• Rtd. MPs’ Collective Secy. Pemasiri Manage opines that the move will reduce oppos. for individuals from ordinary families to enter politics 
• Says politics will be dominated by a small number of wealthy families, causing damage to democracy and governance

The Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP)-led National People’s Power (NPP) Government’s proposal to end pensions for former Members of Parliament (MPs) has met with opposition from the Retired Parliamentarians’ Collective (RPC), which has threatened various forms of action both locally and internationally.

In response, Government representatives, including Cabinet Spokesperson Dr. Nalinda Jayatissa, stated that former MPs facing financial hardship can still apply for existing social welfare programmes such as Aswesuma. They also noted that the JVP has been advocating for the abolition of MPs’ pensions for over 20 years, even when they were in the Opposition.

In an interview with The Daily Morning, RPC Secretary and former JVP MP Pemasiri Manage shared his views on the Government’s decision, its impact on former MPs, and the implications for political participation in Sri Lanka.

Following are excerpts from the interview:

Could you explain what the RPC is, including its purpose?

Our Collective consists of MPs from all ethnic backgrounds and from different political parties, including the JVP. It was not formed with a narrow aim in mind. We formed it with broad objectives that go beyond winning our rights as former MPs. We believe that as former MPs, we should play a more active role in addressing the challenges facing the country today. This is not a group formed to protect our personal privileges alone. It is a platform for former MPs to contribute to the country’s progress in the present political and social climate.

Approximately how many retired MPs are there in Sri Lanka today?

According to the information available to us, there are close to 500 retired MPs in the country. This number may have slightly changed, as several have passed away in recent months.

What kinds of benefits or privileges do retired MPs currently receive in Sri Lanka? How does this compare to the common perception held by the public?

In almost every other country, retired MPs receive certain benefits, including a pension. In Sri Lanka, we are entitled only to a pension, and it is very minimal. The NPP, led by the JVP, has spread the belief among the public that retired MPs enjoy many luxurious privileges. This is not true. It is a slogan created by them during the Presidential, Parliamentary/General, and Local Government (LG) elections for political advantage. They are trying to mislead the public and maintain their grip on political influence by propagating this misconception. The image that they have built of retired MPs living lavishly is false.

Could you give an idea of the actual pension amounts that retired MPs receive, and how these figures are determined?

Not all retired MPs receive the same amount. It depends on the length of service. The basic salary of an MP is Rs. 54,000. The highest pension possible is two-thirds of that amount. A few small allowances are added to this figure. These allowances were not available earlier; they were introduced after a request was made to Karu Jayasuriya when he was the Speaker of the Parliament. Even with the allowances, I don’t believe that the pension of any retired MP exceeds Rs. 80,000.

Recently, a Bill was introduced to abolish the privileges of retired Presidents. What are your thoughts on this development?

Abolishing their privileges is totally wrong. They all delivered a great deal for the nation. Former Presidents Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga and Mahinda Rajapaksa led the country at a very difficult time. If Rajapaksa did not end the war, the NPP would not even be in a position to form a Government today. Former President Gotabaya Rajapaksa also made a major contribution to ending the war during his tenure as the Defence Ministry Secretary. 

Former President Ranil Wickremesinghe took charge of the country during a severe economic crisis and worked to stabilise the economy. Former President Maithripala Sirisena too, devoted considerable time and efforts to serving the country. Even former First Lady Hema Premadasa lost her husband (President Ranasinghe Premadasa) because of the decisions he made as the President. If he had been an ordinary citizen, he would not have been targeted by terrorists.

It is wrong to accept the service of these leaders when the country needs them and later discard them in such a disrespectful manner. Abolishing their privileges will not make them destitute, but it is an insult to them and to the nation. No country treats its former Heads of State this way. If any of them has committed wrongdoing, there are proper legal channels to address it. Punishment for wrongdoing is one matter, but actions like this damage the country’s image. When future leaders see how their predecessors are treated, they will be reluctant to take bold decisions for the country’s benefit. Instead, they will focus on planning their life after retirement. It will weaken the quality of leadership in future Presidents. This Government and President Anura Kumara Dissanayake don’t appear to understand what proper governance entails. That is why they make such short-sighted decisions.

Why do you oppose the Government’s decision to end pensions for former MPs? What impact do you believe that this will have?

The NPP will leave office after introducing these laws, but the damage that they cause will remain. This move will reduce opportunities for individuals from ordinary family backgrounds to enter politics. As in the 1940s and 1950s, politics will be dominated by a small number of wealthy families. If an ordinary citizen leaves their job to serve in the Parliament and ends up with no pension at all, many will not enter politics. 

Those who do may be tempted to use their time in office to earn as much as possible by dishonest means. Throughout our history, many capable and honest MPs have been former public servants who left their careers, giving up their salaries, benefits, and pensions, to enter politics. These individuals brought valuable knowledge and expertise into policymaking. If pensions are abolished, such people will hesitate to take the risk. How will a country create good policies without educated and experienced individuals? The likely outcome will be that the Parliament will fall into the hands of people with questionable intentions. This would be a serious damage to democracy and governance. I think that the current Government is being influenced by external forces to change the political direction of the country in ways that will cause long-term harm.

