INGOS BEHIND PROTESTS...
Wimal Weerawansa M inister of Construction,engineering Services,housing and Common Amenities Wimal Weerawansa spoke to the Daily Mirror about the increasing cost of living,protests against the government and the impact of his 2010 fast unto death in front
By Dianne Silva The Govt. is subsidizing for the poorest, and asking the Middle Class to manage their affairs. Members of the INGO had the ability to brainwash the members of that community, and this brought them onto the streets Before the prices went up even the American Ambassador was receiving the fuel subsidy provided by the government The irony of it was that they said they did not want subsidies
My protest outside the UN Office had an
impact Certain groups are carrying out organized attempts to distort these peaceful demonstrations
INCREASING COST OF LIVING
Q: The people are suffering due to the increase in the cost of living; do you feel the pain of the people? Why are you doing nothing about it?
The month before the increase in the fuel prices, the inflation rate was at a low of 3.8 percent. We know that during the United National Party’s regime when Ronnie De Mel was the Minister of Finance the economic growth was at 6 percent and the inflation rate was at about 25 percent. Similarly at that time the poverty level also very high. Today it is at a low of 4 percent.
Therefore I would not concede that there is a severe crisis in the country, as portrayed by the media. I am not saying that the public is not suffering at all, even before the increase in the fuel prices, there was a bracket in society that was unable to meet their day to day needs.
However at this time, despite the increase in oil prices, the prices of vegetables and rice is falling—therefore the overall impact to the cost of living is relatively small. I am not saying that there is no impact, but the impact is not as great as that which is being created by certain parties.
At the same time while increasing the fuel prices, the government has been able to look after the needs of the low income earners by providing them subsidies. Fishermen, Samurdhi recipients and school van drivers, have been given a subsidy. Therefore the government has operated in a manner that ensures the lowest income earners are given a safety net.
THE MIDDLE CLASS AND THE COST OF LIVING
Q: Your defence has been that after the increase in the price of fuel, the government has provided appropriate subsidies for those who cannot cope with the increase in prices. However, what about the members of the Middle Class, the ones who can’t get out onto the streets and protest, because they have corporate jobs that they will lose if they don’t go to work? What happens to them?
We know that the poverty level has reduced in recent times; however we still provide 15 percent of the population with the Samurdhi benefits. Simply because the fuel prices increased we have not stopped giving the Samurdhi benefits, neither have we stopped giving the fertilizer subsidy. We are giving the subsidy to everyone that we can. If the government was one that was inconsiderate of the people, then they would not simply increase the fuel prices and leave it at that. They would also increase the price of fertilizer, because the price of fertilizer is very high globally.
Previously, when someone from the Middle Class pumped petrol from a filling station—the government bore some portion of that cost. At that time everyone was given the subsidy, what has been done now is that we are subsidizing for those who cannot afford it at all and telling the Middle Class to manage it for themselves.
Before the prices went up even the American Ambassador was receiving the fuel subsidy provided by the government, our Kerosene prices were lower than the prices in India; our kerosene was being shipped to India through Katchativu. We have removed this market distortion and given those who need subsidies some relief and asked the Mid- dle Class which can manage its affairs and have a strong income base to face the fuel price hike.
I don’t think the Middle Class will be greatly affected, there will be some impact. I believe the Middle Class had the capability within their lifestyle to manage this fuel price hike.
Furthermore even at this point the government is still bearing a partial cost for fuel. Q: You say the Middle Class is expected to manage the price increase on its own. The poorest are taken care of by the subsidies, but the Middle Class must suffer?
I don’t think that simply because the price of fuel has increased the Middle Class will be destroyed. If that was the case then after the elections in India, they too will increase their prices. Every country in the world that is not producing oil is facing this same issue.
I think for the Middle Class to suffer there are a number of other elements that need to come together.
CONSEQUENCE OF PROTESTS
Q: There have been a number of protests in the recent weeks, because the people are unhappy with the administration. You have said that these protests are a means of creating an unstable situation in the country, similar to the Arab Spring. Do you think protests make a difference?
I think the public and political parties have all the right to hold protests, which is a fundamental right of the democratic tradition of this country. There are instances when these protests achieve their objectives and times when they are not considered. However I don’t think that the majority of this country is dissatisfied with the administration.
I think those who attend those protests are a very limited group. However due to the power of the media, there is an exaggeration of the numbers. Even in Syria, it is only one town, but the media makes it out to be the whole country—cnn, BBC and Al-jazeera are capable of doing that.
