Parliament

UPFA glows in tax bill triumph
By Chandani Kirinde, Our Lobby Correspondent
The ruling UPFA had its first taste of victory in Parliament last Wednesday, by obtaining a comfortable majority to repeal a controversial piece of legislation enacted by the former government but was forced to put off the passage of another contentious bill amidst protests from the Opposition.

The government secured 112 votes to pass the Inland Revenue (Special Provisions) Bill finding strong support among the members of the JHU some of whom had postponed an overseas visit to be present in Parliament to vote for the Bill. The Opposition managed only 62 votes with the UNP and SLMC voting against it while the TNA members chose to leave the Chamber before the vote was taken. This Bill seeks to undo the damage done by the earlier Bill which gave an across the board tax amnesty which the UPFA alleges cost the state Rs 200 billion in revenue.

However the government had not enjoyed the same success the previous day when its efforts to pass the Elections (Special Provisions) Bill was thwarted by Opposition objections. The Bill seeks to make ID cards compulsory for voters at all future elections but with nearly three million eligible voters without National ID cards, the Opposition is seeking safeguards that such legal requirement will not disenfranchise these people.

Despite a daylong debate on the Bill, there was no explanation from government members for the haste in bringing this Bill to Parliament except to say the government was fulfilling a long felt national need. The Opposition however saw a more sinister motive such as a referendum that would seek to enable the President to continue beyond the two terms she is entitled to under the present Constitution.

The Bill was referred to the Supreme Court as an urgent bill by the President last month and was presented to Parliament on August 17 by Justice Minister John Seneviratne. Much of the Opposition discontent came from the fact that the government which had agreed to take the vote on the Bill on October 7, at a previously held party leaders meeting had suddenly decided to pass it last Tuesday. This was announced when sittings began by Chief Government Whip Jeyeraj Fernandopulle.

UNPs Gampaha district MP Karu Jayasuriya said this was in contravention of an assurance given by the government at the party leaders meeting and said even though the UNP supported the Bill, it needed more time to bring amendments to it. There was also strong opposition from the TNA whose leader R.Sambanthan said that the majority of those who will be disenfranchised by such a move would be the Tamils both in the north and east as well as in the estate sector and said the government going back on an assurance given earlier would do no good to the healthy working of Parliament.

The SLMC leader Rauff Hakeem questioned the "indecent hurry" in pushing through such a Bill while the CWC’s V.Putirasigamani too said that more time was needed to bring amendments to make the Bill viable.

The JHU said it supported the Bill but asked the government to seek a consensus before passing it. It was the UPFA’s Wimal Weerawansa who took strong objection to the Opposition demands for delaying the passage of the Bill accusing it of adopting "unfair" and "unjustifiable" excuses to postpone the Bill being passed. Urban Development Minister Dinesh Gunawardena who chaired the Select Committee on electoral reforms in the last Parliament which recommended several changes to the electoral system including the introduction of the IDs said no one would be deprived of the right to vote and accused the Opposition of speaking on the issue that the government will fail to provide NICs to everyone within an year of the passage of the Bill as it had promised to do.

Despite the apparent impatience among government members at the Opposition call for more time, it decided to heed their concerns and at a party leaders’ meeting called while the debate was in progress, it was decided that the bill would be passed on October 7th after provision was made to accommodate the amendments proposed by the opposition parties.

But the UNP could not escape the fire directed at it from the government benches for passing a tax amnesty bill during their tenure in office. Finance Minister Sarath Amunugama was among a long list of government speakers who charged that the UNP had passed the law only to appease it's rich supporters. The newly passed bill will withdraw amnesties granted with regard to indirect taxes such as customs duty, excise taxes and fines, Goods and Services taxes, Stamp duties etc but will retain provision to grant amnesty to certain income tax payments.

Wimal Weerawansa was one of the earlier bills biggest critics calling it one of the most disgraceful bills ever passed by a Parliament in the country. "You wanted to reward the rich smugglers and corrupt businessmen who funded your 2001 election campaign. You used their black money to buy some MPs from the People's Alliance and you had to keep the promise made to them by passing the bill," he charged.

However, UNP members defended the amnesty they had granted and said the party stood by it even today. Bandula Gunawardena who was Deputy Finance Minister when the earlier amnesty Bill was passed said Parliament was setting a bad precedent by repealing a Bill that granted an amnesty to tax offenders which was done to build up trust between offenders and the revenue collecting institutions.

He said the purpose was to get more people to make declarations and make them comply with the tax laws in the future. "Every government has granted tax amnesties from time to time but in the future no one will trust a government and accept the amnesty after this," he warned.

UNP Kurunegala district Parliamentarian Dayasiri Jayasekera cited amnesties such as those granted to army deserters which are done to encourage more people to comply with the laws of the land and said a tax amnesty served a similar purpose.

With the UPFA successfully repealing the controversial tax amnesty bill introduced by the UNP, the ruling party has been able to fulfil at least one of its election promises. Whether it will have similar success in overturning some of the previous regimes other doings which it had promised to do is yet to be seen.

Back to Columns