Columns

The Government’s announcement in the middle of the presidential election campaign that it will increase salaries for public servants from January 1, 2025 has come in for a great deal of flak from election monitoring organisations on the grounds that it is in violation of election laws.

The People’s Action for Free and Fair Elections (PAFFREL), has, in a letter to the Election Commission stated that the Cabinet announcement of the decision to increase the salaries of State sector employees from next year (2025) constitutes acts of undue influence of electors in connection with the free exercise of their franchise at the upcoming presidential poll.

Additionally, PAFFREL has alluded to the Government’s announcement that it will reduce the PAYE tax as another example of undue influence on the voter.  

The latest in this trend of the Government making such promises is its announcement that it has decided on an immediate write-off of all crop loans taken by farmers.

The President’s Media Division (PMD) noted that the decision was reached with a view to providing financial relief and support to farmers.

That these pledges/decisions of the Government have been made with an eye on the presidential election can easily be deduced from the surrounding circumstances. Just two months back when teachers and public servants were on the streets demanding salary increases the Government’s response was that it was not possible in view of the economic situation in the country. In fact the United National Party (UNP) chairman Vajira Abeywardene, who is undoubtedly privy to the thinking of the president, said that such salary hikes could be granted only by increasing the value added tax to 21 percent.

The announcement of generous salary increases to public servants just before the commencement of postal voting (a facility mainly used by public servants) is another indication that it was directed at influencing the public servant’s vote.

However, what is equally or more problematic than the allegation that these are “chanda gundus” is the governance aspect of such decisions. This is clearly reflected in the sequence of events that led up to the Government’s announcement of the decision to increase salaries.

On Wednesday, media carried photographs of the chairman of the Presidential Expert Committee tasked to put together recommendations related to the salaries and allowances of public services Udaya R Seneviratne handing over the committee’s final report to President Ranil Wickremesinghe.

It was also reported that the Cabinet of Ministers on Monday, approved the final report of the Committee presumably after it was handed over to the President.

The media further reported that according to the PMD, Committee Chairman Seneviratne has announced that the Cabinet had approved the committee’s final report.

Seneviratne stated that the report was prepared in alignment with the conditions outlined in the memorandum of understanding (MoU) between the Government of Sri Lanka and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). It was developed with the agreement of the Treasury and the approval of the Cabinet to ensure the necessary financial allocations.

The expert committee on restructuring public sector salaries and allowances was appointed by President Ranil Wickremesinghe on June 12, with the approval of the Cabinet.

According to Seneviratne, the committee was instructed to submit the report within three months, and accordingly, an interim report was presented on August 12. In the interim report, the committee had outlined an 18-point policy for implementing public service reforms and increasing salaries.

Cabinet approval was granted on the same day, that is on August 12, allowing the committee to prepare a comprehensive salary revision for the entire public service, including constitutional boards, corporations, universities, and all government departments.

Accordingly the committee had submitted its final report to the President a week before the three-month deadline which ended on September 12, confirming significant relief for all government employees.

Transport, Highways and Mass Media Minister Dr Bandula Gunawardana speaking at an election meeting at Boralesgamuwa said that the recommendations given to include the salary increase to the State sector in the 2025 Budget based on the Udaya R Seneviratne committee report had been included in the 2025 Budget document being prepared by the treasury.

The minister also claimed that the data on the amount of money allocated for the government servants’ salary increase will be made available in the budget estimate that will be printed and released next month.

From a governance perspective several questions arise with regard to the process followed by the government in arriving at the decision to increase public servants salaries from January 2025.

The committee that was given three months time to prepare its recommendations when it was appointed on June 12, completed its work with one week to spare. This is rather unusual given the wide ranging and complicated nature of its work and suggests that it may have been hastily done. It is usual for such committees to ask for an extension of time of time to complete its work but this committee had completed its work ahead of schedule.

The committee’s recommendations were handed over to the President on September 2, and the Cabinet approved the recommendations on the same day. This suggests that the Cabinet would not have had time to study and deliberate on the recommendations and its implications before giving its nod to the proposals and only blindly rubber stamped the committee’s recommendations.

Usually when a proposal is presented to the Cabinet it is customary to give at least two weeks for the Cabinet Ministers to make their observations. More so when the proposals have financial implications as was the case here.

In fact on the face of it the Government would have to raise substantial finances to implement the proposed pay hikes. Additionally, the Government had just announced that it was in talks with the IMF to reduce personal taxes which would have in turn put a strain on the resources available to the treasury. In such a context it would have been prudent to call for a detailed report from the treasury in order to enable the Cabinet to make an informed decision on the proposals.

Minister Gunawardana’s remarks at Boralesgamuwa that the recommendations to increase salaries to the State sector had been included in the 2025 Budget confirm that the Ministers are not privy to the financial implications of the proposals. This is further reinforced by the Minister’s statement that the data on the amount of money allocated for the government servants’ salary increase will be made available in the budget estimate that will be printed and released next month.

All this points to the lack of due diligence in the decision making process of the Government. With the President’s surprising remarks last week that the economy comes before governance, one wonders what factors have been taken into consideration in the recent past when important decisions have been made. It is difficult to subscribe to the Presidential pronouncement that matters of the economy have to be given preference to governance matters. After all, good governance practices will not only facilitate prudent decision making in the economic arena but will also enhance nation building.

(javidyusuf@gmail.com )