Our news pages report today that President Mahinda Rajapaksa lost his composure on Friday while addressing a ruling coalition rally in the central highlands of Kandy. It was understandable, for which leader of a nation would like to have party workers boo him while he was addressing the public.
The 'booing' was organised; aimed at jeering at a fellow candidate on the coalition's list, in an attempt to show that he is unpopular. It shows the depths to which the battle for the manape (preferential votes) has sunk.
Both the Government and the Opposition have realised the evil effects of the battle for the preferential vote in the Proportional Representation (PR) system introduced with the 1989 General Election. Inaction on the part of the last Parliament, however, to remedy this malady by implementing the recommendations of the Electoral Reforms Committee is primarily to blame for this unfortunate state of affairs.
There seems to be consensus now that while the PR system has its good side (there are no landslide victories and smaller parties get to have representation in Parliament), the flipside is this battle for the preferential vote where candidates have two opponents, the opposing party and your own candidates' list. There is also the aspect where there is no longer the "Gamey manthrithuma" (our-MP) concept. Thus, the compromise seems to be to have a Parliament, like in Germany, with half of the MPs elected under the PR system and the other half under the former 'first-past-the-post' system as in Britain and India. While there is no perfect system, it is worth giving this formula a try.
Meanwhile, the country is witness to the spectacle of the on-going parliamentary election campaign. The amount of money being spent to get elected is colossal -- much of it undeclared millions.
It is often argued in some quarters that 'black money' or undeclared money is a sine quo non to economic development. That if the taxman takes all the extra money, it will not go to economic development but merely to feed an overgrown political establishment and obese bureaucracy.
In a bid to legitimize this 'extra wealth', the latest Indian budget has tried to give tax incentives to the upper middle class (economically speaking) to invest that money in the national economy.
The funds now being spent on the on-going election campaign amount to millions of rupees and it is the Government politicians who seem to be having the 'big bucks' to throw.
There are reports that powerful Government politicians bring gunny bags full of cash for distribution among party workers; but that has been the case with all ruling parties. They all have agents who handle these money bags. They are always at an advantage because the business community, both in the corporate sector in Colombo, or the village mudalali has a vested interest in some ongoing project, or a contract they are smacking their chops to get at.
They would rather play safe than be sorry. Those in the Opposition have to fend for themselves, begging and pleading with promises of a better tomorrow even though all of these funders, be they in the corporate world or the village entrepreneur (the sausage eating class and the sweet-corn eating class as the President was wont to classify them) do hedge their bets with a percentage to the opponents.
It is also known that foreign countries make contributions to parties and candidates. They don't come through the External Resources division of the Finance Ministry or the Central Bank, but through money exchanges and other sources.
There has been a nagging allegation that a Treasury Secretary converted a loan from a foreign country to a political contribution - with the knowledge and consent of that foreign country. That's how the big bucks come rolling in to campaign coffers.
That's why, as we have said over and again, the political parties are the biggest bribe-takers in this country. Many in the Establishment often shrug their shoulders and say "it happens all over the democratic world"; but the fact also remains that many of the advanced democracies have checks and balances, and controls over campaign funds, including foreign funding.
How flushed the Ministers contesting seem to be -- each fighting the other and some new bountiful candidates, for sheer survival in the brutal, cut-throat Proportional Representation system.
The President has tried to bring a halt to this, not for any altruistic reason, but simply to arrest the in-fighting by saying he will not give Cabinet portfolios to those who engage in this 'dirty war'. Our political satirist on the opposite page identifies some of them he will have to drop should his coalition be re-elected.
Under the old election law, there was a provision to place a cap on expenditure. With the escalating inflation that amount became unrealistic; but now there is no such upper limit. The sky is the limit now, if not space.
True, with the PR system, a candidate has to canvass a larger district rather a smaller constituency, and have his or her number popularised among a bigger voter population. But there must be some sense of proportion to this spending spree.
The Government (and the Opposition in Parliament) have not been bothered to look into this, preferring a free-for-all.
The net result is that while the old system which enabled only the wealthy to enter Parliament had given way to the 'common man', we have now reverted to the old system where only the wealthy are able to enter Parliament; defeating the very purpose for which Parliament was meant to be; as an assembly representative of the people. |
E-mail