Contrary to Bryan Nicholas (letter in The Sunday Times of September 8) I would say 'Thank God' for cricket, particularly in today's context. Imagine the situation in the country if the Sinhala and Tamil citizens took the war as seriously as they apparently, and objectionably, do cricket.
Normal life would be impossible. There would be a siege atmosphere prevailing in areas of mixed population. Instead of tallying scores and comparing the finer points of play of the relative teams, people would be counting casualties and arguing as to which army's tactics were militarily superior.
The new heroes would be the services commanders. Is this desirable in a democracy? Would the growing burden of the rise in the cost of living be more supportable in an environment of bellicosity rather than of friendly rivalry?
The culprits who should take responsibility for the loss of life and limbs are the politicians on both sides who have created the conditions which have led to hostilities and those, eg. the neo-Buddhists, who continue to foment them. Why blame the private sector? They are, by definition, motivated by considerations of profit maximization, and do not pretend to be any more altruistic. Surely we should not want them to turn jingoist?
All reasonable people would be ever grateful for the recent Test series which ameliorated a potentially explosive situation by diverting people's minds away from the war and each other's throats.
All this does not detract from the grave need to spare a thought for the casualties of the war, whether combatants or civilians, and do all that is in our power to lighten their lives.
The "sole current national urgency" should be, not the war, but the peace effort.
The Sri Lankan population is said to be top heavy. A clever device has now been invented to blot off a fair portion of this population - the pensioners, by a recent Govt. decision to increase salaries of those on the job by 50 per cent and pensions by 10 per cent. How this will happen I would explain, though it needs only a little explaining.
Even a child knows the simple logistics of all prices and service fees going up with increase of wages. So while the employees will have a 50 per cent raise to buy the jacked-up-priced goods and obtain the higher-charged services of doctors, lawyers etc. the poor pensioners will have to face the bloated prices and fees with only the 10 per cent increase. So the only alternative in the present context of prices etc. hitting the ceiling overnight is to lick one's fingers and starve slowly to death in the confines of one's own or rented out habitat. It has been argued that pensioners do not need increases as they only sit at home. Of course they sit at home but haven't they too to eat and go to their doctors, even more frequently than the younger employed set?
In many Western countries, the state's consideration for the over 60s is almost amazing. They are given free public transport, have 'senior citizen seats' separated for them in public conveyances, have subsidised holiday packages (to be done with before kicking the bucket), and when they get to the very weak stage even have a state-run meals-on-wheels system with meals delivered at the door by kind young women who would opt to fuss around a bit too. To lessen their boredom, telephone facilities are given generously. Those who do not get pensions are given a food-allowance. One will a very pious style say, 'We are Easterners, we have the extended family system and don't need the state molly-coddling the old and the weak".
Extended family system in the East too, is going out rapidly, so we find the poor pensioned man and woman seated alone in his or her abode, dreaming of food that has gone out of their purse-limits, un-cared for by the state and the families and only having the pleasure of seeing the food-prices and employees' salaries hitting the sky above! It is enough matter for king Sakra to burn his buttocks if the state refuses to have second thoughts on the matter and increase pensions proportionate to the employees' salary increases or at least to three quarter of it. One-fifth increase, as envisaged at present, is downright unfair and inhuman and can be described even as a deliberate device to knock off the poor men and women in a state of acute hunger even before their due time! What a difference between the pious intonations of 'Respect to the elders' and this cruel state of affairs. When in January 1997 salaries are increased by 50 per cent and food prices go up by 100 per cent (unscrupulous vendors having a field day) you will find half the pensioners dead by March 1997 through sheer starvation.
So we poor pensioners entreat those at the top to change the decision and be fair by us. King Sakra may burn his buttocks but he has long ago stopped coming this way to our trouble-ridden land. So the govt. is our only salvation. The extended family system, a variable factor too is bidding us adieu. We certainly are a desperate lot.
It was announced recently that the state pensioners are to be given a 10 per cent increase in their pensions from 1997. However, at the same time it was announced that only half the proposed increase would be made next year, while the other 5 per cent would be made in 1998. Along with this announcement it was also made known that the serving public officers would be given a 25 per cent increase in their salaries next year, while another 25 per cent increase would be made in 1998. It has to be pointed out here that a pensioner whose basic pension is Rs. 2,000 (without CLA and other special allowances) would get an increase of Rs. 100 only next year. This is a negligible amount in view of the very steep rise in the cost of living which has gone beyond the reach of the fixed income group.
