By Sarah Hannan
Over the past several weeks, the marriage between the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) and the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) showed signs of breaking, and the statements made by the SLFP to the media were thought to have added fuel to the fire. However, following the recent party leaders’ meeting and the SLFP’s meeting with the President and Prime Minister, things seem to have been patched up at present.
The Sunday Morning spoke to SLPP General Secretary MP Sagara Kariyawasam, who took the time to clear some of the doubts over whether the alliance would continue to stand as the provincial council elections are being discussed.
Following are excerpts of the interview;
[caption id="attachment_111635" align="alignleft" width="300"]
Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna General Secretary MP Sagara Kariyawasam[/caption]
Are there growing issues in the SLPP alliance with the SLFP?
I do not agree with you in the sense that you asked that question. In any case, when there are political parties working together, each and every political party will work according to their policies and principles. Therefore, parties that form alliances will not always agree with each other, and there can always be certain issues that can be ironed out through discussions and compromise. Other than that, we do not have serious issues that cannot be resolved between the two parties.
The SLFP Leader and the General Secretary have openly spoken of issues faced by the party in its alliance with the governing party. Your thoughts?
We do not agree with certain sentiments that have been highlighted by them to the media. This matter was discussed at the last party leaders’ meeting. SLFP General Secretary Dayasiri Jayasekara also agreed to a great extent.
Jayasekara had made a statement that the initial discussion the SLFP had with the SLPP was not truthful and that the SLPP had not fulfilled our end of the agreements, which is wrong. When we pointed it out, Jayasekara agreed that it was wrong of him to make such statements prior to discussions.
The SLFP has, since the last general election, said the SLPP had failed to honour the agreements reached between the two parties. How would you respond?
When the SLPP formed an alliance with the SLFP, our first task was to secure the local authorities, which are secondly governed by the UNP (United National Party) – the local authorities that were established during the Yahapalana regime. When they formed the local authorities, the SLFP and the UNP were in an alliance.
As an initial step, this time around, we agreed to defeat these local authorities’ alliances and win the support of the SLFP, so that they could form the alliance with the SLPP and defeat the UNP, and establish power at the grassroots level. That was the initial setup we agreed to, but unfortunately, in certain areas, the SLFP did not fulfil the terms of the agreement.
So, from the areas which were governed by the UNP, we did not get the required support from the SLFP to establish power in the local councils in question. Therefore, it is the SLFP that damaged the relationship with the SLPP.
The issues that sprung up in Kegalle District’s Mawanella local government authority can be taken as an illustration, for instance, where the SLFP did not honour the agreement they had with the SLPP. The SLFP decided to support the UNP instead of supporting the SLPP and established a UNP council there. Even in the Badulla District, there were two such councils that were established. Thereafter, our supporters also thought that if the SLFP is not fulfilling their end of the agreement, why should we bother to go ahead.
Given that we are a very democratic party, we told them that if this was what the SLFP wanted for those local council areas, they could have it. Now, the SLFP, without fulfilling their part, expects us to honour the agreements, which cannot be allowed. They must keep their end of the agreement as well.
We have had cordial dialogues in this regard and have been able to amicably settle the issues that are building.
SLFP local government members have voted against the Budget 2021 proposals presented by the SLPP in some local government bodies. How will the SLPP address this situation?
This is just one of the many issues for which the SLFP did not provide their support at the grassroots level, and they expect the other party to fulfil all the obligations. But this is not the main problem as voters lost their confidence at such instances. Nevertheless, that has now been sorted after holding proper negotiations.
It seems that despite the SLPP-SLFP agreement being enforced at higher levels of the Government, it is not so at the district and electoral levels. What will your party do to improve this situation?
We have fulfilled our obligations 90% of the time, but we agree that there can be a minor percentage of instances where the agreements are not met. Those are the disagreements that get highlighted. That is the entire problem. But for the most part, both parties have worked well to keep the alliance together.
Why hasn’t the SLPP included the SLFP in the Government's decision-making process?
They are very much included in the process. In fact, SLFP members in Parliament were given two strong cabinet portfolios and several state ministerial portfolios, and when major decisions are taken within the parties in alliance, all party leaders are consulted, during which time the SLFP plays a major role in the decision-making process.
The SLFP Leader has said that if the party does not receive the agreed number of candidates at the impending provincial council elections, the party would contest separately at the polls. What will you do to ensure the alliance is strengthened?
