SLFP is right -the district is the superior unit of devolution
Arjuna Hulugalle
DEVOLUTION: What are the obvious advantages of the District as
the Unit of Devolution? Firstly, the potential benefits to the people.
It benefits because of the proximity of the people to their legislators
with whom they have common interests. Secondly the devolved powers will
not give a fillip to separatism and jeopardise the territorial integrity
of the country.
The latter is a legitimate fear of the majority in the context of the
long drawn out Eelam War, the talk of a permanent merger of the Northern
and Eastern Provinces, the demand for an Interim Self Governing
Authority (ISGA), and the experience of the ‘ethnic cleansing’ witnessed
in the two provinces, but particularly so in the Jaffna Peninsula, where
almost 100,000 Muslims were given 24 hours to leave their homes in
October 1990 by the LTTE.
These are valid reasons for fear. As an old philosopher put it in
this context: “Things and actions are what they are, and the
consequences of them will be what they will be”
Efficient
The Sri Lankan State with a structure of District administration will
not need excessive constitutional guarantees to ensure its territorial
integrity. The size of the units themselves will make secession
irrelevant.
However, the Districts are large enough to be self-managed.
It is an interesting fact that the Districts compare very favourably
in terms of area and population with the comparative Cantons in
Switzerland. Switzerland has today one of the most efficiently run
administrations in the world. Any experienced administrator of standing
will confirm that Districts have a more appropriate critical mass for an
efficient administration.
In fact, the existing districts in Sri Lanka could constitute such
units for maximum devolution. With time adequate power will be assigned
to the Districts with less central power and regulation, without the
stigma of inhibitions which Provinces will always carry with them.
Administratively, the smaller units will offer more opportunities for
participation by local people. Legislators would be better informed,
with the needs and potential of the areas they represent; better
equipped to define local priorities; more accountable for their
decisions; and, more responsive to local needs.
The ‘democratic deficit’, which everybody complains of nowadays at a
national and provincial level, and fears arising from further devolution
(particularly in the North and the East), would be reduced.
More power
The Marga Institute had this to say in a draft publication, titled
“Inter-Racial Equity and National Unity in Sri Lanka’ (circa 1984 where
it gave several reasons for advocating the district as the most
satisfactory unit for a system of devolution.
It read: “First, under-developed districts such as Mullaitivu in the
Tamil speaking areas, Moneragala in the Sinhala areas will receive
attention for itself without being submerged in a larger unit together
with a highly developed district.
Secondly, districts such as Trincomalee and Mannar, which have a
different ethnic composition, will evolve its own pattern or development
on a form of accommodation appropriate to its special characteristics.
Third, the district as a territorial unit is small enough to enable
the people themselves to participate more actively in the processes of
decision-making, plan formulation and plan implementation” (pp59-60) The
Marga document also states: The Marga publication further states: “In
Sri Lanka, the territorial basis of the District can be put to good
purpose in which the ethnic divisions do not merge in terms of the
majority and minority, but in which the guiding principle becomes the
devolution of genuine power.
A pattern of devolution of this kind which applies to the entire
country and which creates units of self-management both in the Tamil
speaking areas as well as the Sinhala areas, will have a different set
of motivation from a system in which the autonomous parts are related to
each other as majority and minority and as district ethnic groups.” (pp
60-61) The problems associated with any form of further devolution
cannot, and should not, be underestimated.
Handing more power to the people to look after themselves implies
inevitably far greater diversity and choice in public policy in devolved
subjects. More devolution implies more diversity.
The country has to prepare itself for that. With good governance and
a culture of trust and goodwill developing among the communities much
greater innovative and creative thinking, which has been stifled as a
result of the emotional devolution rhetoric and the centralistic
practice, will emerge.
This will be reflected in the social sector (e.g. schools and
health), devolved areas of taxation, subsidies and investment, policing
and other matters when the Centre divests its control.
Problem
Another problem would relate to financial resources available to
districts and decentralised taxation powers.
Over time, districts should be able to raise a higher proportion of
their resources through local taxes (such as income and corporate taxes,
vehicle duties, property taxes and rates) and by borrowing; and spend
them locally.
The present position is that most tax revenue is collected centrally.
There is a need to devise an equitable basis for the distribution of
taxes such as VAT and import duties to districts, possibly on a
population basis with special treatment for less-developed districts.
