Ceylon Today Editorial

Unabashed waste

 

02 September 2016

Premier Ranil Wickremesinghe has allegedly set the tone to fight waste and corruption in the country. As reported on these pages yesterday, Wickremesinghe has called for an explanation from the Sports Ministry Secretary as to how 40 officials had accompanied a team of a mere nine athletes to the recently concluded Olympic Games at Rio de Janeiro in Brazil.

Whereas, probably a manager and a physiotherapist would have had been more than sufficient to have had accompanied this contingent, which returned home medal-less!

In this regard, the Pakistani Press has been criticizing its own officials, comprising some 17 who had accompanied a squad of a mere seven athletes. Pakistan, like Sri Lanka too returned home, medal-less.

In Sri Lanka's case, a total contingent of 49 comprising 40 officials and nine athletes works out to a figure equivalent to 81.63% of the party consisting of officials and 18.37% of athletes.

In Pakistan's case, a total contingent of 24 comprising seven athletes and 17 officials works out to a ratio of 70.83 (70.83%) officials to 29.17 (29.17%) athletes, still better than Sri Lanka's comparable ratio of 81.63 officials: 18.37 athletes.

Sri Lanka's giant and closest neighbour India sent a contingent of 118 to Rio and finished with two medals: a silver and a bronze. It's however unclear how many officials accompanied the Indian players.

Nonetheless, the Indian press has been critical about some of the officials who accompanied the contingent. They have been critical of their Sports Minister, the two medical officers who accompanied the contingent; and the Haryana Sports Minister who led a nine-member delegation to Rio at a cost of Indian Rs 10 million to the exchequer, that cost being what was incurred by only that 'Haryana contingent'.

Accompanying Sri Lanka's delegation to Rio was also the island's own Sports Minister Dayasiri Jayasekara.

Meanwhile, during the 'dark' era of the Mahinda Rajapaksa regime, at the immediately preceding Olympics which was held in London in 2012, Sri Lanka had sent a contingent of seven athletes and 30 officials, the latter number being the figure quoted by the then UNP's Media Spokesman Gayantha Karunathilaka, as reported by 'The Island' on its 31 July, 2012 edition.

This means the ratio of local officials to competitors at the London Olympics comprised 81.02: 18.92; marginally better than the Rio Olympics ratio of 81.63: 18.37; better, because higher the ratio pertaining to participating athletes, better does it mean that misuse, abuse, wastage and corruption are relatively minimal in respect of such events, though in both these instances, i.e. Rio 2016 and London 2012, the overall representation of officials comprised more than 80% of Sri Lanka's contingent, whereas the number of athletes comprised under 20% of the total contingent.

With reference to the 'officials' contingent', it may be moot to quote what Karunathilaka had then said, as reported by 'The Island': 'Sri Lankan officials, at the ongoing London Olympics, should be given gold medals for being the highest contingent at the games, percentage wise," the UNP said yesterday.

Only seven athletes were representing the country, but thirty officials had accompanied them, the UNP's Media Spokesman Gayantha Karunathilaka, MP, told a news conference in Colombo.

He said that the fiasco being enacted in London was nothing but an extension of the 'Mahinda Chintana' which propagates the squandering of public funds.

The sports officials attending the Olympics are following the example set by the President and his jumbo Cabinet, who frequently travelled abroad on tax payers' money, while the poor were struggling to make ends meet, Karunathilaka observed.

The government, he said, had instituted disciplinary action against some Pradeshiya Sabha members while ignoring the corrupt and lawless conduct of persons holding higher positions.

The MP noted that the "Big Fish" were allowed to go scot free, because they have the capability of embarrassing the Rajapaksa regime.

After the war had ended President Mahinda Rajapaksa said that the country would occupy the first three places in precedence. But, today the first place has gone to high interest loans, the second to imposition of taxes and the third position to lawlessness, Karunathilaka said, adding that the nation had been mortgaged for generations to come and it was the future generations who would have to pay the price and not the President, his Ministers or officials who were the decision-makers.

