Columns

One of the great hopes nurtured by concerned citizens was that the current economic crisis will push the diverse political parties to make a united effort to rescue the country from what President Ranil Wickremesinghe described as “the worst economic crisis in its history.”

That was why the mantra of an ‘all party’ or ‘multi party’ Government was touted as a way of political leaders and political entities putting their heads together to help resolve the economic crisis which hit the people in a tailspin.  

While different political parties, economists and a range of concerned sections of society have presented and articulated their proposals on different occasions to resolve the crisis, the country as a whole has failed to bring such diverse suggestions into one minimum common programme that can galvanise the struggle to keep the economy afloat in the short run.

The reasons for this national failure are many and not necessary to be discussed here. However one reason could be the absence of across the board trusted mediators to pro-actively work to narrow the differences in the proposals before Parliament.

It is here that civil society could actively play a bridging role to fashion a common minimum programme that will meet the needs of the time and find the greatest deal of acceptance among the range of actors. While political parties may be coloured by their future electoral prospects, civil society will have no such limitations when helping to resolve the economic crisis.

A civil society mediation or facilitation can pave the way for a ‘whole of country effort” which is desperately needed at this point of time.

The seriousness of the economic situation is sometimes not understood by many. The fact that there are no fuel queues, no gas queues, no long power cuts etc. seems to have created a sense of complacency that the country has turned the economic corner. The fact that these have been managed basically by utilising the assistance provided by other countries and international agencies and not by resolving the foreign exchange crisis is sometimes lost on many.

President Ranil Wickremesinghe’s take on the economy clearly spells out the current economic situation. In his address to Parliament last week he said: “Today, the country’s economy and financial condition are not at sound levels. But some political parties and groups are still working under the assumption that the country is in a sound state. They make their comments and criticisms and make their proposals under the same assumption. We cannot assume that the economy has come back to normal just because there are no fuel queues.”

After reiterating that the country is facing the most serious economic crisis in recent history, he explained his strategy to get out of this crisis as follows;

Reaching a staff-level agreement with the International Monetary Fund (IMF)

Reaching a common agreement on debt restructuring with countries such as Japan, India and China and private creditors who have given us loans

Stabilising the economy by obtaining loan assistance from the IMF and other countries after certification from the IMF.

Working to raise the country’s economy to a developed level through a general plan after stabilising the economy.

Concluding his remarks in Parliament the President reiterated his call made earlier on several occasions: “I invite you all to join this process and let us face this challenge together for the sake of the country.”

During the ensuing debate on the President’s statement to Parliament Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa outlined his party’s 20 point economic blueprint to resolve the current crisis. Previously Dr. Harsha de Silva too had made public an economic plan to resolve the crisis.

During last week’s debate many speakers highlighted the urgency of the situation and made various proposals to face the economic crisis.

While Parliamentarian Champika Ranawaka highlighted the prospect of poverty levels increasing leading to a people’s uprising Professor G.L. Peiris stressed the importance of dealing with the spectre of corruption to facilitate the receipt of aid from foreign countries.

In all the views expressed by diverse political actors there are many commonalities which can be included in a common programme of work but the political establishment has been unable to translate these common features into one action plan.

It is in this context that the role of civil society becomes important. If it can play a constructive, proactive role in creating a national consensus on the way forward there is hope for the future.

(javidyusuf@gmail.com)