Former Minister Navin Dissanayake, the son of former UNP heavyweight Gamini Dissanayake in an interview with the  asserted his confidence on the Common Opposition winning the election, while rubbishing claims by Ministers of the government, who had cast negative aspersions on the election manifesto of common Presidential Candidate Maithripala Sirisena. Excerpts:

Q  Following your initial media conference after your defection, at which you said that you had been offered 100 million rupees by the government to continue to stay, there was a recording released In the media, which alleged that this allegation was planned. What is your response?
I made a comment on that and the issue I think has rested now. Once I made the statement that I was offered a Rs. 100 million to stay in the government the CID contacted me and wanted a statement from me. Thereafter I took legal advice and my lawyers wrote to the CID and pointed it out to them that there should be a formal complaint lodged without which, the CID could not commence an investigation.

"So, the argument raised by Prof. Peiris and others don’t hold water because the Sovereignty lies with the people and if they decide that the Presidency should be abolished by not voting for Rajapaksa, then the rest will be worked out. "

There is a discrepancy in the Law and the CID has not understood it. If it’s a bribe then the Bribery Commission must be involved. It was thereafter that one of these websites carried a dubbed recording purportedly of me. The people I know and whom I have interacted with over the years would know that this was not my voice.
The point is that the State always resorts to doing such things like these to entrap people or get people involved in various unnecessary things.

Q  Was there actually an offer made to you?
Yes there was. I am not a person who would say otherwise if there was not.

Q  So then why didn’t you make a complaint regarding the offer?
I don’t think it was necessary. It was made by a person in the government whom I know. He is a businessmen but I don’t want to put him into difficulty.

Q  There is insinuation that the election manifesto of the platform that the opposition is fighting on lacks substance. One minister even called it ‘hodgepodge’, why don’t you think it is so?
This is the kind of typical negativity that a government on its way out, would come up with. First was the argument of a confused manifesto. The point is that there is one clear document with which we could all go by, which is the manifesto of abolishing  the executive presidency, which is of paramount importance.

Q  But there isn’t anything about the abolishing of the executive presidency in there Mr. Dissanayake. Doesn’t it talk of change?
No it is there very clearly, I read it before I came for this interview. It clearly says that the executive presidency will be abolished- the word abolish is there.
So, the argument raised by Prof. Peiris and others don’t hold water because the Sovereignty lies with the people and if they decide that the Presidency should be abolished by not voting for Rajapaksa, then the rest will be worked out.
I think that is the general idea where Mr. Sirisena is heading. So, the argument that it is ‘hodgepodge’ or that it is a confused thing is not correct. There has been a lot of thought that went into the manifesto.

Q  You were one of the MPs who were a part of the mass defection from the UNP, who joined the President. Are there any regrets?
No, I think the situation was very different at that time. You may not have been working at the Daily Mirror at that time, but there was what was called the Malik Samarawickrema, Maithripala Sirisena agreement, which was signed at Temple Trees.

The United National Party pledged its support to the government to finish the war. But there were certain other things that happened which pulled this back. So, it was then that I felt- as a son who had lost his farther to terrorism- that I should put my full weight behind the government to stop that.
A lot of people didn’t believe that terrorism could be defeated militarily but that was proven correct. I therefore have no regrets.
Thereafter the country didn’t move in the right direction and I was one of the few Ministers who came out and spoke about the massive financial corruption that occurs in this country. I feel very happy that I was able to do that and have no regrets about it. The country must change now and it should happen at this juncture, if not, we are in for a very bleak future.

Q  Mr. Dissanayake  although now many of you try to make it look like that mass crossover was to support the war effort, is it not a fact that you all defected because you all had issues with the UNP leadership?
To be very honest that was also a factor. We believed in a more democratic process in the party. I don’t want to make any personal attack on any one but one of my main concerns were the post of General Secretary had gone to the wrong person. I expressed my views to Mr. Ranil Wickremesinghe that Mr. Attanayake was not suitable for the post and I was proven correct.

Q  Have those differences been sorted out now?
I can’t comment on that. I have commenced a new page in the UNP. That is a question you have to ask the seniors. But I feel that most of the simmering differences have been sorted out because there is a monumental election before us and we all have to fight. Those differences are not as important as the most important aspect of unity, which I feel is there now.

