brand logo

Budget attendance must never be optional

03 Nov 2022

Although the tabling of the Budget is usually an event people look towards to know what sort of relief the Government is giving them, this year, there is not much hope for relief. On the contrary, the Budget is more likely to impose more economic restrictions and austerity measures. In this context, this week the Government decided to restrict the foreign travel of Ministers, State Ministers, and Government MPs on days of Parliament sittings and during the Budget debate for 2023. This decision was arrived at by the Cabinet of Ministers after considering a proposal presented by Prime Minister Dinesh Gunawardena. In addition to this decision, the proposal had also stipulated that such persons can only travel abroad during the said period for urgent medical needs or very urgent official duties.  This decision came in a context where speculation is rife that certain Government MPs are contemplating going abroad during the Budget debate allegedly due to the nature of the Budget, which is presumed to be one that would not be approved by the people. In this context, it is clear that the Government just wants to ensure it has adequate support in Parliament during the Budget debate. Irrespective of the reason, it is unfortunate that the Government has needed to impose restrictions to keep its members in the country to take part in this crucial national event. In a context where participating in the Budget debate is one of the key duties and roles of MPs, the fact that restrictions are necessary to ensure that they perform this duty only showcases a lack of discipline, responsibility, and sensitivity that is shocking even in the Sri Lankan context. At the same time, these restrictions should not be imposed only to obtain Government MPs’ votes in favour of the Government, which seems to be the case. A government that takes its responsibility to the nation seriously, and also understands the fact that it is supposed to serve the entire country and not just its supporters, should impose such restrictions with the intention of ensuring that all of its members participate in the lawmaking process. Another matter the aforementioned decision highlights is the MPs’ fear or unwillingness to stand for the people they have pledged to represent instead of the political parties and alliances to which they belong. If the rumours about the reasons for the said Government MPs’ alleged decision to go abroad during the Budget debate are true, it shows they would rather evade taking a difficult decision for the people’s sake – which in this case may be to vote against the Budget proposal – than stand on the side of the people, or against the Government.  Overall, even though this decision could be appreciated due to the fact it could prove effective in compelling Government MPs to participate in the Budget debate, there are serious concerns about the circumstances that forced the Government to take such a decision, and also the Government’s intentions. More importantly, this situation begs the question as to how the country can rely on MPs that have to be forced to do their duty when a difficult stance needs to be taken. Once again, the House has proven that as far as political discipline and responsibility are concerned, Sri Lanka seems to have a very long way to go.


More News..