mess govt has created in guise of good governance

Rajiva tells parliament about mess govt has created in guise of good governance

April 12, 2015, 7:13 pm 

By Saman Indrajith

Government which came to power promising to adopt a scientific basis to appoint a cabinet of ministers instead made an alphabetical soup in doing so, leader of the Liberal Party Prof Rajiva Wijesinha told Parliament last week.

Participating in a debate on a resolution under the Local Treasury Bills Ordinance moved in Parliament to get approval for a sum of Rs 400 billion to be borrowed by the Government by issuing Treasury Bills, Prof Wijesinha said: "We promised a Cabinet determined on a scientific basis, but instead we combined Fisheries with District Secretariats, Highways with Higher Education, Economic Affairs with Cultural Affairs and Children and Youth. Finally the Cabinet was an alphabetical soup. And then we change things round, but fail to allocate responsibilities to Ministers for over a fortnight. How can you ask Parliament to allow you to raise even more money, when no one has any idea who will be responsible for expenditure and for productive outcomes?" he asked.

Delivering his first speech as a member of the opposition he said that time had come for the people to decide the future of incumbent administration which was a mess and chaos that act against the principles of transparency. "It is with great sadness that I speak today, for the first time as a Member of the Opposition. Last year I recall a member of the Government saying in a Committee that there was no need for an Opposition when members like me were present. He was being critical, but I am proud of my constant quest for reform, in line with the basic principles of Liberalism.

"But it is very sad to have helped to have a government elected for the purpose of Reform, and to find no interest in promoting the changes we need to strengthen Accountability, Transparency and Responsiveness to the needs of the people. 

"I can sympathize with the argument that we need more money, but we must also show that we are cutting down on waste. We must show that we are using money to enrich the people, not to win elections. We must make it clear that this government is interested in development activity, not simply in transferring powers from the President to the Prime Minister and then rushing for an election before the main promises in the manifesto have been fulfilled 

"Money is needed to carry on the business of government, but at present no one knows whose business is what. We promised a Cabinet determined on a scientific basis, but instead we combined Fisheries with District Secretariats, Highways with Higher Education, Economic Affairs with Cultural Affairs and Children and Youth. And then we change things round, but fail to allocate responsibilities to Ministers for over a fortnight. How can you ask Parliament to allow you to raise even more money, when no one has any idea who will be responsible for expenditure and for productive outcomes?

"This is not a new phenomenon. Two months after the election, we had a Gazette transferring the Consumer Affairs Authority and the Cooperative Wholesale from the Ministry of Food Security to the Ministry of Industry and Trade. This may have been part of the horse-dealing the Prime Minister engaged in, as he explained to those who had supported the present President and were astonished at the failure to adhere to the highest standards of financial integrity in constituting the Cabinet. But when the government seems actively to create room for suspicion, people may wonder whether we are opposed only to excessive corruption, and the Prime Minister believes corruption of a mild sort is acceptable.

"The current and past Chairman of the UNP noted, when I referred to corruption in the Ministry of Defence during the last UNP government, and hoped this would not be repeated, that I should not have blamed the Minister, it was someone else who was responsible. But active connivance in corruption, defending the indefensible, is as bad as stealing public money oneself. And it is worse when the government was elected specifically on a pledge of good governance.

"In those distant days when I was a Minister, and thought this government was serious, I sent the Minister for Good Governance some suggestions on how we could promote this. They combined aspects of the Code of Conduct which we seem to have forgotten about totally. I will take the liberty of tabling three of the papers, on Preventing Corruption, on limiting the use of the Executive for Political Purposes, and on Removing Politics from Recruitment. I hope there is some interest in this in my friends on that side of the house who I think were sincere in their commitment to Reform, and did not simply want to take over the spoon and help themselves as the last UNP leader who was Head of the Executive declared. If that is all this government is about, we must oppose this attempt to obtain yet more money, with no clear agenda to provide the people with value for the money they will in the end have to pay." 

Leader of the National Freedom Front MP Wimal Weerawansa who spoke soon after Prof Wijesinha said: "Prof Wijesinha’s speech symbolizes the situation of those who ate the dead rope of Yahapalana gang. It is an account of one of those who had been misguided by the empty promises on which this government has been built upon. This is the same story we hear in towns and villages. Many of those who had mistaken and imprudent to effect a regime change now are frustrated. Three ministers had resigned within 88 days of the 100-day programme. Public servants have been left in the lurch and cannot find ways to celebrate New Year."