The Sunday
Times economic analysis
Pre -poll doles and post-poll hikes
By the economist
Lee Kwan Yew characterised Sri Lankan elections as
an auction of non-existent resources. The daily announcements of concessions
by the government since the dissolution of parliament render this assertion
an understatement.
In the coming weeks extravagant promises are most likely to be made
in election manifestos and on election platforms. The economic consequences
of this fiscal profligacy are no concern of the government.
Readers are only too aware of what happens to political promises. We
are here concerned about the economic promises that distort public expenditure
and ultimately heap burdens on the common man. Most of these economic promises
are never fulfilled, can never be fulfilled and were never intended to
be fulfilled.
Others are fulfilled in part often with dire consequences to the public
finances of the country. The Janasaviya promise of President Premadasa
is the best illustration of this. The original promise was to give everyone
who did not get an adequate income a monthly allowance of Rs. 2500. If
this promise was kept government expenditure would have sky rocketed beyond
any manageable levels. This was clear from the beginning.
When it was pointed out that the cost of the promise was unbearable,
the answer was that we will do it somehow. It was a ploy to win the election
and Premadasa knew fully well that a very attractive amount had to be promised
to have the desired effect at the elections.
Once in power there were the various adaptations to the scheme that
gave the illusion of the promise being kept in phases. Even the much-tailored
down version was very costly and hardly achieved the economic objectives.
The People's Alliance was not to be out done. They promised another welfare
package as attractive and as costly as the Janasaviya. The Samurdhi payments
are obtained from 55 per cent of the households in the country, at least
statistically. This alone is sufficient proof of a lack of targeting and
abuse. How a programme meant to serve the poor ends up in purchasing shares
of banks and in huge deposits is another question.
Ironically those who acquiesced in this program will be its critics
now, as mud slinging at election time gains momentum. The two issues that
come out of this is that election promises are reckless statements that
do not take into account either the economic capacity of the government
to fulfil or the economic consequences of even part fulfilling the promises.
The second issue is the utter lack of accountability of public funds.
Political parties are able to make rash promises owing to the credulous
nature of our people and their being accustomed to receiving handouts from
the government.
It may not be incorrect to characterise the public perception of the
role of governments to be one of doling handouts. There is also a lack
of an understanding that public expenditures have to be met by the public
themselves. This perception is perhaps due to the fact that very few people
pay direct taxes. This fact leads to the illusion that the receivers of
the benefits are not the payers. In fact this is a wrong perception as
most government revenue is obtained through indirect taxes. Further, these
expenditures generate inflationary pressures that result in the dwindling
of real incomes, especially of the poor. The reduction in prices of a number
of commodities is likely to be a temporary one. People should now be accustomed
to the fact that prices are reduced before an election only to be increased
after the election. Wage increases that could not be given were suddenly
given after the dissolution of parliament.
Tariffs that required to be maintained in order to reduce imports have
been lowered. All these will have consequences no sooner the election is
over. Then prices will rise. Surely these ploys have been used so many
times that our people cannot be fooled anymore?
Chandrika's Lanka, Ranil's Lanka and Prabha's Eelam
By Susantha Goonatilake
Monday's LTTE blast reportedly aimed at the Prime
Minister was a distinct signal of the Tiger not changing its stripes even
after the Bin Laden attack on the US. Other sources indicate that the LTTE
is working on a two pronged strategy — a terrorist one and an electoral
one.
The Chennai-based Hindu reported that "the TULF goes to poll with a
strident pro-LTTE plank" and "with the aim of supporting the LTTE's struggle".
It quoted TULF Secretary General R. Sampanthan as saying that the new Tamil
parties alliance was to muster support "for LTTE in and out of Parliament
and was not aimed at [only] the elections". Mr. Sampanthan said, "the Tamil
struggle has reached a point where the demand for sovereignty and self-determination
had become inevitable." Under the laws banning supporting Tigers and separatism
Mr. Sampanthan should have been immediately arrested. But this is Chandrika's
Sri Lanka with some thinking it will soon become Ranil's Sri Lanka.
The web journal Eelam Nation, reported that the Ellalan Force, a Tiger
front, had circulated leaflets in Batticaloa urging all Tamil political
parties to come under one umbrella. Otherwise, the Ellalan Force warned,
these parties would be "eliminated from the Tamil homeland". They would
"have to pay for it at the time of the election campaigns", it added ominously.
The group urged the Tamil people to support politicians who represent the
alliance and should avoid supporting or casting votes to other political
parties. Otherwise they would be considered anti-Tamil and would be "targeted
for reprimand" — meaning death sentence.
Eelam Nation quoted PLOTE leader Dharmalingham Sidharthan as saying
that his party was willing to join the Tamil Alliance so that they could
push the incoming Government to achieve self-determination of Tamils. He
apologized for the "past mistakes of its military approach against the
LTTE" and declared "the LTTE is the sole representative of the Tamil people".
He said the sharing of powers should not be the fundamental issue among
the Tamil parties to discuss now - meaning the aim is not devolution; instead,
self-determination or in other words a separate state. He said that branding
the LTTE as a terrorist organisation should be stopped.
These reports talk about a carefully laid out plan by Tigers together
with the foreign-funded lobby. The latest report of the University Teachers
for Human Rights (UTHR's)- Jaffna shows how the Tigers were recruiting
children. But "oblivious to these appalling events" the "well-heeled Tamil
elite were indulging in strange rituals". The National Peace Council (NPC)
arranged a plush three-day "consultation" at a hotel in Nilaveli last month.