Now that Wickremesinghe has called for an explanation, the nation may probably be looking at what the Premier who co-heads the current Yahapalana regime along with incumbent President Maithripala Sirisena, would afterwards do?

Daily Mirror Editorial

Super billionaires turn into prophets of justice

02 September 2016

 

Next Monday September 5 is the International Day of Charity and the United Nation in a statement says charity contributes to the promotion of dialogue, solidarity and mutual understanding among people. Poverty persists in all countries, regardless of their economic, social and cultural situation, particularly in the developing world. In recognition of the role of charity in alleviating humanitarian crises and human suffering within and among nations, as well as of the efforts of charitable organizations and individuals, including the work of Mother Teresa, the UN General assembly in a resolution designated September 5, the anniversary of the death of Mother Teresa, as the International Day of Charity. Significantly, Mother Theresa widely respected as the saint of Kolkata’s gutters will be formally proclaimed as a Saint in a ceremony at the Vatican on Sunday. 

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, now in Sri Lanka, issued a statement pointing out that Mother Teresa who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979 for her work to overcome poverty gave the prize money of about 190,000 USD or Sri Lankan Rs. 27.6 million to some of the poorest people in India. 

According to Mr. Ban, at a time when the need for humanitarian assistance has never been higher and when there are more refugees and displaced people than at any time since the end of the Second World War, charities play an increasingly vital role in meeting human need. 

As recognized in the Addis Ababa Action Agenda, the resources, knowledge and ingenuity of philanthropic and volunteer organizations will be invaluable partners in implementing the new 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

Mr. Ban says UN development and humanitarian agencies also rely on public donations and the generosity of governments to continue their lifesaving work in response to development challenges, natural disasters, armed conflicts and other emergencies. To mark the International Day of Charity, the outgoing UN chief has called on people everywhere to volunteer and act charitably in the face of human suffering. 

While more than 60 million refugees struggle for survival without basic needs and those in the Syrian hellhole of Aleppo were reported this week to be eating grass, it is known that 62 of the world’s richest super billionaires own more wealth and resources than half the world’s population of about 3,500 million. The UN apparently is unable to do much to reduce this monstrous gap and break the structures of injustice, mainly because some of the richest countries have veto powers in the decision making Security Council. 

Thankfully, some of these super billionaires including Microsoft founder Bill Gates and world business magnate George Soros, like the famous Zacchaeus in the scriptures, are giving half their wealth to the poor.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation launched in 2000 has given billions of dollars to enhance healthcare, reduce extreme poverty, provide educational opportunities and access to information technology. It had an endowment of 44.3 billion USD as of December 31, 2014. “It’s fulfilling to ‘take From The Most Wealthy And Give To The Least Wealthy’,” says Bill Gates who is known to have donated about 35 billion USD to break the structures of injustice. 

George Soros who visited Sri Lanka recently to promote foreign investments and international trade is reported to have been transformed from a billionaire hedge fund manager to a socialist philanthropist. In one of the latest moves, while America’s political kingmakers inject their millions into high-profile presidential and congressional contests, Democratic mega-donor George Soros has directed his wealth into an under-the-radar 2016 campaign to advance one of the progressive movement’s core goals — reshaping the American justice system. The billionaire financier has channelled more than 3 million USD into seven local district-attorney campaigns in six states over the past year — a sum that exceeds the total spent on the 2016 presidential campaign by all but a handful of rival super-donors. The vision is restorative justice instead of retributive justice specially for the minorities and the impoverished people. 

We hope other super billionaires also will turn from the golden calf to be prophetic figures and crusaders in the mission to rebuild a just world with a more equitable distribution of wealth and resources.

