Last week’s revelation in parliament that a news
conference organized in connection with Livestock Awards
Ceremony has cost all of a million rupees will surely merit
inclusion in Bob Ripley’s ``Believe it or Not.’’ Given
the way that inflation is galloping with a cup of tea in a
boutique costing Rs. 20, a million bucks may be worth less than
it seems to be and millionaires today maybe dime a dozen in a
country where a laksapathiya merited wide esteem not so
long ago. But is it possible for a government institution to
spend that kind of money on a mere news conference? Readers may
well wonder whether it was a champagne and caviar affaire with
hundreds of invitees and gifts for participants with special
sound and lighting effects thrown in for the television cameras.
According to what Chief Government Whip Jeyaraj
Fernandopulle had told the House, the Livestock Awards
extravaganza, it was obviously much more than a mere tamasha
favoured by our politicians and political patronage seeking
officialdom, had cost Rs. 24 million. No doubt Fernandopulle,
who nowadays has to pull out most of the government’s chestnuts
out of the fire, was right when he said that livestock was an
important subject and productivity in that sphere had to be
incentivised and rewarded. But spending Rs. 24 million on an
awards ceremony takes not just the cake but the whole bakery.
The JVP’s Anura Kumara Dissanayake had asked how
the government could spend a million rupees on a news
conference. His party periodically meets the press having now
shifted from the Hotel Nippon where these events used to be held
in the past to the National Library Services Board which is
cheaper. A JVP press conference usually includes a piece of
cake, a sandwich, a plantain and a cup of tea. Plain fare,
obviously, compared to what must have been on offer at the
aforesaid million buck event. As Dissanayake pointed out, they
too live in this country and have an idea on what media
conferences cost. Of course there are press conferences and
press conferences. Rich companies hire event managers to
organize these events, most often at five star hotels, and
frequently followed by cocktails. Hard headed businessmen
usually apply a cost – benefit criterion on money they spend and
probably find the publicity they seek worth the investment they
make. Quite a nice little industry has grown around media
conferences that crowd the diaries of news editors and directors
working for the print and electronic industries.
The government, of course, is near bankrupt with
hardly enough cash to pay its bills notwithstanding frequent
recourse to the money printer. Hence the blood, sweat and tears
shed by its various suppliers and contractors struggling to
collect their dues. But the profligate habits of the political
and bureaucratic functionaries are alive and well. These
worthies are ever willing to spend lavishly if the money does
not come out of their own pockets. Government departments and
corporations all too often arrange their press conferences,
media briefings etc. in five star comfort. Food and drink is
laid out lavishly and alcoholic beverages are provided despite
the government’s obeisance to mathata thiththa, the much
touted anti-alcohol policy. Seminars and workshops too cannot be
held in their own offices, some of which are equipped with halls
and auditoriums. Lunch is a sine qua non at such events.
Admittedly we in the news industry attending these events are
beneficiaries because journalists too are ``eating drinking
people,’’ some more than others.
Now that something smelly has hit the fan about
the Livestock Awards, it behoves the opposition to follow up and
get some idea of how the Rs. 24 million including the million on
the press conference was spent. A detailed accounting should be
demanded. The mere fact that some figures have been presented
and some front page newspaper space won for the expose should
not mean that the matter should be allowed to rest. What came to
light is only a tip of the iceberg. The way government funds,
meaning taxpayer rupees, are wasted boggles the imagination.
Time was when some well placed supplementary questions would
have hit the responsible minister like a whiplash when a reply
such as Mr. Jeyaraj Fernandopulle’s was on offer. Now, as then,
ministers sometimes duck loaded questions asking for
unreasonably long periods of time to provide the answers. We run
a story today about former Speaker Joseph Michael Perera
grumbling about the time demanded to answer his question of
three Prado SUVs supposedly missing from the Bank of Ceylon’s
transport pool.
While on the subject of responsibility of MPs,
well paid MPs we might add, to keep the government on its toes
with searching parliamentary questions, we will digress to
another matter we have touched upon in our news pages today.
This relates to the on-going examination of directors of the
International Center for Ethnic Studies by a Parliamentary
Select Committee on NGOs where it had been revealed that two
influential funders of ICES, the Ford Foundation and the
Canadian High Commission here, had influenced the ICES board to
reinstate its sacked executive director days after she was
dismissed. It is of course common knowledge that he who pays the
piper calls the tune and nobody will be surprised that the ICES
board, which should have properly resigned if its decision to
get rid of Mani was either wrong or in bad faith, knuckled under
the demands of its funders. What interests us is that a select
committee is righteously digging into the funds and funding
sources of NGOs while nobody knows from where political parties,
whether they be the SLFP, UNP, JVP or any other P get their
money.
Transparency in this regard is more important
than finding out from which pot the gravy is ladled out to NGO
plates. Some NGOs do excellent work and others less so but most
NGO personnel are very well paid. Political parties and their
leaders, whether in the Third World or the First, are notorious
for rewarding their Godfathers with contracts and other goodies
paid for by the national exchequer in return for helping to get
themselves elected or perpetuating their tenure in office. As
far as we know there are hardly any rules requiring disclosure
of political donations in this country and it is high time that
our leaders started grappling with this matter. Given the
difficulty of pushing the president to appoint the
Constitutional Council, about which the opposition is even
belatedly exhibiting some political will, it will be the height
of optimism to expect politicians to demand disclosure of how
their party coffers are filled leave alone individual war
chests.