Council, which US envoy to the UN Nikki Haley called ‘a cesspool of political bias’.

President Trump issued another controversial executive order, granting a presidential pardon to about 1,500 Republican supporters serving jail terms for storming Capitol Hill on 06 Jan. 2021 in a bid to disrupt a joint session of the Congress convened to certify the results of the 2020 presidential election, where Trump lost to Biden. That blanket pardon came as a surprise even to some of Trump’s close associates. His sweeping approach to the issue is bound to be used by his critics to bolster their claim that the rioters acted at his behest in 2021. After all, Trump was impeached by the House of Representatives led by Democrats for ‘incitement of insurrection’, but he was subsequently acquitted by the Senate.

Trump’s controversial pardon for the Capitol Hill rioters came close on the heels of a much-publicised statement by Vice President J. D. Vance that those who had committed violence on 06 Jan., 2021 should not be pardoned. Ironically, during his second presidential election campaign, Trump stressed the need to restore the rule of law, and promised tough action against lawbreakers, but his first day in office saw the hard work done by the FBI, etc., in the Capitol Hill probe, which reportedly became known as the largest-ever criminal investigation in the US, being undone. Trump’s pardon will surely find its way into history books just like the one granted to the Confederate rebels after the conclusion of the Civil War.

The US never misses an opportunity to take the moral high ground and pontificate to the rest of the world on the virtues of democracy, the rule of law, justice, etc. Perhaps, what is more disturbing than Trump’s blanket pardon at issue is the fact that the US people ‘pardoned’ Trump, who mercilessly assailed the integrity of the US electoral process by challenging the outcome of the 2020 presidential election, brought the US into disrepute internationally, allegedly backed a riot that almost scuttled the certification by the Congress of the aforesaid election results, and, above all, was convicted of felony; they re-elected him President, enabling him to do more of what he drew much criticism for doing during his first term. Trump himself has been able to avoid punishment for felony thanks to his re-election. He received an ‘unconditional discharge’ from a New York court a few days before his inauguration.

President Biden granted a presidential pardon to his son, Hunter, who was to face sentencing on federal felony and tax convictions, last month, and went on to issue pre-emptive pardons for three of his siblings and two of their spouses, during the final minutes of his presidential term, claiming that they might be targets of ‘baseless and politically motivated investigations’. Those controversial pardons may have emboldened Trump to adopt a sweeping approach to the Capitol Hill riot issue.

Washington and Colombo are doubtlessly worlds apart, but one sees some striking similarities between the two cities where unfolding political scenarios are concerned. In Washington, a man who was accused of inciting an insurrection, which almost derailed the legislative certification of the outcome of a democratically conducted presidential election, in 2021, is now the US President. In Colombo, a political party, which has admitted to an abortive attempt to engineer a mob invasion of Parliament in 2022, is now in power, having secured the coveted executive presidency and obtained a two-thirds majority in Parliament. Some of the rioters have been elected to Parliament! Others who are facing legal action must be hoping for a blanket pardon.