There is no doubt that many cynics among us thought that the ministers’ gesture of foregoing a month’s salary in the context of the present covid and economic emergencies was a move paving the way to hit salary earners, both in government and the private sector, with a 50 percent pay cut. This had been suggested a few days earlier by Tourism and Aviation Minister Prasanna Ranatunga in a letter he wrote President Gotabaya Rajapaksa. There is no gainsaying that the current pandemic which compelled a lockdown, has placed particularly daily wage earners, eking out a precarious hand to mouth existence, in a terrible predicament. Nobody can or will deny the government’s obligation to support them as best as possible. It also true that salary earners, particularly in the government sector, have much of their workload reduced by the ‘work from home’ formula that now prevails. So why pay them for work they do not do?

The present lockdown, which may or may not end as announced at the end of this month, was forced on the government as result of massive pressure exerted by health professionals, trade unions, very influential sections of opinion maker and a cross-section of the larger population. Even shop owners countrywide, hard-pressed as they are by current circumstances, spontaneously pulled down their shutters. There was undoubtedly an element of self-interest in such action. What’s the point in keeping shops open when there are few or no customers? But their widely publicized action no doubt played a not inconsiderable part in compelling the government to bite the bullet. And now comes that salary cut suggestion.

Our opening remark on the cynical viewpoint of many that the ‘sacrifice,’ if we may call it that, of a section of the political hierarchy, stems from the near universal dislike our politicians, and indeed politicians in many other parts of the world, have earned from the very electors who placed them in office. This enabled them to enjoy lifestyles that were never theirs in previous avatars. Home was never so good to this political class and a few of them have publicly admitted that they are hated by their electors. Of course such candid admissions were made in self-defence. There was one panjandrum who talked of making do with what he regarded as a basic vehicle while his official car was under repair after an accident. Another ‘we are hated’ remark was triggered by the common criticism of subsidized sumptuous meals enjoyed by MPs in the parliament restaurant. Undoubtedly there has been much disinformation on this subject with figures conjured by dividing the total food bill of the legislature by the number of MPs who sit in it. This is a ridiculous calculation as it is not only MPs but also staff, on-duty police, press and others who also eat in parliament.

It must be said in fairness that President Gotabaya Rajapaksa is not a conspicuous consumer. He lives in his private home and does not ride about in lengthy motorcades as many of his predecessors were wont to do; and some of his ministers still do. In this regard, he is undoubtedly a puduma satha or strange animal. Given our very short memories, most of us have long forgotten how ‘Temple Trees,’ the prime minister’s official residence, was appropriated by a former president for his own use. That worthy probably acquired a taste for the place having had it in his previous position of prime minister. Though he didn’t live there, or at President’s House, he found it useful for other purposes. Right now former President Maithripala Sirisena who continues to live in government housing he occupied as Head of State/Government is defending himself saying that accommodation for former presidents are provided for by law; moreover, his predecessors and in one instance a widow, enjoys such facilities. But he neglects to mention that the premises he continues to occupy was created by joining two large government bungalows in a prime location so that he had the space needed for performing his duties as president. Those responsibilities no longer apply to him.

Among other reasons for electors’ dislike of the elected is that many senior politicians have buttered their bread on both sides holding high office in both UNP and anti UNP-governments. This has become all too common and it is time that some analyst publishes a list of these worthies. But we don’t expect any of them to blush or desist from such sharp practices in the future. The fault, of course lies mostly with the party hierarchies on either side of the fence. We wager there will be no course correction. The merry merry-go-round will keep spinning. That’s human nature.

Kumar told you so

It is said that among the most self-satisfied expressions in human speech are those four words “I told you so.” We indulge in using them to remind our readers that our regular columnist, Kumar David, who’s trenchant and often provocative remarks has in an extraordinarily prescient essay on Afghanistan published today, has predicted events as they are rolling out in that troubled country. David wrote his column before the Kabul airport bombs and we recommend that our readers digest his remarkable crystal gazing of the emerging short term. He predicted internal strife within the Taliban and Afghanistan and expressed his conviction that ISIS is a breakaway group and is now Taliban’s sworn enemy. He believes that things are likely to get worse, not better.