Media space is dominated by news stories regarding the proposed debate between National People’s Power’s (NPP) prospective Presidential Candidate Anura Kumara Dissanayake and nominee for Presidential Candidacy of Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) Sajith Premadasa.
The news stories related to such an open debate are doing the doing round on both social and mainstream media platforms. But, it is yet to the see the light of day with both sides putting one condition after another for the debate to take place, and it leaves scope for one to wonder where both of them chicken out from such a public confrontation fearing all their rhetoric with little or no substance will be exposed before the public eye ahead of the Presidential Election, most likely to be conducted early October.
Mr. Premadasa, addressing an event in Mullaitivu earlier, said he was ready for a debate on any topic – be it economic, social, political or international. He chose Mullaitivu, a northern town in the remote corner of the country to speak about it but it drew widespread media attention.
The prospect of an open debate between Sajith Premadasa and Anura Kumara Dissanayake has become a focal point in Sri Lankan politics.
In a turn of events in politics, the prospect of such a debate grows in the country after Mr. Dissanayake, has voiced his readiness to partake in a debate with Mr. Premadasa. Mr. Dissanayake said that Dr. Nalinda Jayatissa would oversee the coordination of these efforts on behalf of the NPP. Furthermore, he extended an invitation to Premadasa’s team, urging them to nominate a representative to facilitate and prepare for the upcoming debate.
In the meantime, Sunil Handunnetti, a member of the NPP’s Economic Council, has accepted a challenge for an economic policy debate. Mr. Handunnetti emphasised the significance of such discussions, particularly between the Presidential candidates, underlining the importance of addressing crucial economic issues.
Responding to these developments, Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa has also accepted the invitation for a debate.
In the countries with advanced, open and transparent democracies, such debates mark a promising stride towards fostering political discourse and engaging in constructive exchanges on critical issues. Politicians take questions directed by the media, their rivals and civil society on specific issues and answer accordingly in keeping with their policy lines. If it is tax cut, for example, they will announce what taxes will be reduced or increased. After that they will even ground their stands in some political theory to convince voters.
Such debates among the presidential candidates hardly take place in Sri Lanka. Instead, their nominees participate in TV debates. If it happens between Mr. Dissanayake and Mr. Premadasa, it will be a momentous development in Sri Lankan politics. In fact, the willingness of key figures to participate in debates bodes well for the forthcoming elections, promising a robust exchange of ideas and perspectives.
It is clear that Mr. Dissanayake is particular ready to take on Mr. Premadasa in one-on-one debate. However, there is a stumbling block for it to happen because the SJB insists on changing the structure of the debate. Instead of making it Mr. Premadasa versus Mr. Dissanayake, the SJB moots the idea that the debate should take place between the economic teams of the two parties, a proposal not entertained by the NPP as such.
There are enough and more reasons for both sides to find excuses one after another to avoid such a debate. Mr. Premadasa is a long standing politician starting his parliamentary career way back in 2000. However, his appearance in public TV debates with his political opponents has extremely been rare. It is so rare that one cannot remember when he last appeared in a TV debate taking on his opponents affront. Even in his parliamentary life, he did not actively participate in debates up until he became the Opposition Leader.
It is fathomable that he feels uncomfortable in facing one – on – one debate with a rival candidate ahead of an election that is detrimental to his political future. Therefore, his party insisted on the inclusion of a team for the debate.
In contrast, the NPP is keen on a debate between Mr. Dissanayake and Mr. Premadasa sans other leaders of the two sides who are well-versed in economic matters, though.
There is a reason for that. The NPP, in its election propaganda work, does not take a deep dive into the current economic woes. Instead, it has a surface driven approach and uses fiery or flowery language at rallies and meetings to mesmerize voters whose antipathy against the traditional political forces are all time high.
The NPP is a political amalgam led by the Marxist JVP. The core of the NPP is nothing but the JVP. The core JVP leaders such as Tilvin Silva always utter that they would not deviate from socialist principles no matter what. Nevertheless, the NPP leaders speak otherwise. It is now a party full contradictions, confusions and contrast. The NPP has managed to keep such policy contrasts away from the public eye to some extent through the use of their grandiose propaganda skills. Yet, in the presence of economic experts from other parties in a public debate, the party fears getting their double standard exposed. Therefore, it tries to avoid a debate at this juncture.
During a public debate, the NPP knows it will be compelled to spell out whether it is still bogged down in its Marxist dogma or not. If it is an open admission, it will antagonize its cadre base.
Well aware of the inner weaknesses, both sides try to dodge the debate despite the prospect of people for it keeps rising.
