Setting a good example

Winding up the 2025 budget debate in his capacity of finance minister, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake once again told the country that legislation to abolish MPs’ pensions is forthcoming, presumably in the short term although he has not specified when. However, opposition lawmaker Ravi Karunanayake has stolen a march on the president and his government by bringing a private member’s motion to abolish pensions for parliamentarians which has already been unanimously adopted by the legislature and is now awaiting a formal government Bill for enactment. Ironically, MPs who voted unanimously to give themselves pensions are now on the brink of similarly voting to abolishing them.

- 

We have on previous occasions barked back on the fact that former prime minister Sir John Kotelawala, famously exhorted henda aithey thiyanakan bedaganilla (as long as the spoon is in your hand, serve yourselves). This, our lawmakers have been assiduously doing over the decades. The parliamentary pensions, non-contributory as in the case of coveted pensions for life paid to public servants, was later extended to their widows and orphans. But in the case of the public service, surviving spouses and orphans were covered by a contributory Widows and Orphans Pension Fund while parliamentarians paid nothing for this extended privilege to their widows.

The president correctly understands that perks and privileges elected officials vote for themselves are deeply resented by the public. He has hemmed and hawed for months for himself and his government by announcing that having discovered that he was being paid an MPs pension in addition to his salary as executive president, he was foregoing the former entitlement and has already written to parliament’s secretary general to that effect. He further announced that the present all powerful regime has decided that its ministers and deputy ministers will not enjoy both their parliamentary emoluments together with the salaries for their official positions. They are foregoing the former but will enjoy a fuel allowance on account of the latter. We do not know if this dual payment was made was so in the past.