Daily News Editorial

A break from the past

14 November 2016

Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe’s assertion that the national economic policy, built on the foundation of Budget 2017, crafted with the inputs from both major parties, would ensure a smooth development process unimpeded by a change of government, is to be welcomed. Speaking in parliament during the Second Reading of the budget the Premier said that even though the two parties are together now, there is bound to be a parting of ways in the future, but the economic policies put in place by the Unity Government will remain constant despite political changes.

Since Independence the general norm has been for a newly elected government to change or undo the work of its predecessor in keeping with its policies or ideologies and start all over again. Till 1977 governments changed every five years or after its first term in office and the incoming government did away with the development plans of the regime it replaced. Since the country was ruled by the UNP which practised capitalist policies and the SLFP (or SLFP led governments) which was inclined towards the left, the view points of these parties and their policies were diametrically opposed to each other. The result: the country had to restart again, with the change of governments, since development programmes already started by one party or those in the pipeline, were scrapped altogether. The polarisation was such that promises made to the voters by one party to do away with the work of the other also played its part.

Thankfully, after 1977 this trend was arrested to a great extent. Not only that, former President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga, who was a dyed in the wool socialist, went so far as to proclaim that she who was a good socialist at one time would now be a good capitalist, when she took the reins of power in 1994. This even earned for her the wrath of Dullas Alahapperuma who famously said in parliament that aanaduwa vamata signal daala dakunata haravanava.

Be that as it may, the country can at least now be assured that there would not be any drastic policy change with the change of government since, as the PM stated, the budget which charted the country’s future development course was the outcome of the consensus of both the UNP and SLFP. There is good reason to believe that it is the SLFP that is represented in the Unity Government that will hold the reins of power if and when it parts ways with the UNP. To that extent, the country can be assured of continuity of the current development process without seeing things disrupted and discontinued, which will be the case if a hostile SLFP were to assume power some day.

To begin with, the economic policies of both major parties are today almost the same although ideologically the SLFP may still retain the vestiges of its past. The view points and standpoints of some of its members are an indication of this. But this may not pose a problem generally for the two parties to work together although it is the contention of the Joint Opposition that UNP policies won’t jell with that of the SLFP and hence the Unity Government was bound to fail.

Be that as it may, the Premier’s assurance is welcome in other ways too. It will put an end to the bitter, rancorous party politics this country has gone through all these years. Under the present circumstances, even after an envisaged political separation, one could expect both parties to work in unison on urgent national issues instead of the usual leg pulling party politics in this country has come to witness.

Above all, the political landscape in the country would undergo a welcome change with the friendly relations between the parties seeping down to the rank and file in the grassroots. Where there was enmity and hostility in the villages between supporters of rival parties, which sometimes end even in murder, one could expect to see a more calm and subdued atmosphere which would also go a long way in ending the violent political culture that has been the bane of Sri Lankan politics.

Take him on

The threat by the President of the Private Bus owners’ Association Gemunu Wijeratne to pull out all private buses from the roads if the government does not withdraw the enhanced fines imposed on highway offenders in the budget should be met squarely by the government. A fine is a deterrent against the repetition of an offence and the need to enhance the fine, while it could be argued is another way for the government collect much needed funds, is also an indication that the exiting fine had not acted as a deterrent. Fines imposed on ticketless travel in trains and buses were to no avail when it dawned on the authorities that the offenders were ready to pay the meagre fine imposed by risking ticketless travel. The fines, thereafter, were increased several fold. Private buses anyway deserve to be slapped with imposing fines for the cavalier manner in which they are plied on the roads.