Firstly, I need to say that I don’t know what their intended number of candidates would be. We still don’t know as to how many candidates in total we would have to nominate for each provincial council. This is an alliance which has so many parties, and the SLFP is one of the political parties of this alliance. Even during the recent general election, the SLFP got more candidates included in the list of nominations over and above all other parties in the alliance. So, for the forthcoming provincial council elections, first they have to communicate to us what their required number is, and thereafter, we have to start negotiations in that regard.
Obviously, if they are not going to be happy with what is offered by the alliance, then they can contest separately. So, we do not have any issues with that, as that is the right way to go about such a matter. Because the SLPP is a democratic political party, we will try our level best to work as a team, and we will look at allocating the right number of slots to each and every party.
Similar to the method we followed during the general election when allocating slots, for the provincial council election too, these parties will have to propose the slots they would require for each local government constituency. We will take these proposals and requests into consideration and take a decision without compromising the right to secure slots for the other parties that are in the alliance.
Therefore, I would like to reiterate that matters such as these could easily be discussed among the parties and could be settled, rather than going out in public and making statements to the media and the people.
As of now, the dates for provincial council elections have not been declared. Still, there has not been any negotiations as to the number of candidates that should be put forth and the electoral system that is going to be followed. Without understanding these inner workings, and when a party in the alliance makes such statements, it is not very healthy for the alliance. Any such statements should be made after negotiations have taken place.
While the SLFP might be making such statements to convince their cadres or to create a reputation for themselves among the people, we do not take such incidents very seriously.
Does the SLPP want to continue its alliance with the SLFP?
There has never been a requirement to end the alliance between the parties, as even during the last party leaders’ meeting, we had cordial discussions without any disputes between the two parties.
The SLFP has expressed its grievances to the President and Prime Minister. What has been done to address the issue so far?
I need to correct that sentiment. This is an alliance and all parties in alliances will have their own grievances; as the SLPP, we too have our grievances, which means all parties that formed the SLPP alliance have forwarded their own grievances to the President and Prime Minister.
One must understand that when you work in an alliance, you get certain things as expected, but sometimes you might not get what you expected. That creates a grievance, and even we have grievances as a party.
For instance, when the SLFP was governing the country with the UNP, some of the members of Parliament decided that they no longer supported the SLFP-UNP alliance and joined forces with the SLPP, becoming instrumental in establishing the SLPP alliance. Some of these members have not been given portfolios or anything.
Just because we have grievances, that does not mean that we cannot work together for the betterment of the country. But when you work as an alliance, you forget your party’s grievances and work to achieve a common goal, which is to improve the country. We as a party are working towards achieving that and I believe the SLFP too is doing just that. However, at the same time, you have to bring out your grievances and reach a solution.
Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna General Secretary MP Sagara Kariyawasam[/caption]
Are there growing issues in the SLPP alliance with the SLFP?
I do not agree with you in the sense that you asked that question. In any case, when there are political parties working together, each and every political party will work according to their policies and principles. Therefore, parties that form alliances will not always agree with each other, and there can always be certain issues that can be ironed out through discussions and compromise. Other than that, we do not have serious issues that cannot be resolved between the two parties.
The SLFP Leader and the General Secretary have openly spoken of issues faced by the party in its alliance with the governing party. Your thoughts?
We do not agree with certain sentiments that have been highlighted by them to the media. This matter was discussed at the last party leaders’ meeting. SLFP General Secretary Dayasiri Jayasekara also agreed to a great extent.
Jayasekara had made a statement that the initial discussion the SLFP had with the SLPP was not truthful and that the SLPP had not fulfilled our end of the agreements, which is wrong. When we pointed it out, Jayasekara agreed that it was wrong of him to make such statements prior to discussions.
The SLFP has, since the last general election, said the SLPP had failed to honour the agreements reached between the two parties. How would you respond?
When the SLPP formed an alliance with the SLFP, our first task was to secure the local authorities, which are secondly governed by the UNP (United National Party) – the local authorities that were established during the Yahapalana regime. When they formed the local authorities, the SLFP and the UNP were in an alliance.
As an initial step, this time around, we agreed to defeat these local authorities’ alliances and win the support of the SLFP, so that they could form the alliance with the SLPP and defeat the UNP, and establish power at the grassroots level. That was the initial setup we agreed to, but unfortunately, in certain areas, the SLFP did not fulfil the terms of the agreement.
So, from the areas which were governed by the UNP, we did not get the required support from the SLFP to establish power in the local councils in question. Therefore, it is the SLFP that damaged the relationship with the SLPP.
