Kusal
Perera
Short note on above with
emphasis on how gradual “centralisation” of power in the hands of
the Colombo governments, left poverty alleviation along with accrued
wealth in and around Colombo a continuing debate and opens a dialogue
on why power has to be devolved for provinces to address their own
issues related to poverty and development, with democracy enhanced
and enriched.
Poverty is often
discussed in terms of numbers -
number where the poverty
line is drawn
growth or not on % of poor
people
family income of average
urban/rural household
what the per capita income
is
etc., etc.,
This is Very Misleading
!!! Numbers don't give the actual picture, nor does it explain the
story of poverty
Take per capita numbers
– This is how development is projected
US $
2,399 in 2012 to US $ 4,400 in 2015. The country would also develop
fast and would have a growth rate of around 9% during the period -
Dr. T. Lalitha Gunaruwan, Senior Lecturer (Economics), University of
Colombo
IF,
a person earns LKR 299,875 [@ LKR 125 / US $] per annum in Sri Lanka,
then it is LKR 24, 989 per month ! Sri
Lankans can not be poor !!!
But
this is how people earn !
Monthly
starting salary of a Graduate Teacher –
According
to Public Administration Circular No: 6/2006 (iv) dated 24-08-2007 is
Rs.
14,135 - 180x9 - 240x6 – 330x5- 400x7- 645x13 – Rs.30,030
and ADD LKR 5,850 as CoL allowance (calculated
05 years ago) = LKR 19,985
Monthly
salary of a EPZ female worker -
LKR
6,790 + LKR 1,000 (Budgetary allowance since 2002) = LKR 7,790
With
03 hrs overtime 05 days of the week, 05 hrs overtime on Saturday,
working without taking any leave to earn “holiday allowance” of
LKR 1,000 their take home pay LKR 13,000 or less [Prof Athula
Ranasinghe – Research on Apparel sector Living Wage / 2012 August]
Distribution/share
of GDP in 2009 @ market prices
GDP Rs.Mn Per
Capita GDP (Rs)
Western
Province - 45.1% 2.2 374,591
Central
Province - 9.6% 0.46 174,988
North
Central - 4.8% 0.23 189,138
Uva
Province - 4.6% 0.22 168,079
Sabaragamuwa
- 6.3% 0.30 157,497
That remains the basic picture, 64
YEARS after independence
POVERTY
is being talked of in the Donoughmore Commission Report
tabled in British parliament in 1928 and to quote ;
“The
Commission found that in many provinces, poverty and ill health were
the lot of many villages. Many sections of the people had not even
decent housing or adequate facilities for primary education. No poor
law system for relieving destitution, no system of compensation for
injured workmen, no up to date system of factory legislation and no
control over hours and wages in sweated trades.”
There
is also mention that poverty is rampant in the dry zone areas.
Also,
the granting of universal franchise by the Donoughmore Commission was
not only on the basis of the submission made by trade unionist A.E.
Gunasinghe, but also on the assumption, that better provincial
representation in governance, would help poverty alleviation.
Since
then, there were different measures adopted to relieve poverty under
colonial rule.
Talking
of independent Ceylon and Sri Lanka - Major efforts taken during 64
years of independence;
- 1952 – Kandyan Peasantry Rehabilitation Commission turned into Udarata Development Authority in 2005 ; covers whole CP, Kegalle, part Uva and part NCP
- 1990 – Janasaviya Trust Fund turned to Samurdhi Authority ; all island
- 1995 – Southern Development Authority ; Galle, Matara, Hambantota and Moneragala districts
Major
development programmes leaving out colonisation schemes like Gal-oya,
Rajanganaya and Uda walave
- 1972 Land Reforms and 1973 Nationalisation of Plantations
- 1978 onwards Mahaweli development
- 1978 Katunayake FTZ, 1986 Biyagama and 1991 Koggala EPZs
- 1986 to 1992 Samanala Oya project
- 1992 export oriented 200 factory garment industry expansion programme
The
list should also include;
1978
onwards – 19 Integrated Rural Development Programmes (IRDPs)
outside North and East and all were foreign funded, designed under
the Ministry of Planning and all implemented through GAs (District
Secretaries).