Several Western diplomats were also present at this conference funded by
a Japanese foundation. The decisions arrived at the conference were to
serve as a basis for apparent peace. Through "carefully selected speakers",
the NPC set the main message that "the Tamil people are inseparable from
the LTTE and this war is to relieve the oppression of the Tamil people
by the Government". The LTTE, the UTHR report notes was "using all channels
of influence to replace the PA government by a UNP one. With Parliament
dissolved and elections in prospect, the UNP, with help from the TULF (that
is now allied to the UNP), will be pushed as the party of peace". Tamil
journalists were among those active in organising this LTTE front of Tamil
parties. After the elections, these front-parties would push for a ceasefire
giving a respite for the Tigers. The UNP, the TULF, and the Tigers, were
part of a common platform, the UTHR claims.
In any other country, the Western ambassadors at this meeting would
have been called before the Foreign Office and asked for explanation. The
NPC leadership would have been immediately arrested for supporting the
Tigers. The NPC actually should have been arrested long ago. Tiger journals
had reported that the NPC had proposed in 1995, removing all Sinhalese
settlements from the North East. Another Tiger journal had shown the NPC
marching in Geneva under the Tiger flag. But this is Chandrika's Sri Lanka
with some thinking it will soon become Ranil's Sri Lanka.
And while these were going on, Chandrika was in London and Ranil in
Tamil Nadu and Delhi, both drumming up support. Chandrika gave three muddled
interviews to the BBC missing a golden opportunity to compare the Tigers
with Bin Laden and the attack on the Central Bank and Katunayake with the
attack on New York and the Pentagon.
And Ranil? It would have been interesting to see what aspects of the
UNP's pro Tiger policy — as claimed by the UTHR — he was discussing. And
this was at a time when the one terrorist attack on the US's sovereignty
had galvanized the entire West. This is but Chandrika's Sri Lanka with
some hoping, it will soon become Ranil's Sri Lanka.
17th Amendment to stop malpractices
The politicians as well as the state officials who act in disregard
of the fundamental law of the land do not appear to have realised the serious
consequences that they might have to face.
By Victor Ivan
At a general election, an individual or a private
institution has the right to help a party of his choice. However, a government
official or a government institution has no such right at its level. What
the government officials and government institutions must do is to be politically
silent and inactive and allow the people to elect a government of their
choice.
One of the main objectives of the 17th Amendment was to put a stop to
this malpractice. Although the 17th Amendment has been adopted and it has
become part of the law of the country, it has not been possible to achieve
the aims of the law on an independent election commission.
After the government announced the election, it increased the salaries
of the government servants and the pensions.
It made the temporary employees of government institutions permanent.
Thousands of teachers were given promotions on the specific ground that
they had been politically victimised.
Although the Elections Commissioner has informed heads of all government
institutions that the resources of departments, corporations or statutory
bodies must not be used for the benefit of any party or to the detriment
of any party, this institution has been disregarded by many heads of government
institutions, and the government party politicians have been permitted
to use the resources of government institutions at will. All the media
of the state are functioning as mouthpieces of the PA disregarding the
principles of the 17th Amendment.
The IGP rejected the request made by the Elections Commissioner to cancel
all the police transfers made by the IGP after the election was announced.
What the IGP said was that, as he was the administrative authority of the
police, he alone had the right to transfer police officers. The Elections
Commissioner thereafter accepted the IGP's interpretation.
Although the IGP is the chief administrative officer of the police,
the Elections Commissioner has the right to prevent him taking any administrative
action that might make an undue effect on the election at election time.
The IGP says that there were a large number of transfers before the 1994
election too, but there was no shouting about it at that time. In 1994
there was no 17th Amendment. On the other hand, it must not be forgotten
that it has not been possible to establish a Police Commission.
Under the Police Commission that will be established under the 17th
Amendment, the IGP's powers to effect police transfers and disciplinary
control have been taken away from him and vested in the Police Commission.
All the political parties agreed to the enactment of such a reform because
there was a general recognition that the IGP as a rule has had to function
as a political tool of the executive.
At previous elections, in areas where there was violence some high ranking
police officers functioned as tools of local political leaders of the government
party, and the IGP took no effective action at all to control the situation.
What it showed was that the IGP's conduct at elections had not been impartial.
The role being played by the chief of the government's media institutions
is similar to the political role being played by the IGP. Instead of objecting
to the Election Commissioner's directives in public as the IGP did, they
follow a policy of refraining from following those directives. Their excuse
is that directives aimed at them alone cannot be just.
It will be desirable to have a policy frame work incorporating principals
that all mass media must follow at elections.
However, although a private media institution has the right to act for
the benefit of a party of its choice, a government mass media institution
has no such right. For instance a private TV institution can work for the
UNP and another can work for the PA without contravening the election laws.
However, no state media institution can work for the benefit of one
party and to the detriment of another party. The state media should follow
a policy of total impartiality. The reason is that, unlike the private
media the state media are an institution of the public and are run on public
funds.
There can be no doubt that the autocratic conduct of the IGP and the
chiefs of the state media institutions serve the government's purposes.
What it shows is that the PA government which functions as a care -taker
government until the end of the elections, as well as the President, is
prepared to follow the principles of the constitution including the 17th
Amendment which was passed with her own support, which may be considered
to be the fundamental law of the land. It is no simple offence. That offence
alone would suffice to invite an impeachment against the President. The
IGP and the state media are under the President's direct control.
The politicians as well as the state officials who act in disregard
of the fundamental law of the land do not appear to have realised the serious
consequences that they might have to face.
The politicians who use the movable and immovable properties belonging
to the state, a state corporation or a statutory body for political purposes,
as well as the state officials in charge of those properties who permit
such action on the part of the politicians, can be found guilty of offences
of corruption coming under the election law as well as offences under the
law relating to bribery and corruption.
A person found guilty of such offences can be sentenced to rigorous
imprisonment and be deprived of civic rights.
The writer is the Editor of Ravaya |