Q  There is a notion that the UNP party-machinery didn’t throw its full weight behind the campaign of General Sarath Fonseka during the last Presidential Election, how do you think it would be different this time with the UNP party machinery supporting Mr. Sirisena?
Well I think that is a completely subjective view. For example in my father’s campaign in 1994 this kind of theory to the effect the party machinery was not working.
As a grassroots organiser, I think the machinery was working during the last Presidential Election too. However, what I could say is that now I could feel a huge difference. The main reason is that the UNP realised the stakes in this game. It has been in the opposition for so long, the party has a good vision and a good economic policy. Whatever the differences I may have had with Mr. Wickremesinghe in the past, it is a known fact that he is a clean politician, and nobody can accuse him of corruption.
I feel that is a huge strength for him and the combination of Mr. Sirisena and Mr. Wickremesinghe working together is a blessing for this country.

Q  But how comfortable do you think the people of this country would be when voting for Mr. Sirisena would only bring back Mr. Wickremesinghe, who has been repeatedly rejected by the people?
Well, let us look at it like this. Mr. Wickremesinghe had all the chances without any obstacle to be the candidate.

Q  But he would have lost; He would have had no chance…?
No no. That’s not the point. The point is that he sacrificed that option because he believed that there was a better candidate.
He did that on two occasions. The fact that he lost or won is pure conjecture. What I think is that he would have rallied the UNP and it would have been a two way contest between the elephant and the hand.
But here we have other forces coming in like the Hela Urumaya, which we never thought would break away from the government, then the rift within the SLFP itself is massive.

"About the instability, that is a very artificial argument. There have been Prime Ministers before who have dealt with many situations, like Mrs. Bandaranaike during the 1971 insurgency. It is time that we did away with this Executive Presidency. "

Although people are only seeing a few numbers move the rift is deeper and the government members know that.  You earlier said that the UNP machinery was not working, but from my contacts and my knowledge of the government and individuals, I can assure you that over 40 per cent of the SLFPers were not working for this election.
That is why these intellectual frauds come up and say that there is going to be instability.
Strangely I was watching an interview of the former foreign Minister of Iraq, Tariq Azeez who said the very same things about instability and economic growth when the ground situation was very different from that. The mobilization of the people and the thinking of the people has changed a lot particularly after the Uva Provincial Council elections, when finally people understood that change is possible. Earlier there was a monolithic structure of the family but it was after the Uva elections people knew that there was a chance of change and what we see now is an extension of that election.

Q  I know that this question has been asked time and time again. You voted for the 18th Amendment, which was brought on the grounds of long term stability and now you are working against it.  Are you not of the view that this country will go back to a ‘Ranil- Chandrika’ era filled with instability? If not please explain why.
Personally, on the 18th Amendment, although I felt within my conscience that I shouldn’t vote for it, I had to vote for it and today I feel sad about it.
Having said that one must understand that it isn’t easy to be alone voice, when there is such a large majority and when you are a part of it- there is a chance that one would get isolated. If one is to survive in politics you have to go on with the flow.

Even my father although he fought against the taking away of the Civic Rights of Mrs. Bandaranaike within the party, he had to vote for it. Not that I’m justifying my actions in anyway, I would live for the rest of my life with that regret.  About the instability, that is a very artificial argument. There have been Prime Ministers before who have dealt with many situations, like Mrs. Bandaranaike during the 1971 insurgency. It is time that we did away with this Executive Presidency.
We have lived with this through your generation and my generation and I think it is time we changed this system. We need a better system of governance which promotes accountability, checks and balances. We have to do away with this evil system.

"No its not. It is not a personal campaign but it is an issue based campaign. It is based on a system of values that we all must strive to uphold. It is based on a policy to live in a free and democratic country with full individual freedom without a ‘big brother’ watching us all the time. "

Q  Is it right to say that in fact- that this election is between the Rajapaksas and the rest?
No its not. It is not a personal campaign but it is an issue based campaign. It is based on a system of values that we all must strive to uphold. It is based on a policy to live in a free and democratic country with full individual freedom without a ‘big brother’ watching us all the time.  Freedom of expression is a cardinal tenet of a democracy and although I’m not a big fan of his, to this date, nothing has happened with regard to his murder.

He was killed in broad daylight and not a single person has been apprehended. This is what this country has come to. This is just one example. Even now, stages are burnt; a Mayor is running amok in rampage. This is not a free election. This cannot go on anymore. We need a system where the people’s voice could actually be heard, where there is no fear; a system in which there is no threat and intimidation or violence.
Look at the State resources that are currently going into the election campaigning. But despite the constraints that we as the opposition are trying to meet that and I hope we could take our message to the people.