CROSSINGTHE BRIDGE

According to the modern Parliamentary traditions, the legislative function does not end with the mere passage of a Bill. Legislators have a greater role in monitoring activities. In this context, the concept of monitoring is all important. In Sri Lanka’s Parliament, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) and the Committee on Public Enterprises (COPE) are the key monitoring bodies.

DEMOCRACY IN ENTERPRISE MONITORING

They are assigned to uncover financial irregularities, mismanagement, wastage, corruption etc. in state institutions. In this assignment, whether these committees should be headed by a member of the opposition or a member of the government is a matter being debated.

For effective and objective monitoring, there is a school of thought that such committees should be chaired by someone from the opposition. Also it is argued in some quarters that the government should hold the chairmanship of such monitoring committees as only the ruling party has the authority to take policy decisions to implement the recommendation made by them.

FAIR PLAY BETWEEN 2002-2004

During the 2002 - 2004 United National Party (UNP) regime, the chairmanship of both the COPE and the PAC was handed over to the Opposition of that time, marking a departure from the past tradition of holding it under the government’s purview.

However, today, these two posts are held by two members of the ruling party Senior Minister D.E.W. Gunasekara (COPE) and Deputy Finance Minister Dr. Sarath Amunugama (PAC).

The views expressed for and against on who should head Parliamentary monitoring committees took centre stage at a press conference held in the Parliamentary complex on Tuesday, after presenting the COPE report in the House.

Minister Gunasekara, flanked by committee members across the political divide, gave the press conference. The Chairman detailed the areas of concern outlined in the COPE report which he presented.

ERAN INSTILLS SENSE

Shortly after him, UNP MP Eran Wickramaratne had a few words on the report as a member of COPE, and stressed the need for the chairmanship to be held by an opposition member for the objective supervision of disbursement and utilisation of pub- lic finances appropriated by Parliament.

All the UNP MPs in COPE, including Mr. Wickramaratne, were not against Mr. Gunasekera being the chairman as a member from the party that helms the governing affairs. They, in fact, hailed his impartial work as COPE Chairman. Yet, they held a common view on the principle that it would be more democratic if these positions were held by the Opposition for objective monitoring of each state institution’s performance.

WAY FORWARD FOR SRI LANKA

“In Sri Lanka, we want to develop systems rather than promoting individuals. That is the way forward for the country,” Mr. Wickramaratne said.

Yet, it was not to the liking of the government members at the head-table. Ministers Mahinda Amaraweera, Jagath Pushpakumara, and Deputy Minister Lasantha Aligiyawanne, as government members in COPE, presented their views that ran counter to what Mr. Wickramaratne said.

AMARAWEERA’S INSIGHT

At one point, Minister Amaraweera remarked, “Minister Gunasekara, despite being a government member, did a fantastic job. If the person who holds the position is capable enough, he or she can take decisions whether he is from the government or the opposition. That is immaterial in this exercise. However, only the ruling party can implement recommendations made by the COPE. If the chairmanship is held by the Opposition, the government may not be interested in implementing them.”

LEAVE ME ALONE: DEW

At this moment , Minister Gunasekara looked embarrassed as journalists, covering the press conference asked him to declare his stand. He remarked that he too subscribed to the same view with Mr. Wickramaratne. Also, he asked the government members to avoid making references to him or casting aspersions when airing out their views.

According to Parliamentary history, legislative supervision of the public finances has been a litigious matter since the earliest days of the United Kingdom (U.K.) House of Commons in the late 14th century.

FINANCIAL MESS

Eventually, the COPE brought everyone’s attention on the matter of financial mismanagement in state institutions. It pointed out how nepotism, pessimism and lack of vision have led some state institutions down the path of collapse.

The COPE revealed that the dearth of qualified accountants in state ventures and the appointment of unqualified personnel to top positions in these institutions have led to their poor financial management.

While the COPE was wrapping up its responsibility in this manner, the political parties were busy with preparations for the elections in the three provinces - Northern, North-Western and Central Provinces.

SPAT BETWEEN TWO MINISTERS

Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP), the largest ally of the ruling coalition led by President Mahinda Rajapaksa, had its central committee meeting last Friday. Infighting within the party over local political affairs was visible at the meeting when Media Minister Keheliya Rambukwella and Sports Minister Mahindananda Aluthgamage had a showdown.

Minister Mahindananda asked for disciplinary action against party member S.K. Ranasinghe from Nawalapitiya. He alleged that Mr. Ranasinghe supported the UNP at the last elections in a discreet way. He said therefore, Mr. Ranasinghe should not be given nominations for the elections to the Central Provincial Council. Minister Rambukwella was irked by such remarks. He defended Mr. Ranasinghe. This led to heated cross-talks between the two at the meeting.

