All hat, no cattle?

Wednesday 16th December, 2020

Politicians always feel for the people when they are out of power. Their love for the masses flies out of the window after winning elections and being ensconced in power. The Opposition has called upon the government to curtail wasteful expenditure and channel the funds so saved to grant relief to the pandemic-hit people. Bravo! On the eve of the final budget vote, the SJB urged the Speaker to cancel the traditional dinner held to mark the passage of the budget. The government, which is very generous with others’ money, true to form, went ahead and hosted the dinner. The SJB MPs let out a howl of protest and boycotted the event.

Minister John Seneviratne has, in a bid to justify the Speaker’s dinner, said the Westminster traditions we have inherited have to be respected. One could not agree with him more. But that must not be done selectively. Look at the Commons Chamber in the British Parliament. It is far from ornate, and all MPs have to sit on benches. The British MPs do not throw chilli powder at their opponents or frighten the Speaker into showing them a clean pair of heels. Why aren’t such traditions followed here?

The SLPP has no moral right to speak of parliamentary traditions, which it has no regard for. It is also no respecter of the law. Its leaders forcibly formed a government in 2018 even though they could not muster a majority in Parliament, and shamelessly held on to power for nearly two months before suffering a heavy gavel blow.

It has now been revealed that the holier-than-thou SJB MPs, who skipped the Speaker’s dinner, partied at a five-star hotel on the same day. The government has sought to ridicule them as a bunch of hypocrites. One may argue that the SJB MPs spent their own funds on their shindig, and therefore, they have done nothing wrong. But they are at fault where their call for austerity measures and giving to charity in view of the pandemic is concerned. They could have saved the money spent on their five-star dinner and used it to do something for the poor. Example is said to be better than precept.

Besides the Speaker’s dinner at issue, there are many events that cost Citizen Perera an arm and a leg. Grand opening ceremonies are among them. These events only help the government in power gain political mileage and boost its leaders’ egos. The practice of holding expensive ceremonies to mark the opening of projects carried out with public funds (borrowed money included) has to be done away with. Will the SJB launch a campaign to pressure the government to refrain from wasting taxpayers’ money on such expensive yet useless events?

Then there is Parliament, which is a drain on the public purse. The MPs are given duty free vehicles, plus massive loans at ludicrously low interest rates to purchase them. Will the Opposition MPs call for scrapping this scheme, turn down duty free vehicle permits and, thereby, help ease the economic burden on the public and save a lot of foreign exchange? In Sweden, as we have pointed out in a previous comment, the MPs including the Speaker have to travel in buses and trains, or use private vehicles at their own expense.

Now that the SJB has boycotted the Speaker’s dinner purportedly for the sake of the public, will its members stop having heavily subsidised meals in the parliament canteen while the people are struggling to dull the pangs of hunger. If they do so, and bring their meals from home, their government counterparts will have to follow suit. Then only will they be able to convince the public that they are different from the greedy government politicians they rightly rake over the coals for wasting public funds. Otherwise, the discerning public will say, “All hat, no cattle.”