Curtailing budget debate

The Minster of Industrial Development, Constitutional Affairs and Deputy Minister of Finance, Prof. G. L. Peiris, who has presented the PA government’s budget in parliament argues in an interview with The Island Sunday Edition (March 31) that the budget debate should be shortened.

He says it is ‘tedious and repetitive’ - his emphasis is on the committee stages proceedings. Those who watch budget debates in parliament may agree with Prof. Peiris on this. The manner in which budget debates are conducted is proof of the deterioration of the standards of parliamentary debates over the years. It is not seldom that one who listens to these debates wonders why most of the speakers cannot stick to the subjects being debated. Occasions are numerous where the ruling party and the opposition disport themselves in a game of verbal Ping-Pong which in no way helps improve the lot of the taxpaying public.

It was only the other day, we reported an incident in parliament where some ruling party members had hurled tumblers at the opposition ranks. Most of the speeches made there are so pregnant with double entendre and even filth that teachers are, it is said, wary of taking school children to the public gallery.

A proposal was made recently to set up a research wing for parliamentarians to improve the standards of debates. It was welcome by many, but nothing is heard of it today. That parliamentarians need proper training and guidance in conducting research which will arm them with facts and figures needed for debates goes without saying. The Speaker, who himself is a fiery orator and seasoned debater evinced a keen interest in this proposal. But what has become of it?

There has also been a proposal that parliament meet more often than it does at present. But it is doubtful whether this will serve any purpose unless measures are first adopted to enhance the quality of parliamentary debate.

Minister Peiris, who no doubt has to bear the brunt of frontal attacks launched by the opposition during the budget debate- with President Chandrika Kumaratunga, who is the Minister of Finance enjoying the luxury of not being present in parliament- says that this kind of ‘long protracted debate is inconvenient to members on both sides of the House ... As a result constituency work as well as ministry work has been neglected.’ He views curtailment of budget debates as a way out. He wants ministries clustered at the committee stages.

However, there appears to be another solution as well. Isn’t it also a good idea for the government to scrap the dozens of unwanted ministries? Sri Lanka has no need for such a jumbo cabinet.

Minister Peiris as well as many others including the Speaker is worried that it is difficult to secure a quorum in parliament while debates are on. In the electorates the oft heard complaint is that parliamentarians are not available to the public. In parliament there is a complaint of difficulty in securing a quorum. Then where are these representatives?

It behoves party leaders to put their heads together and find out what has gone wrong.

Politician with a backbone

A motion moved by the TULF at the Jaffna Municipal Council to reproach the US Ambassador in Sri Lanka, Mr. Ashley Wills, over his recent speech in Jaffna, has been torpedoed by Mr. T. Subathiran, an EPRLF councillor, according to our report on Saturday.

In a statement issued to the press later, the EPRLF points out: "... there is nothing wrong in Mr. Wills’ speech. A particular group [read the LTTE] who have not yet joined the stream of democratic politics and who do not accept other Tamils political parties, cannot be considered the sole representatives of the Tamils. If we do so, then we are forfeiting our election as the people’s representatives in this council."

That the LTTE is the sole representative of the Tamil community is a Goebbelsian lie that is being propagated the world over. Even prominent members of the mainstream Tamil parties have subscribed to this lie, some under duress and others on their own. There are also others who are using the mainstream Tamil parties as a vehicle to further the terrorist cause by projecting the LTTE as the sole representative of the Tamils.

Mr. Subathiran’s question must be posed to these politicians: If the LTTE is the sole representatives of Tamils, what are they doing there in parliament and other elected bodies? What follows from this is that those who claim that the LTTE is the sole representative have no moral right to champion what is termed ‘the Tamil cause.’ For on their own admission they are not representatives of Tamils. Despite this claim, most of these Tamil political leaders can be seen at foreign missions in Colombo seeking appointments and delivering lectures on behalf of the Tamil community.

In the south, too, during the JVP instigated reign of terror, political parties were under the gun and some sided with the JVP to save their skin. But there were many others, including the traditional left, who had the courage to stand up to the JVP. Their strategy bore results. They helped unmask the JVP, lay bare its terrorism and isolate it. This helped defeat the JVP decisively in the end. The JVP is today in the democratic mainstream.

The JVP and the LTTE are not similar in most respects. But, the Tamil politicians must have courage to tell the LTTE enough is enough. So long as they remain pusillanimous and try to subcontract for the LTTE for fear of death - which is inevitable at the hands of the terrorists anyway as evident from the assassination of TULF Leader, Mr. A. Amirthalingam - the LTTE can justify its naked terrorism and defy pressure to accept a solution acceptable to all communities. It is sad that some of the Tamil political leaders have been reduced to LTTE apologists and come to be dubbed closet Tigers ipso facto.

The greatest disservice that these leaders can do to their community as well as the country to genuflect to the terrorists and to try to curry favour with it by bashing those, at the LTTE’s bidding, who dare stand in its way.

Your comments to the Editor