brand logo

Paying politicians properly to perform

29 Aug 2021

Last week, all Samagi Jana Balawegeya (SJB) MPs, on the directive of SJB and Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa, decided to donate their salaries towards the purchase of medical equipment required to treat Covid-19 patients. This was followed by an announcement from the Government that the entire Cabinet of Ministers would donate their salaries for the month of August to the President’s Itukama Covid-19 Healthcare and Social Security Fund, and the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) MPs also announced that they would donate their August salaries to the SLFP-created Covid-19 fund. However, amidst all these donations, what grabbed the public’s attention were several MPs who stated that they were not in a position to follow suit as they were experiencing financial difficulties. In particular, a statement made by a veteran politician that he owes banks around Rs. 30 million and therefore could not donate his salary was ridiculed by the public, especially on social media platforms. The ridicule stemmed from the widespread perception that politicians, especially MPs, are entitled to more perks than they deserve, and therefore cannot claim to be having financial difficulties. It is true that they do receive a number of payments and other perks for various official duties and their official staff; however, whether what they receive is adequate is another matter. So how much do our representatives receive? According to Parliament’s official records, MPs earn Rs. 54,285 as their basic monthly salary. This is quite meagre in comparison to even senior executives in private firms, who typically draw down an average of Rs. 84,000 per month – but there is a slight catch. MPs do receive a number of monthly allowances, including an entertainment allowance of Rs. 1,000, a driver’s allowance of Rs. 3,500 (if they aren’t provided an official driver), a variable fuel allowance (based on the distance between the district from which they were elected and the Parliament, and current market prices of fuel), a staff transport allowance of Rs. 10,000, postage facilities amounting to Rs. 350,000 (issued in stamps), and a telephone allowance of Rs. 50,000. While one might add these up to craft a hefty sum, it is important to note that these allowances are for what is spent on the bureaucratic duties expected of them. And thus, we come back to the point that private sector executives see higher monthly remuneration for their work; at least, above board. But why is this important? For one, in the private sector, someone earning a higher salary is almost automatically expected to deliver more to the bottom line. Another justification for higher salaries is that a higher-paid employee is less likely to try their luck with embezzlement. But then, the idea of paying politicians more to deter them from underhand methods of padding their fortunes might leave most of us with a migraine, given the track record of several of our MPs. However, the final justification for higher salaries comes again from the private sector – simply, companies pay more to attract top talent. From this perspective, if a politician is capable of earning a competitive salary (from honest work), we can assume that more intelligent, qualified individuals would be willing to take up the considerable burden to work towards the greater good; or at least that those who end up garnering enough votes are not as easily swayed by the temptation of money. This is not a pipe-dream by any means. Singapore, for example, has implemented such measures to its benefit. Its legendary former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew had long wanted to increase Ministerial salaries to attract the cream of the crop to politics, as he knew they would otherwise rather remain in the private sector earning 10-15 times as much. He managed to introduce significant salary hikes for MPs in 1973 when the economy was booming, and Singapore implemented another Ministerial salary hike again in 1994. The result? Highly qualified individuals were more confident about becoming public servants, while corruption reduced drastically – Singapore was ranked third in the 2020 Corruption Perception Index, and many of its Cabinet members are Ivy League graduates and former CEOs and MDs from the private sector. However, dishonesty is part of human nature – one could say it was Lee Kuan Yew’s severe punishment of a minister over a corruption scandal in 1986 that kept his successors in line – and so higher salaries alone cannot deter politicians, or any employee for that matter, from seeking extra income. But attracting a higher level of talent also increases the level of competency and competition, thus weeding out the unfit through what could be described as natural selection. Especially now, amidst this unprecedented economic and health crisis, the persistent, deep-rooted flaws in Sri Lanka’s political culture have bubbled to the surface, highlighting how we have constantly excused, and even expected, a level of dishonesty in our politicians. However, the same crisis makes it difficult for us to actively engage in paying our politicians better. But it is definitely something we must consider once we finally weather this storm, to initiate a change of culture in the long term. Such a change will not reform the current Cabinet or parliament, but it may help improve the composition of the next few cabinets and parliaments, strengthening them with men and women who have proven themselves in the corporate and academic spheres and have a genuine love for Sri Lanka, with a desire to see it achieve its potential, even at this late stage.  


More News..