The Jumping Jacks of Sri Lanka’s
Parliament
SHENALI WADUGE
The 60 years of post-independence has done little to uplift the ethics
of Sri Lanka’s parliamentarians. In a parliamentary system that
engages the voter to select the party of his choice it bemoans to ask
what right parliamentarians have to change their allegiance when their
comfort-zones are jeopardized or they feel it better to shift their
comfort-zones to better climes. The argument in question here is whether
cross-overs are really as a result a difference in principle or whether
it is motivated by monetary means iced by other extravaganzas that are
sure to come tied to the carrot. We can well guess why Sri Lanka is
possibly having the highest cases of cross-overs in parliamentary history
– a few of them have crossed-over between the two main parties
so much so they may not even remember their own score.
Understanding the psyche of our politicians is not very difficult to
do. Perhaps then our blame should not be directed solely at the parliamentarian
who crosses over. A greater amount of “why” should definitely
be spearheaded at the party that beckons him with the carrots…
predictably in critical times when the numbers game come to play. In
the most recent example it is the passing of the 2007 budget. We are
very well aware of who Mr. Rauf Hakeem is. It does not take any effort
to read how his decisions are likely to be placed in times of importance
where his “men” are likely to tip the scales in favor or against
a major decision. Likewise, he has decided to first vote with the budget
& then suddenly do a U-turn. We are told that it was the denial
to offer the Chairman of the TRC to Hakeem that instigated the turn-round
in allegiance. This would then beg to question whether Hakeem’s
first vote for the budget was as a result of a promise to grant him
the TRC Chairman post which could have been later denied… We will
possibly never know. Then there is the other cross-over specialist following
in the footsteps of his grandfather. He is likely to do a googly upon
the Government as well.
The corruption of democracy begins within the precincts’ of Parliament
with self-serving megalomanics who care not a penny for the voters who
voted them in. With the present parliamentary system doing nothing to
help or provide any escape from inviting ethically defunct parliamentarians
until such time the present system does change the public will have
to make do with the bargaining ties that the minority parties love to
dabble with each time an important issue requires a vote.
Do these parliamentarians deserve any empathy? Well their argument
would be that they should have the freedom to cross party lines as per
their conscience. Fair enough – so long as it is not attached to
any portfolio or monetary gain. Yet it becomes a cumbersome endeavor
to recall what these politicos bellow on top of political stages &
completely contradict their own statements when they cross-over &
end up on a higher pedestal of power & glory.
What about the public – how do they view the increasing number
of cross-overs in Sri Lanka? the Center for Policy Alternatives in their
survey of 1300 individuals residing in 17 districts (except in the N&E)
following the cross over of 18 UNP parliamentarians & 6 Muslim Congress
MPs have deduced that the public has mixed reactions. 68% JVPers disapprove
of crossovers while 15% approve it. 48% of UNPers disapprove UNPers
crossing over while 34% were undecided & a further 18% actually
approved crossovers. Amongst the SLFPers surveyed 30% disapprove while
50% approve crossovers.
We can well see how the public themselves are opinionated in their
views regarding crossovers. Usually party-minded themselves the public
are a mirror of the politicians in more ways than one as they blindly
accept whatever wrongs that their party leaders commit – in this
case using carrots to veer avaricious politicos to cross over.
It is the party manifesto & the promises of a better Sri Lanka
that engages the minds of the voter to cast their vote for a particular
party. The members representing that party who eventually become elected
to parliament are expected to support that party’s decisions in
Parliament, would it then be correct for MPs to suddenly decide to act
according to their “conscience” leading to a cross over? It
is ironical how the conscience doesn’t mind very lucrative portfolios
that soon come with the cross over.
Principle or perks we are certainly likely to see plenty of cross overs
in future. It would mean added burdens to the public, a colossal waste
of public funds necessitating calls for austerity for the public but
prosperity for all parliamentarians no doubt.
|
