The proper response to public interest is to keep the people informed of reality, especially on matters that can impact on public thinking and the politics of governance. There have been many instances when the present government has failed to make the best use of timely contact and communication with the public on matters of importance, that have added to its problems in governance. Just now the price of rice stands out as an issue of increasing economic and political importance, which seems to have been forgotten or ignored by those handling the subject.
There is no escape possible from the unprecedented drought conditions faced by the country. This was known to the authorities for many months back, with little hope of things improving by the occasional huge shower, even though thinking those rains came as a response for prayers to the deities. The fact today is that those in governance appear to be wholly ignorant of the role of rice in the politics of this country. Rice has changed governments. The price of rice has been the core subject of national elections. We have had political leaders who promised to bring rice from the moon in election campaigns, and we have had political parties that gave free rice to the people.
The response by the government to the growing criticism on the price of rice in the market, despite all the publicity given to the Gazette notifications on the Maximum Retail Price (MRP) of the most consumed varieties of rice, seems a complete failure to understand the reality of both the social and political impacts of the price of rice. It took some time after the criticism began to spread for the Minister of Industry and Commerce Rishad Bathiudeen to visit rice traders with the media, and make statements as to how the MRP on rice was being implemented. It took even more time after that for the people to be told about the raids carried out – more than a thousand we are told - on traders who were not observing the MRP.
The reality is that in any area of the country, whether urban or rural, the MRP is largely non-effective, except in the CWE and other cooperative outlets. The larger public has neither the time nor money to travel distances to the CWE and cooperative outlets to benefit from the MRP on rice. They go to traders in their areas of residence, and find that the price has not come down, and the traders tell them the rice they sell has been purchased at the older higher prices, and cannot be brought down. This is the stark reality of the everyday market, as faced by the people.
Becoming a farce
The public is not helped by the statistics published by any ministry about raids carried out. They are not encouraged by such statistics to take the trouble to make phone complaints about their nearby traders selling at higher prices, who they have to deal with every day. They lack confidence in the privacy assurances of the officialdom about such phone complaints, and on the entire system of the MRP on rice, which is becoming a farce and leading to a steady increasing in the cost of rice, and as a result the daily cost of living of the people.
If there are raids on traders who sell rice at higher prices, why is the media not used to give publicity to such raids? Why is the public not told of the fines imposed on the traders so charged? What is preventing the use prominent news items, and good advertisements in the media to give publicity to such raids and fines, just as huge advertisements are used to give a boost to Ministers and various programmes launched by ministries? This is the lack of contact and communication, on an issue as important socially and politically as the price of rice, and which certainly has an important impact on the image of the government and its popularity with the people.
The allegations made that those who break the MRP on rice are engaged in a conspiracy to bring down the government, makes no sense whatever, when considering the reality of how this lack of contact and communication with the people, and actual publicized raids on wrongful traders, are causing much more damage to the government; giving an impression that it is threatened from within. Speedy changes are called for on dealing with the price of rice, as well as the wider increased cost of living that is faced by the people.
Constitutional doldrums
If the crisis on the economic front is shown by the inability to effectively handle the price of rice, another aspect of political importance that has moved in the doldrums is Constitutional Reform. There is no question that this government was elected – both in the sea change on January 8, 2015 and the later affirmation of that change in the General Election in August that year – on a pledge to bring in a new constitution, which will abolish the Executive Presidency. The talk from the SLFP, especially those of the SLFP in the government, points to a total negation of that pledge given by Common Candidate of January 2015 – none other than President Maithripala Sirisena.
After many twists and turns in the past few months, this section of the SLFP is now coming out in the open as being wholly rejective of the pledges given to the people by the Common Candidate and the political movement – the combination of political parties and organisations of civil society – that campaigned to elect the Common Candidate, defeating Mahinda Rajapaksa, to bring about major constitutional changes in the country.
This emerging trend by SLFP sections within the government is not a big surprise, because most of them remained supportive of the corrupt Rajapaksa Regime even after January 8, 2015, and also campaigned for a Rajapaksa victory in the General Election that followed. What one hears from them is their echoing of the Rajapaksa thinking on the politics of the country, which is totally against any constitutional change, on the basis of any new constitution, brought in with emphasis on the principle of devolution and power sharing, which they say would bring federalism and, therefore, separatism in the country.
The question remains as to how these persons were in the Mahinda Rajapaksa governments, both of them, with the policy manifesto of Mahinda Rajapaksa, in both elections, stating the need for the abolition of the Executive Presidency. The answer would be that they knew that it was a false promise that would never be implemented, and they liked all the corruption that flowed in many directions of governance under the power of the Executive Presidency.
Referendum fears
Apart from that support for Rajapaksa thinking, what is emerging now in their opposition to the abolition of the Executive Presidency, and any constitutional changes that would require a referendum, show that they do wholly fear the possibility of a referendum, which could lead to a defeat of the government on this issue. What is being displayed by these members of government is that they do not want any new constitution. The constitutional changes that can come without a referendum can only be further amendments to the present constitution, and cannot be major issues such as the abolition of the Executive Presidency.
What these forces that are opposed to a referendum conceal, apart from their fear of the results of a referendum, is that they do not look at the possibility of winning at a referendum. Going by the examples of Brexit in the UK, and the recent Italian referendum on constitutional change, a referendum could certainly pose a danger to a government in office. Yet the situation here is certainly different. The dangers the government could face could certainly be wholly removed if the government lives up to the other major promise to fight and eradicate corruption in the country, beginning with the Rajapaksa Regime.
The issue of popularity faced by the government today, apart from the lack of good communication with the people, lies in what people see as its failure to fight the forces of corruption. Pushing behind many investigations launched by the FCID and the Bribery Commission, and moves to appease forces who are against the law being applied on “War Heroes”, even when involved in crimes against the people, are certainly taking their toll on the government’s popularity. The major issue here is that those of the SLFP making the biggest noises against the abolition of the Executive Presidency and the possibility of a referendum could also be having links to the corruption of the Rajapaksa Regime, apart from the corruption of today.
The government clearly has to deal swiftly with the issue of the lack of proper communication with the people, and keep to its pledge for constitutional reform, if the pledge to the people to bring major political change is to be lived up to.
Add new comment