After the next Budget, where several existing subsidies are to be done away with according to Government sources, the C.O.L. would go up further. It is not known why the Government decided to differentiate between the serving officers and the pensioners, who have to face the same living conditions as the public officers. The pensioners have also to pay the same prices to purchase their daily food and other requirements for their existence, like the public officers who are to be given an increase of 25 per cent with their salaries in '97. It should not be forgotten that the pensioners are those public officers who have served 30 to 35 years or more during their life time, and are now spending the evening of their life under much economic constraints. If the Government decides that the pensioners should be given a lesser increase than the serving public officers, then they should be given the staple food items under a "Subsidised Scheme" as the Government proposes to do in the case of the Samurdhi card holders. The shop keepers or the State Agency outlets are not going to give the pensioners any rebates when they buy their provisions on production of their Pensioners' Identity Cards.
If the Government wants to stick to their present decision, I wish to suggest here that the pensioners be given the full 10 per cent increase in their pensions from 1997 itself, and not in two installments in '97 and '98 as proposed. It has also to be pointed out here that over 95 per cent of the pensioners are those who have retired during their time, on much lower salary scales than those who have retired after the recent salary revisions during the last few years.
I had the misfortune of stepping into the Free Ayurvedic Dispensary at Panadura recently seeking medical treatment. As I entered the dispensary premises, my eyes met the lady doctor who was having a hearty chat with a woman seated before her. Later I learnt that the other female was none other than an employee of the institution. Perhaps, my visit would have spoilt their tete-a-tete! However, as there was no other patient, the physician was kind enough to ask me about my whereabouts, while demanding my National Identity Card. On hearing my address, she, wearing an air of official superiority, flatly refused to attend to me, as she was expected to treat only patients resident within the Panadura U. C. limits.
I politely asked her as to why it was not indicated on the notice board. She admitted that it was a lapse on the part of the authorities concerned and asked me as to why I could not go to the Ayurvedic Dispensary at Lunawa, since Henamulla falls within the bounds of Moratuwa. I explained to her that the distances from my home to Lunawa and Panadura were four and two miles respectively and that I was a voter in the Panadura Electroate. Her response was nothing but a wry smile showing her lack of knowledge of the geographical divisions!
Overcome by anguish and despair, I left the dispensary, pondering over the achievements and set- backs of the PA rule. This is a pointer to the fact that the old and the sick are often driven from pillar to post for no fault of theirs!
Countless number of articles and letters have appeared in the national press on the subject of animal slaughter and consumption of meat. We, Buddhists living in this thrice-blessed land of the Sinhala race, are supposedly forbidden from consuming meat, fish and flesh of any living creature.
The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Ordinance of 1956 specifies, animals as "any domestic or captured animal and includes any bird, fish, or reptile in captivity." In our country where the Sinhala Buddhists constitute over 70 per cent of the population, consumption of animal flesh (beef, mutton, pork, chicken and fish) is astonishingly on the increase. Surely, this massive increase could not have been caused by the consumption-levels and patterns of non-Buddhists, for, their Holy Books, Koran and Bible, do not forbid eating of animal flesh, except in certain cases such as pork, creatures sans blood and flesh of dead animals. In fact, the Koran and the Bible have prescribed a particular method of slaughter with which many of our animal rights crusaders and vegetarianist advocates disagree.
Since we cannot impose our will on other religions and cannot demand their followers to alter what have been decreed in their Holy Books, we Buddhists could positively contribute to the reduction in animal slaughter and rate of consumption of animal flesh if we ourselves strictly adhered to the teachings of Lord Buddha and abstained from eating animal flesh. If the majority Buddhist people gave up eating meat, there would be a massive drop in the sale and consumption of beef, mutton, pork, chicken and fish. For instance, true Hindus in India and Sri Lanka and elsewhere do not even touch meat - not even eggs.
Instead of wasting our time and energy in this endless debates and trying to teach others, let us set the example by avoiding animal flesh.
Otherwise, the only simple solution, in my humble view, to stop animal slaughter and consumption of meat is to remove the canine teeth of all our citizens once and for all through a Constitutional amendment. I believe the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Affairs, Professor G.L. Peiris, who is busy negotiating the passage of the new Constitutional Reforms, would be kind enough to give serious thought to my suggestion.
Return to the Letters to the Editor contents page
Write a letter to the editor : editor@suntimes.is.lk