Daily News Editorial

MR should hold his fire when abroad

02 September 2016

 

Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa has developed a penchant to visit countries with large expatriate Lankan workers. The visits are billed as official and on more than one occasion the Foreign Ministry had to pick up the tab. But Rajapaksa, throwing protocol to the wind has gone about attacking the Sri Lankan government before large gatherings of Sri Lankans, obviously mobilised in the manner that only Mahinda Rajapaksa is capable of , during these visits.

His recent visit to South Korea where the former President regaled large contingents of Sr Lankans on the alleged misdeeds of the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe government is a case in point. Rajapaksa is now off to Malaysia, a country with a sizable Sri Lankan working community, to attend a political parties’ conference. Not surprisingly the visit coincides with the arrival in Sri Lanka of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. It will be recalled that Rajapaksa was one half (Moon being the other) to a joint statement during the Secretary General's visit in the immediate aftermath of the war victory, which called for an international inquiry into war crimes in Sri Lanka. Of course, Rajapaksa and his cohorts later denied this for its obvious political fallout and the presence of the former President during Ban's current visit would have very much helped clear the air in this regard.

Be that as it may, what is the status of Rajapaksa to address an International Conference of Asian Political Parties conference in Malaysia when he has no political party to represent, being virtually estranged from the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (the JO is not a political party but a group of Rajapaksa associates) despite maintaining a pretense of being a true blue party man. Hence it is crystal clear that the visit is just a facade for MR to engage in government bashing before a Lankan audience. It is obvious that the former President this time too is planning to attack the government before a large gathering of Sri Lankans mobilised beforehand in a foreign country. The crowds naturally would be receptive to Rajapaksa, the majority of whom are largely employed in menial jobs and is less intelligent to grasp the real motive behind MR's visit.

Rajapaksa is next planning to visit Italy, still a haven for Sri Lankan job seekers, most of whom travel to that country through the perilous sea routs arranged by human smugglers. No doubt the former President will use the visit once again to lambaste and castigate the government like he has done so far in the countries where Sri Lankan workers are found in large numbers. It is as if Rajapaksa is engaged in election campaigning in these countries in anticipation of the government sometime soon granting voting rights to the expat Sri Lankan population. It is also noteworthy that MR is carrying out these political stunts in the countries where there is political freedom and democratic governance. It is interesting to see if he will take forward this campaign to countries such as the Middle East which has an overwhelming Sri Lankan workforce and to countries such a Australia with a huge Lankan population but more enlightened and intelligent and cannot be duped by political rhetoric.

Be that as it may, what is the stand adopted by the government to counter this frontal assault on it by a former President of the country on the soil of friendly countries of Sri Lanka. It ought to take up this matter at diplomatic level. This is because these outbursts, though made in Sinhala, are beamed across the world and is bound to impact on the country's image and that of the government. Investigations should also be conducted to ascertain if this was a deliberate attempt to discourage investors into the country at a time the government has lined up many projects that require foreign investment. Could it ever be conceived of a scenario of a Sonia Gandhi being allowed to erect a stage in Colombo and attack Prime Minister Modi. Sri Lanka's envoys should be told to be alert to situations where defeated politicians, when abroad, are allowed free rein to attack Sri Lankan government leaders.

For his part, Mahinda Rajapaksa who was President of Sri Lanka twice over should know better than to discredit the holder of the office he once held, in foreign lands. In any event he cannot now aspire to be President or Prime Minister, for that matter, ever again. Besides Rajapaksa never misses an opportunity to display his love for the country and patriotism before the locals. This however does not accord with his conduct of bad mouthing the country's present leaders before Lankans during his foreign trips and by extension placing the country in poor light. It is also conduct unbecoming of a one time leader of the country.

Ideally Rajapaksa should have retired into the sunset after his electoral defeat and carried himself with the dignity as befitting a leader under whose watch the country was rid of the scourge of terrorism.