I don’t think there is anything wrong with having protests. However there are certain groups that are carrying out calculated, manipulated and very well organized attempts to distort these peaceful demonstrations into violent outbursts. These may be agents of INGOS, dependents of Foreign Missions in the country, regardless of which they are carrying out a manipulated attempt to make these protests violent.
The ultimate goal of these or- ganizations is to de-stabilize the country from within, while simultaneously carrying out an international conspiracy against us outside of the country. Q: Do you think there can be any impact through protests? Can the public achieve anything?
Protests cannot achieve results the next day. Regardless of whether there are results through these protests or not they are still being carried out.
Q: The question is; will the government listen to the people if they protest? Can the people make a difference by getting out onto the streets?
I don’t think that protests can overthrow the government or make the government dance to their own tune by simply protesting. The government acts regardless of whether there are protests or not—if they see a grievance of the people.
PROTEST OUTSIDE THE UN OFFICE IN 2010
Q: You say that the people cannot make a difference by protesting against the decisions taken by the leaders, whom they elected into power. Yet you carried out a protest against an international organization. In 2010 outside the UN office you carried out a fast unto death, against the appointment of a Panel of Experts. What do you think was achieved
by that?
There were three goals of this protest; the first one was to increase the awareness of the UN panel within the country. Secondly; it was to ensure that the panel was not appointed. Thirdly; it was to ensure that they would carry out an unbiased report, in the event that they were appointed. I think that the first and third objectives were met. Q: However the government still felt that the panel report was biased. Even today, in Geneva the government has to defend itself against these allegations. So did you achieve anything?
I know that we cannot change anything because of one protest here. However what I did had an impact, this is the report that was given after I protested. Who knows what kind of report would have been published if I had not?
SUBSIDIES TO CURB THE COST OF LIVING
Q: You have repeatedly said that the rise of the cost of living is being exaggerated by various groups, including the media. However the people are the ones who are feeling the pinch, as evident by them taking to the streets in large numbers.
The people are out on the streets because they have an issue with the increase in the cost of living—that is correct. People have felt the impact of the cost if living, which is why we have provided subsidies to those who cannot afford it. Q: These subsidies are not enjoyed by every strata of society that is impacted by the cost of living. However even those who have received the subsidies, like the fishermen, were unhappy about it and felt no confidence that the government would be able to provide these subsidies.
I don’t agree with your categorization that the fishermen took to the streets. If you say the fishermen, then all the fisherman from the North and the East and the entire coast should have taken to the streets. It is a very small percentage of the entire fisher community that took to the streets; Puttalam, Halawatha and Negombo areas.
They took to the streets due to the guidance of an International Non-governmental Organization in the area. They had the ability to brainwash the members of that community, therefore they brought the fishermen to the streets under the slogan “we don’t need subsidies, reduce the price of fuel”. That was due to the power that the IN- GO had, if they exercised the same power over other parts of the country we would have seen the same type of protests taking place in those parts as well.
The irony of it was that they said they did not want subsidies. When there is an increase in the cost of living in a country, people take to the streets asking for subsidies, because they cannot buy at the market prices—that should have been the fishermen’s slogan. But in this case; they wanted to say “reduce the prices—we don’t need subsidies.” What the INGO wanted was to take the fishermen to another battle that they could not win.
RELATIONS WITHIN THE ALLIANCE
Q: The alliance partners often state that they are a voice of opposition and reason within the ruling alliance. Do you feel you too are a voice of opposition, within the alliance?
I would not like to be seen as a voice of opposition, I would much rather be seen as someone who will guide the government in the right path. I hate the idea of the word opposition because it indicates that there has been such a disservice to this country that we would kill each other over it. That has not been the case at all.
We do have certain areas that we disagree on, for instance the private universities bill. We have called for a more open debate on this issue. We have presented our ideas to the President and others. Therefore it need not be seen as this massive oppositio campaign.
Q: Many feel that the senior ministers of the government and some alliance partners have become puppets of the Rajapaksa family. What is your response to this?
There are so many romours going around in this country. Re- cently they found gem stones in Kataragama; what is the roumour? That Namal Rajapaksa has taken all those gem stones. The President went overseas for an official visit to Singapore; the roumour is that he went to see Duminda Silva. Therefore there is a very subtle conspiracy against the Rajapaksa family.
I don’t think that the Rajapaksa family has any intention of using anyone as puppets, and I doubt there is any one they can manipulate in that manner, maybe there are one or two—but I don’t know any. We are all working for the people who voted us in.