When a fish rots ...

Editorial-September 26, 2014, 7:19 pm 

Former Director (Administration) of Parliament Lacille de Silva has, in a brief interview with this newspaper, put his finger on what really ails the national legislature whose standards continue to deteriorate with senior political leaders doing precious little to arrest the spread of the rot. What attracts political dregs to Parliament is the host of perks and privileges MPs are entitled to, the former bureaucrat has argued. Everyone who has amassed wealth even through narcotics trade and other illegal operations wants to become a parliamentarian so that he can rise above the law and protect his interests.

One way of cleansing politics is to strip parliamentarians of their perks and privileges which make them, to use an Orwellian phrase, more equal than others. In developed countries, politicians do not kill one another to get elected because parliamentarians are not treated as demigods and they are equal before the law like everyone else. They have to drive and do shopping like their electors. Even in neighbouring India some ministers have been prosecuted for frauds etc, but here not even a deputy minister’s driver can be ticketed for speeding. If a policeman dares do so he not only comes under goon attacks but also is hounded out of his job.

Parliamentarians are state employees to all intents and purposes in that they are paid monthly salaries, allowances etc besides pensions with public funds though most of them are not qualified to be employed as even labourers in the state service. A fish, it is said, rots from the head down, and given the sorry state of affairs we have witnessed at the national legislature over the years, the deterioration of the state service is something to be expected. What moral right do parliamentarians have to lambaste the ordinary public officials for dereliction of duty when they themselves are shirking their legislative responsibilities?

There are too many parliamentarians, as former Parliament Director has rightly pointed out. We have also been flogging this issue all these years but to no avail. There are 225 MPs in addition to 279 provincial councillors including 36 ministers. If a wayside bush is kicked at random, as a local saying goes, at least one dozen parliamentarians and provincial councillors get thrown out. In the world’s biggest democracy, India, there are only 552 parliamentarians for a population of 1.2 billion people. What would happen if India were to follow the Sri Lankan example in determining the number of its MPs?

Electoral reforms are being talked about and the government has undertaken to adopt the so-called German Model which is a combination of the first-past-the-post and proportional representation systems. This is a step in the right direction, but serious thought should be given to reducing the number of MPs. After all, the present-day parliamentarians have proved beyond any doubt that Parliament can manage its affairs with a much smaller number of members. The House, more often than not, is without a quorum and parliament workers have to run around looking for missing MPs, but in vain. There have been instances where only 25 or 30 MPs were present in the House to debate and vote for/against vital Bills. So, the question is why the public should be made to cough up so much money to maintain 225 lawmakers.

Above all, since parliamentarians are the highest paid public servants it should be made mandatory that they possess at least the same educational qualifications as those who are recruited as labourers in the state service. When skivers and school dropouts go places in politics and become people’s representatives so as to live in clover at public expense while graduates are staging street demonstrations demanding jobs, it is no surprise that parliamentary standards drop and the quorum bell has to be rung frequently.