The issues that sprung up in Kegalle District’s Mawanella local government authority can be taken as an illustration, for instance, where the SLFP did not honour the agreement they had with the SLPP. The SLFP decided to support the UNP instead of supporting the SLPP and established a UNP council there. Even in the Badulla District, there were two such councils that were established. Thereafter, our supporters also thought that if the SLFP is not fulfilling their end of the agreement, why should we bother to go ahead.
Given that we are a very democratic party, we told them that if this was what the SLFP wanted for those local council areas, they could have it. Now, the SLFP, without fulfilling their part, expects us to honour the agreements, which cannot be allowed. They must keep their end of the agreement as well.
We have had cordial dialogues in this regard and have been able to amicably settle the issues that are building.
SLFP local government members have voted against the Budget 2021 proposals presented by the SLPP in some local government bodies. How will the SLPP address this situation?
This is just one of the many issues for which the SLFP did not provide their support at the grassroots level, and they expect the other party to fulfil all the obligations. But this is not the main problem as voters lost their confidence at such instances. Nevertheless, that has now been sorted after holding proper negotiations.
It seems that despite the SLPP-SLFP agreement being enforced at higher levels of the Government, it is not so at the district and electoral levels. What will your party do to improve this situation?
We have fulfilled our obligations 90% of the time, but we agree that there can be a minor percentage of instances where the agreements are not met. Those are the disagreements that get highlighted. That is the entire problem. But for the most part, both parties have worked well to keep the alliance together.
Why hasn’t the SLPP included the SLFP in the Government's decision-making process?
They are very much included in the process. In fact, SLFP members in Parliament were given two strong cabinet portfolios and several state ministerial portfolios, and when major decisions are taken within the parties in alliance, all party leaders are consulted, during which time the SLFP plays a major role in the decision-making process.
The SLFP Leader has said that if the party does not receive the agreed number of candidates at the impending provincial council elections, the party would contest separately at the polls. What will you do to ensure the alliance is strengthened?
Firstly, I need to say that I don’t know what their intended number of candidates would be. We still don’t know as to how many candidates in total we would have to nominate for each provincial council. This is an alliance which has so many parties, and the SLFP is one of the political parties of this alliance. Even during the recent general election, the SLFP got more candidates included in the list of nominations over and above all other parties in the alliance. So, for the forthcoming provincial council elections, first they have to communicate to us what their required number is, and thereafter, we have to start negotiations in that regard.
Obviously, if they are not going to be happy with what is offered by the alliance, then they can contest separately. So, we do not have any issues with that, as that is the right way to go about such a matter. Because the SLPP is a democratic political party, we will try our level best to work as a team, and we will look at allocating the right number of slots to each and every party.
Similar to the method we followed during the general election when allocating slots, for the provincial council election too, these parties will have to propose the slots they would require for each local government constituency. We will take these proposals and requests into consideration and take a decision without compromising the right to secure slots for the other parties that are in the alliance.
Therefore, I would like to reiterate that matters such as these could easily be discussed among the parties and could be settled, rather than going out in public and making statements to the media and the people.
As of now, the dates for provincial council elections have not been declared. Still, there has not been any negotiations as to the number of candidates that should be put forth and the electoral system that is going to be followed. Without understanding these inner workings, and when a party in the alliance makes such statements, it is not very healthy for the alliance. Any such statements should be made after negotiations have taken place.
While the SLFP might be making such statements to convince their cadres or to create a reputation for themselves among the people, we do not take such incidents very seriously.
Does the SLPP want to continue its alliance with the SLFP?
There has never been a requirement to end the alliance between the parties, as even during the last party leaders’ meeting, we had cordial discussions without any disputes between the two parties.
The SLFP has expressed its grievances to the President and Prime Minister. What has been done to address the issue so far?
I need to correct that sentiment. This is an alliance and all parties in alliances will have their own grievances; as the SLPP, we too have our grievances, which means all parties that formed the SLPP alliance have forwarded their own grievances to the President and Prime Minister.
One must understand that when you work in an alliance, you get certain things as expected, but sometimes you might not get what you expected. That creates a grievance, and even we have grievances as a party.
For instance, when the SLFP was governing the country with the UNP, some of the members of Parliament decided that they no longer supported the SLFP-UNP alliance and joined forces with the SLPP, becoming instrumental in establishing the SLPP alliance. Some of these members have not been given portfolios or anything.
Just because we have grievances, that does not mean that we cannot work together for the betterment of the country. But when you work as an alliance, you forget your party’s grievances and work to achieve a common goal, which is to improve the country. We as a party are working towards achieving that and I believe the SLFP too is doing just that. However, at the same time, you have to bring out your grievances and reach a solution.