Give reason a chance

THE Post-Tsunami Operations Management Structure (P-TOMS) proposal, popularly referred to as the 'Joint Mechanism', would be presented in Parliament today and with this move the people of this country would be in a position to ascertain what this concept is all about.

As explained by the Leader of the House, Maithripala Senanayake, the purpose of bringing the proposal to the House, prior to signing it, is to enable Members of Parliament to express their views on it.

The Leader of the House went on to explain that prior to signing the document in question, the President would be briefing the Maha Sangha about it.

Although the P-TOMS proposal needs to be swiftly implemented, there is some merit in this approach of putting the proposal for discussion, first, to the people's representatives.

The measure would enable the people's representatives to express their views on the content of the P-TOMS concept and, hopefully, arrive at a consensus on it.

Besides, they and the general public would be in a position to see for themselves that the 'Joint Mechanism' - far from being a threat to the geographical wholeness of Sri Lanka - is really an instrument of equitable development.

Rather than strengthen separatist tendencies, it could be found that the 'Joint Mechanism' would only be facilitating the integration of the North-East with the rest of Sri Lanka. For, essentially, it would be a tool of development and country rebuilding.

Thus far, despite the fact that even the President has attempted to disabuse the minds of critics of the P-TOMS of its perceived limitations, they have mindlessly cried "foul" and even taken their angry campaign of disinformation into the streets.

We wonder whether these fuming critics have paused awhile to impartially examine the merits of the proposal. So blind is their rage that they do not wish to follow the rational course of examining the document with an open mind.

The fact that they have dismissed the proposal out of hand, amply displays a destructive intent on the part of these critics. Destroy and be damned seems to be their motto.

We wish these critics would get back to their senses. Do they desire to hurtle the country back to a state of conflict and war? Or do they want to proceed steadily with the task of country re-building?

The blind fury and irrationality of these critics is eerily suggestive of those dark days in the late Eighties when a rational discourse on issues facing the country was rendered impossible by a mindless and ruthless rejection of reasoned judgement by the critics of ethnic reconciliation and harmony. A case in point was the hate talk which met the Provincial Council scheme.

We wish to remind these critics that the democratic process should be upheld at all times. The polity needs to act on a consensus on the issues facing us. Any extra-parliamentary action would be violative of the norms of democracy and threaten law and order.