5 December 2020 01:08 am Views - 1717
There will be a lot of pressure on the President and on the Prime Minister to give ministerial positions
Do we need such a large number of Cabinet Ministers and State Ministers? Look at what other countries do
In turn becoming a MP will not be the path to get Power and get rich faster
Finally, if we implement this proposal the President can appoint the ‘right man for the right job
Let me first ask a question: What is the objective of getting into politics for most of our politicians? If you ask this from a politician, they will of course say it is to serve the country. I would say it is not. Most of them want to get either Power or Position where they can earn lot of money within a short period by using the Power gained. Most of our politicians start at the grassroots level and some will go up the ladder and get into the Parliament. The moment a politician gets into Parliament; their next aim is to become a Minister. This is where the power base is and for some, the way to get rich fast.
There will be a lot of pressure on the President and on the Prime Minister to give ministerial positions. If no position is given, then these politicians will find excuses and move to the other side/party. It was a good thing that the 19th Amendment restricted the number of Ministerial Positions to 30 and Other Deputy or State Ministerial positions to 40. We know that the current Government also tried to remove this restriction but had to give in due to pressure from religious groups.
Do we need such a large number of Cabinet Ministers and State Ministers? Look at what other countries do. At present the United States of America (USA) has only 15 Cabinet Ministries, China has 21, and the United Kingdom (UK) has 21. Even India has only 25 Cabinet Ministers. If all these big countries can run successfully with a small Cabinet why cannot we do it? We can, but we need to give positions to many MPs so that we create a lot of Ministerial portfolios.
Do we have a solution to this issue? Yes, we do have a solution, provided that we are willing to think and look ‘out of the box’.
To find an answer we need to understand the system we are in and what other countries do. Sri Lanka follows the so-called Westminster System. What is the Westminster System? In 1295 the Palace of Westminster was converted to a Parliament and afterwards, the political system in UK was called the Westminster System. In the Westminster System, Ministers are selected from the Members of Parliament (MP). A Minister drawn from the members of Parliament exercise executive authority and are accountable to Parliament. Sri Lanka, follows the so-called Westminster System and selects Ministers from the MPs.
Is this method of selection of Ministers in the Westminster system a good thing or not? First shall we examine the Governance system of a country? The doctrine of the separation of powers divides the institutions of government into three branches: Legislative, Executive and Judicial. The Legislature drafts the laws; the Executive puts the laws into operation and the Judiciary interprets the laws. These three branches of the Governing system should be independent for a country to function smoothly.
In the Westminster system the Legislature is the Parliament and the Executive is the Prime Minister and the Cabinet. To me drawing some members from the Legislature to Executive arm is a breach of the independency and checks and balances between Legislature and the Executive branches. Hence, I can argue that the method of drawing the Executive from the Legislativae branch is not a good practice. Furthermore, Cabinet is more of an administrative branch of the Executive hence the criterion of appointing Ministers should be on the basis of “the right man for the right job” policy. If the President is forced to appoint ministers from the members of the Parliament, then appointing the right man for the right job may not happen.
Can we do away with this system of selecting/drawing Ministers from the Legislature? Yes, we can. Good example is how USA selects its Ministers. In USA, Cabinet Officers are nominated by the President and confirmed by the USA Senate by a majority vote. Each Cabinet Member receives the title Secretary, except the Attorney General who leads the Department of Justice.
If USA operates successfully with this system of appointing Ministers, why cannot Sri Lanka follow it? Yes, we can, provided that the constitution permits it. So, my key suggestion in bringing up the new constitution is to “Totally separate the Legislature and the Executive” by “allowing the President to nominate Ministers from non-MPs and getting Parliament to confirm such nominations”. Such appointments can be drawn from the Government Bureaucracy or any other forum provided that person is qualified and has a proven track record.
The advantage of this proposal to me is, that those who get into Parliament to become MP’s will not have the executive authority. Hence, only those who are willing to serve the legislative powers will get into Parliament. In turn becoming a MP will not be the path to get Power and get rich faster. Finally, if we implement this proposal, the President can appoint the ‘right man for the right job’.
The writer is a Fellow Member of the Institute of Chartered Accountants and Chartered Institute of Management Accountants (UK); MBA (Warwick)
Vice Chair of the Audit Committee of the United Nations Industrial Development Organisation, Vienna, Austria.
Retired from Asian Development Bank as a Financial Management Specialist