The Island Editorial

Blues of the Blues

 

02 September 2016

 

The SLFP is celebrating its 65th anniversary while being in the throes of a deepening crisis. Its leaders are busy papering over the cracks. All its woes, in our book, boil down to longstanding, mutual hostility between President Maithripala Sirisena and the Rajapaksas. It is in the current predicament, struggling to avoid a debilitating break-up because President Mahinda Rajapaksa, during his second term, prevented Minister Maithripala Sirisena achieving his prime ministerial dream and the latter after becoming President ruined Rajapaksa’s chances of becoming PM.

When Prime Minister D. M. Jayaratne took seriously ill in the heyday of the Rajapaksa government, we argued in this space that the prime ministerial ambitions of several SLFP heavyweights were bound to threaten the party’s unity sooner or later. Sirisena, who fell from grace and was short-changed by the Rajapaksas, voted with his feet when the last presidential election was called.

The Sirisena faction of the SLFP blames Rajapaksa for two electoral defeats the party suffered last year. While its argument holds water to some extent it is also true that Sirisena was instrumental in bringing about those two crushing defeats which debilitated the SLFP and reinvigorated the UNP. He joined forces with the UNP, the TNA etc to defeat the SLFP’s presidential candidate Rajapaksa in January last year. He arbitrarily brought down the SLFP-led government by appointing UNP Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe Prime Minister though the latter had only 46 seats in Parliament as opposed to the SLFP’s 126. (The SLFP-led UPFA had about 150 seats!) Thereafter, he unflinchingly engineered the defeat of the SLFP at the last general election by queering the party’s prime ministerial candidate, Rajapaksa’s pitch. He also, through political manoeuvring, deprived the SLFP-led UPFA of the post of the Opposition Leader so as to reduce his bête noire, Rajapaksa, to an ordinary MP. Thus, Sirisena has settled political scores with his erstwhile boss and the former ruling clan and achieved his goal at the expense of the SLFP, which he now leads and tries to steer to victory at future elections!

The blame for the sorry state of affairs in the SLFP should be apportioned to the Rajapaksas. Members of the party’s old guard grew resentful that newcomers, mostly UNP defectors, were given top ministerial posts besides special treatment. The Rajapaksas were accused of running the party as well as the government like a family business. They apparently cherished the delusion that the people had given them a mandate to do as they pleased because they had rid the country of terrorism. Their loyalists flouted the law with impunity and most of them became a public nuisance. Corruption became rampant and the rule of law suffered a severe beating. The Republic of Sri Lanka was on the verge of becoming a monarchy, for all practical purposes, towards the end of the Rajapaksa rule.

It is being argued in some quarters that Sirisena became the SLFP leader because the party constitution stipulates that the SLFPer who secures the executive presidency becomes the party leader. This argument is untenable in that Sirisena was not the SLFP presidential candidate. He contested on the New Democratic Front ticket while the SLFP fielded Rajapaksa. His appointment as the SLFP leader has created a bad precedent; any SLFPer is now free to leave the party in a huff, achieve his or her political goal with the help of political forces, both internal and external, hostile to the party and return to the party’s fold and, if possible, even secure its leadership. President Sirisena and his loyalists have no moral right to threaten disciplinary action against the SLFP dissidents for disobeying the dictates of the party leadership.

The next presidential election is likely to be a three-cornered contest with the main candidates representing the SLFP, the UNP and the political movement led by the Joint Opposition. Even though President Sirisena has publicly declared he will not seek another term, those who threw in their lot with him at the last presidential election are dependent on him for their political survival. They are sure to pressure him to change his mind. As for its presidential candidate, the UNP will be without an alternative to Prime Minister Wickremesinghe, who has consolidated his power in the party and neutralised those who strove for his ouster. Whom will the SLFP dissidents field at the next presidential polls in case of having to form a new party? The government seems to think it is former Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa if the selective efficiency on the part of some state outfits which have sprung into action against him is anything to go by.

The architects of the Jan. 08, 2015 regime change succeeded in cutting the SLFP in two in the same way as Zeus is said to have halved man to diminish the latter’s strength and turbulence. Now, the seemingly Sisyphean task President Sirisena is saddled with is to bring the two halves of the party together.