Do people’s representatives represent the people?

Veteran Communist Party politician and the former Chairman of the Committee on Public Enterprises (COPE) DEW Gunasekara on the eve of the last year’s parliamentary election listed four qualifications that the people’s representatives must possess. They must be able to contribute to make laws, make policies supervise public finance and represent the people, he argued.

Do people’s representatives in our Parliament, leave alone those who are elected to provincial councils and local government bodies, really have those qualities? The answer is definitely not in the affirmative, except in the case of a few, especially the members of the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) and the National People’s Power (NPP) led by it. 

"Last week, JVP and NPP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake tabled in Parliament a document which he said the agreement between the Sri Lankan government and the US Company"

Government has signed an agreement with a US-based company to hand over treasury owned 40% of shares of the Yugadanavi power plant in Kerawalapitiya to the latter. The Opposition and interestingly some ministers who represent the small parties in the ruling coalition have been accusing that the agreement was detrimental to the national security and had been signed without the Cabinet approval. To the utter perplexity of the people, ministers representing the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP), the main party of the ruling coalition claim that the Cabinet had approved it. Now, the issue is before the court. 

Last week, JVP and NPP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake tabled in Parliament a document which he said was the agreement between the Sri Lankan government and the US Company. He said that despite it being announced that the agreement was signed between the Sri Lanka government and the New Fortress Energy Inc. of the US, the American party was in fact some other company. It drew a hilarious and in a way pathetic response from the government ministers and the ruling 
party politicians. 

Talking to media, Highways Minister Johnston Fernando who claimed that the agreement was approved by the Cabinet said that he did not know whether the document presented in Parliament by the JVP leader was authentic. He very proudly further stated that he was unaware of the contents of the agreement that was approved by the Cabinet including him, but he gave his consent to it reposing trust on the leaders of the party, the SLPP. Several other Parliamentarians of the SLPP too during “voice cuts” to the media cast doubt on the authenticity of the document presented by Dissanayake, while expressing support to the agreement signed. 

They, especially the ministers do not need to suspect the veracity of JVP leader’s document, if they had gone through it before or at least after the approval of it by the Cabinet. And the hesitation on the part of the SLPP politicians, especially Finance Minister Basil Rajapaksa who is believed to be the “mastermind” of the agreement to outrightly deny the authenticity of Dissanayake’s document gives credence to it. 

"Highways Minister Johnston Fernando who claimed that the agreement was approved by the Cabinet said that he did not know whether the document present in Parliament by the JVP leader was authentic"

JVP Parliamentarian Anura Kumara Dissanayake said that the agreement contains clauses to the effect that no party to the agreement should reveal the contents of it without the written consent of the other party for two years. And the JVP politburo member and former COPE Chairman Sunil Handunnetti said that same person had signed the agreement as witnesses to both parties. These facts have not been contested yet by anybody. Yet, if the consent of the Parliament is sought, definitely all members of the ruling coalition, sometimes including those members of small parties of it will vote for it, given their track record. Do they represent the people?  

Going by the unprecedented number of domestic gas related explosions and incidents of fire; even a child would understand that the recent change in the composition of gas by the gas companies cause these mishaps. Contrary to the blame put on the accessories used with the gas cylinders such as the regulators by the authorities of these companies, people use these accessories for the past three decades, with only rare incidents of explosions or fire having occurred. 

It is very clear that the government ministers too are unwilling to see any link between these accidents and the composition of gas. They are more inclined to blame the amount of Ethyl Mercaptan, the odour emanating chemical added to domestic gas.  In short, they do not want to prevent explosions or fire, but only to alert the people of such disasters by increasing gas smell. They pretend not to understand that explosions and fire mishaps might occur without a leakage of gas. Can they be considered to be accountable to the people who voted for them?

In order to save the fast depleting country’s foreign reserves, government in May banned importation of chemical fertilizer and other agrochemicals. Some doctors who have been promoting organic farming seem to be behind this unplanned sudden decision. The outcome has been a situation where both agrochemicals and food items have to be imported. It must be noted that no ruling party Parliamentarian hailing from agricultural areas and even those who in fact own agricultural lands were audacious to warn about the impending calamity. Minister of Lands, S.M.Chandrasena on Wednesday trivializing the fertilizer issue told media that there is a small issue but the Opposition is inciting the farmers. He is said to be representing an agricultural district and will sometimes continue to do so after the next election as well. And the farmers who know whether they were incited or not would also might vote for him. That is how the things happen in Sri Lanka.

"JVP politburo member and former COPE Chairman Sunil Handunnetti said that same person had signed the agreement as witnesses to both parties. These facts have not been contested yet by anybody"

Anura Priyadarshana Yapa who was the Chairman of Committee on Public Finance until the prorogation of Parliament on Sunday by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa during a YouTube interview on Wednesday said that the current state of affairs is not in the interest of the country. Although one might doubt whether he did or would speak from his heart in a similar vein as a minister, he said there cannot be people who are always prepared to say “yes sir” in a Cabinet. There should be healthy and open debates in such fora and the leadership must be prepared to come down from its stands while the others must also reciprocally express their views freely. 

However, we cannot recall any such discourses in the highest forums of governance or men of principles in the past or present, except for one or two incidents. Former Agriculture Minister Gamani Jayasuriya resigned from the ministerial portfolio and his seat in Parliament in 1987 in protest of the Indo-Lanka Accord, especially the merger of the Northern and Eastern Provinces. Similarly, two UNP MPs from the south, Chandrakumara Wijegunawardena and the current Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena voted against the 13th Amendment to the Constitution and the Provincial Council Bill at their second reading, following Indo-Lanka Peace Accord. One might deem their actions to be wrong, but cannot deny that they took principled stands. However, the two southern MPs reluctantly voted in favour of the two Bills at their third reading.  

There have been many rebellions within the two main political parties when they were running the affairs of the country, but they were mainly infightings for portfolios and perks. And the law too prevents the people’s representatives from acting according to their conscience. If they do so it would amount to violation of party discipline and law permits their expulsion from the seats in Parliament or any other elected body. Only people with strong personality traits can stand against this kind of scenarios. One cannot expect a change in the situation so long as politics is a collective money making mechanism for the “people’s representatives.”