Add
– money spent in districts under the Decentralised Budgets; each of
the 225 MPs given 35 Mn every year till 2002 and since then 50 Mn
every year.
Take
Anuradhapura district – 09 MPs x 50 Mn x 10 years = 4,500 Mn
With
ALL those “efforts” - Where is development ? Where is poverty
alleviation ?
This
is why it is IMPORTANT to see, what type of governments we have had
under 03 Constitutions beginning 1947.
1947
to 1972 – Soulbury Constitution
No
reasonable impact on poverty alleviation – World Bank and IMF walks
in to advice
Instead
of poverty alleviation and development, we paved the way for the
ethnic conflict -
- Disfranchising Indian origin labour, making them “Stateless”
- Sinhala made ONLY official language, marginalising Tamil people from the State
- Rule under Public Security – 1958 Emergency laws imposed
1972
to 1978 – Republican Constitution
No
impact on poverty alleviation – More World Bank and IMF advice and
growing foreign debt.
AND,
there was heavy Centralisation of power
- PSC was taken under the Cabinet
- Secular nature of State given up for Buddhism
- District Political Authority system established (A senior minister presided over all development programmes in the district)
- Co-operatives brought under political authority of the electorate
1978
to date – The Executive Presidential system
NO
impact on poverty alleviation – growing national debt, devalued
Rupee
and
for the first time – exclusive State programme for poverty
alleviation as Janasaviya Trust Fund, turned to Samurdhi.
Poverty
still remains and development is yet to come to ordinary people.
BUT
ultimate in Centralised power in Colombo, for politicians.
Bottom
line -
Increased
CENTRALISATION through 3 Constitutions (both parliamentary and the
Executive Presidency) has led to NO POVERTY ALLEVIATION to date.
But
has led to a serious disparity of income and distribution of wealth
in society.
Disparity
in income and wealth distribution has been in favour of Colombo and
suburbs.
Therefore
a better option is – MORE POWER TO PROVINCES in real terms.
The LLRC has
dealt at length on why power should be effectively devolved to the
peripheries
while stressing “.....it is also
imperative that the lessons learnt from the shortcomings in the
functioning of the Provincial Councils system be taken into account,
in devising an appropriate system of devolution that addresses the
needs of the people.....”
“All parties should recognize that
the real issue of sharing power and participating in
Government
is the empowerment of the people and making the political leaders
accountable
to the people. This applies to Sri Lanka as a whole and includes
the needs of
citizens
of all communities, Sinhala, Tamil, Muslim and others. The effective
functioning
of
the democratic system which fulfils these needs, together with a
consensual
framework
of devolution will, by virtue of attributes and institutions
intrinsic to it, also
provide
the answer to the grievances of minorities.” [LLRC Recommendations
- 8.222 ]
Post
script ;
Lets
also accept, the oft repeated phrase and the
popular conception that “PCs are white elephants”
is wrong and used without any proof. Here's the cost of PCs ;
Expenditures by Subject Categories
Provincial
Establishment
(Additional
layer of provincial institutions such as the Council,
the
Governor, Chief Minister and Ministers and Ministry staff) - 02.78%
Provincial
Administration
(New
administrative layer of the Chief Secretary and provincial
budgeting,
planning, revenue, administration) - 01.11%
Economic
Infrastructure
(Roads
mainly) - 02.06%
Social
Infrastructure
(Health,
ayurveda, education, child care and social services) - 83.05%
Community
Services
(Local
government, cooperatives, rural development etc.) - 08.51%
Agriculture
(Crop
sector, livestock, fisheries, lands) - 01.68%
Industries
(Small
industries, textile – handloom and entrepreneurship) - 00.82%
Costs
of Provincial Services by Nature of Expenditure
Political
Establishment - 02.3%
Provincial
Administration - 01.4%
Service
Delivery - 96.3%
(Figures
are for 2004, Source: Annual Report of the Finance Commission)
[Prepared for a presentation at CEPA]
Kusal
Perera – Journalist
/ Political Columnist