What typically happens to people who leave public service careers to become MPs? How does this transition affect their previous benefits, such as pensions?

I was a graduate teacher before entering politics. When I was serving as a Provincial Councilor, I could remain on leave from my job. However, when one becomes an MP, they should leave the public service. I also resigned from teaching to enter the Parliament. This meant losing all the benefits that I had earned, including salary increments, promotions, and my public service pension. Once you leave the public service to become an MP, there is no possibility of returning after your term. 

I lost the pension I would have received as a teacher; with the Government's proposal, I am also going to lose the pension for my service as an MP. The public needs to consider whether this is fair. If this is allowed, there is a risk that one day the Government may try to abolish public servants’ pensions too, and claim that it would save the country some money.

How do other countries treat retired politicians, especially former MPs, in terms of pensions or other benefits? How does Sri Lanka’s approach compare?

In countries such as the United States, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, Japan, Singapore, and Australia, retired MPs receive pensions or allowances. The NPP tries to present this as an unusual benefit, but it is a common practice internationally. The main difference is that in some countries, payments start only when the former MP reaches a certain age, such as 55 or 60. In Sri Lanka, the pension begins immediately after leaving the Parliament. In many other countries, retired MPs are also provided with medical insurance. Here, we don’t have such provisions.

Has the Government engaged in any discussions or consultations with retired MPs regarding the decision to abolish their pensions?

No discussions have been held with us. We have sent a letter to the President outlining the potential damage that this decision will cause to the country. Abolishing pensions will save some money, but the harm that it will cause cannot be measured in financial terms. We are also prepared to present proposals to reduce Government expenses without targeting retired MPs. One idea is to stop giving MPs the allowance of Rs. 100,000 a month to maintain their offices. The State owns many vacant buildings. 

If these were given to MPs for office use, the allowance could be eliminated. With 159 MPs from the Ruling Party alone, this would save nearly Rs. 16 million each month. Another proposal is to replace the Rs. 50,000 monthly phone allowance with unlimited mobile packages available to the public for very little amounts such as Rs. 599, Rs. 699, and so on. Even applying this only to NPP MPs could save about Rs. eight million per month. The Government should focus on recovering money from those who became rich through illegal means. But, what the Government does is punish everyone including those who served honestly.

Do you believe that retired MPs can still play a role in politics? If so, how might their experience and expertise be utilised?

Absolutely. Many retired MPs possess high educational qualifications and extensive experience. Some have held ministerial positions in charge of national security during very difficult times. Today, the country’s security has weakened. Shootings take place almost daily. The expertise of these individuals could be used to create policies to address such problems. Instead of using their knowledge, the Government has chosen to target them.

The Government stated that former MPs struggling financially can apply for social welfare programmes such as Aswesuma. How do you respond to this statement?

I heard him (Dr. Jayatissa) make such comments. I think that the provision of Aswesuma should have started with JVP General Secretary Tilvin Silva, who has never worked or run a business in his life. Dr. Jayatissa too received his medical education through public funds and has a duty to treat patients, but, I have not heard of him doing so in a state hospital. The current President also entered politics straight from university. By this logic, he too should be given an allowance. The public should ask themselves how members of the JVP and NPP survive without jobs or salaries. Is that realistic?

What kind of action are you planning to take at the national or international level in response to the decision to abolish MPs’ pensions?

We have already lodged complaints with the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) in Geneva, Switzerland, and the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU). We have also informed Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi in writing. When the Bill is drafted, we plan to challenge it in the Supreme Court. We will also take the matter to the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka (HRCSL) and inform all embassies and high commissions.

The JVP is said to have a unique practice regarding its member-MPs' salaries and allowances. As a former member, could you share your views on this system?

No other political Party requires its MPs to hand over their salaries and allowances to the Party in full as the JVP does. This system is not part of the Party’s official policies; it was introduced by a few individuals including Silva. Salaries and allowances are taken by force. If an MP refuses, they are pressured until they agree. I served as a member of a Pradeshiya Sabha (LG body), a Provincial Council, and the Parliament. At no point did I receive any of my earnings as a public representative. I served as an MP for five years and 11 months. At that time, the monthly pay and allowances came to about Rs. 250,000, all of which was taken into the party’s fund. 

They also took the vehicle permits given to us by the Government. This is one reason why many left the JVP. The party now holds a large amount of untaxed money. A few JVP members use these funds for their personal expenses, such as clothing, vehicles, and houses. We say that before abolishing our pensions, the party should return the money taken from us. We plan to go to the JVP Headquarters soon to demand repayment.

Do political parties in Sri Lanka have any welfare programmes or support systems for their former MPs?

No such programmes exist. If the JVP, which took all our salaries and allowances, does not have a welfare programme for former MPs, how can other parties be expected to have one? Other parties do not forcibly collect money in this way.

Despite the move to end pensions, there appears to be limited public protest. Why do you think the public reaction has been relatively muted?

The NPP has created public resentment toward politicians. They have spread the belief that all MPs are corrupt and privileged. However, people are beginning to understand the truth. As we explain the facts, the public is now realising that the Government is engaging in misleading propaganda.