There is a point in R. de S. Jayawickrema’s comment of the 23rd February on Upali S. Jayasekera’s letter in The Island of 17th February. However, in the first place I do not believe that all those who are in politics today, would fail USJ’s test as claimed by RdeSJ. It would be odious to name names but an objective look at the members of the last Parliament and the new faces lining up to enter the fray, should produce a fair number of persons who could adorn the House, if properly directed. It would be too pessimistic to rule them out totally.

Secondly, even if the available quality is poor on the whole, it would be counter-productive to throw up our hands in despondency. It is in the national interest to do all that is possible to improve what is available. USJ’s vow is certainly a progressive step towards that target. If we continue the lethargy of the past towards quality improvement, the "hope that at least in another ten years time we will be able to find at least a few politicians for whom we will be able to cast our votes with the genuine feeling that we are voting for a person who is above board" would turn out to be a mirage, granted that RdeSJ’s basic assumption is tenable.

My own belief is that if effective steps are taken in time, to drive home to the hopeful contestants, what the Voters consider to be their minus points, they would certainly make an honest attempt to conform, in their own interests. For instance, a prior warning that voters would boycott those who resort to polluting the environment with pulp, paper and polythene, should produce a much better environment than the eyesore thrust upon us during the Presidential Election.