Finally, the Central Committee decided to reprimand Mr. Ranasinghe since he was found guilty of supporting not the UNP, but another party called Kandurata Janatha Peramuna. The party, however, decided not to remove him. Instead, he would be summoned to Colombo for a reprimand.

Minister Aluthgamage said he would abide by the party’s stand though he initially wanted to remove Mr. Ranasinghe from the party.

WELL - SCRIPTED DAYASIRI DRAMA

The unpredictability of politics was proven once again with UNP MP Dayasiri Jayasekara siding with the ruling United People’s Freedom Alliance (UPFA) to contest the elections to the North Western Provincial Council.

For those with political sense, it was a foregone conclusion that he would switch his allegiance to the government. After a lengthy statement made in Parliament, he announced his decision on Wednesday and left the chamber amid applause by the government legislators who surrounded and embraced him in a show of appreciation of his decision.

NO OUTSIDERS TO WAYAMBA PLEASE!

True, the announcement was made on Wednesday. Yet, it appeared that the decision had been made a long time ago. Long before the premature dissolution of the Provincial Council, UPFA members of the North Western Province got wind of a move to woo Mr. Jayaysekara to be fielded, as chief ministerial candidate. They, at a meeting, asked Economic Development Minister Basil Rajapaksa not to bring anyone from outside the party to contest the poll as the chief ministerial candidate.

HARIN PLEADS WITH DAYASIRI

In a last ditch attempt, UNP seniors such as Ravi Karunanayake, Lakshman Kiriella and Mangala Samaraweera met Mr. Jayasekara during the last few days and asked him to remain in the party. Before the commencement of parliamentary business on Wednesday, UNP MP Harin Fernando approached Mr. Jayasekara in the MPs’ library in the Parliamentary complex and pleaded with him to stay with the UNP.

“Aney machan, please don’t go. It is better to stay with us. You can sort out issues,” MP Fernando told Mr. Jayasekara. Both of them got emotional and patted each other’s head. Mr. Jayasekara, with his tearful eyes, remarked, “What to do machan! I have to leave the UNP. Let’s hope we can work together one day again.”

TNA STEPPING ON THE GAS

For the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), the election in the North is all the more important. The Constitution of the Northern Provincial Council would give some form of autonomy to the Tamil people. Therefore, the TNA would muster its fullest possible strength to win this election. The TNA is a combination of five parties – Ilankai Tamil Arasu Kachchi (ITAK), Eelam People’s Revolutionary Liberation Front (EPRLF), Tamil Eelam Liberation Organisation (TELO), People’s Liberation Organisation of Tamil Eelam (PLOTE) and Tamil United Liberation Front (TULF).

On Monday, these parties agreed on the number of candidates to be fielded by each under the TNA banner for the election. For the Jaffna district, Justice C.V. Wigneswaran would contest as a candidate common to all the five parties in the TNA fold. Meanwhile, seven from ITAK, four from EPRLF, three from TELO, two from TULF, and two from PLOTE would be fielded for the district.

For Kilinochchi, there would be three from ITAK, two from TULF, one from EPRLF and one from TELO. The ITAK would field two from Mullaitivu while two from EPRLF, one from TULF, two from TELO, and one from PLOTE would be fielded.

In the Mannar district, two candidates would join the fray from ITAK. And there would be three from TELO, two from EPRLF and one from PLOTE contesting in the Mannar district while the TULF would not put forward any candidate there.

In the Vavuniya district, TELO would have two contestants, ITAK one and TULF one.

UPFA MEMBERS’ PREDICAMENT WITH VOTERS

The UPFA had its Parliamentary group meeting this ti me in the Parliamentary complex on Monday with Leader of the House Nimal Siripala de Silva in the chair.

The UPFA members discussed the business of the week. The debate on the Electricity (Amendment) Bill, scheduled for both Tuesday and Wednesday was the main focus. Some ruling party members used the opportunity to say how embarrassed they felt when their voters aired their grievances about the electricity tariff hike.

CLARIFICATION PLEASE, MADAM PAVITHRA!

Disaster Management Minister Mahinda Amaraweera and Deputy Health Minister Lalith Dissanayake said they had been unable to justify the tariff hike to the supporters in their electorates. Therefore, they asked Power and Energy Minister Pavithra Devi Wanniarachchi to elucidate them on the facts and figures that led to the electricity tariff hike.

“Once we know exactly why the electricity rates were increased, we can justify it to the people convincingly,” they told Ms. Wanniarachchi.