The success of the District Council structure will depend on funding.
In Switzerland out of the total revenues collected in Switzerland
41 per cent goes to the Cantons
28 per cent goes to the Communes (towns and villages)
31 per cent goes to the Central Government
A similar arrangement has to be evolved in Sri Lanka. This will have
to be guaranteed by statute.
The New Constitution could include features such as elements of
Direct Democracy, Referenda, Public Initiatives, Right of Petition and
Right of Recall. These with smaller Units like the Districts are
practical mechanisms to get a feedback from the people and strengthen
their powers.
Break away
The parties supporting the Government, such as the break away group
of the UNP, NUA, MEP, the LSSP, the CP should not find it difficult to
endorse the SLFP proposals. After all the District Council system will
be linked to the Gramrajya concept.
All these groups will have space to be very highly proactive in their
strongholds and profile themselves whether they be the Gramrajyas,
Pradeshiyarajyas or the Districts.
The CWC and the UPF should endorse this arrangement because they will
be in a position of power in the Nuwara Eliya District,where for the
first time they will be able to make a substantial impact on raising the
standards of living of the population.
Most people have been living under atrocious conditions since the
British brought plantation labour from India several decades ago.
In the Northern Province, the democratic parties will have a
substantial say, which will enable them to work in developing their
priorities.
The position in the Eastern Provinces will be similar with the
representatives of the Tamil democratic parties, which will include the
Karuna group, the SLMC, the NUA and the National parties. Both in the
Northern Province and the Eastern Province a reformed LTTE could become
a stakeholder and political player.
The JVP has rejected the SLFP proposals as not conforming to the
Mahinda Chinthanaya. The reason is because no mention of the Unitary
State has been made. Nevertheless, the JVP as a grass roots party should
welcome that power is moved closer to the masses.
For example, they may well have the opportunity to govern in a
Southern district. It then becomes responsible to practise policies
inspired by its idealism and use their experience in a District
government as a springboard for wider popularity elsewhere in the
country.
The decision of whether the country is to opt for District or
Provincial administration should be decided at a Referendum. Before that
a vibrant discussion on this subject will have to take place.
With regard to the Gramarajya concept which the SLFP has recommended,
we have to go back to our own roots. We can also get practical inputs
from India where the Panchiyati Rajya is a cornerstone of Government
policy.
With regard to the District administration, we have long years of our
own practical experience through the District Secretariats. The Swiss
cantonal system is also a source from which this country can draw
inspiration.
Solution
S.W.R.D.Bandaranaike and Leonard Wolf, just to name two, saw
Switzerland as a model for Sri Lanka several decades ago. At that time,
the people of this country were mentally trapped with the Westminster
model. That was what we were imbibing in our halls of learning. We could
not at that stage have thought out of the box.
Leonard Wolf wrote as early as 1937 in a memorandum to the Labour
Party: “The Swiss federal canton system has proved extraordinarily
successful under circumstances very similar to those in Ceylon, ie. the
co-existence in a single democratic state of communities of very
different size, sharply distinguished from one another by race, language
and religion.
Thus the German speaking Swiss with a population of 2,750,000 occupy
the numerical position of the Sinhalese, the French speaking Swiss with
824,000 that of the Tamils, and the Italian speaking Swiss with 284,000
that of the Moormen. The democratic canton and federal system in
Switzerland has safeguarded the legitimate interests of the minorities.”
Today we need to think of a solution, which will not imprison us with
futile arguments to thoughts and words well out of date and originating
elsewhere like “Federalism” and “Unitary Statehood” or the13th
Amendment, which was imposed on us by India.
Nor should we blindly follow the Indian Model or get distracted with
the subject of the merger of the Northern Province with the Eastern
Province. None of these have brought or will bring Peace, development or
relief to Sri Lanka.
We should also resist from being mesmerized by ex cathedra statements
from foreigners who take the stand “Do what we say but not what we do”.
If at all we have to guide them to think correctly. What we have to do
is to think afresh, be original and have confidence in ourselves to find
a solution.
It is time to ponder on the words of one of our own thinkers, who
wrote: “No real progress is possible in the sphere of economic
development, cultural progress, or social organisation, until we make up
our minds, under sound and sincere leadership, to act and live as one
people.
Less social, religious and racial segregation can help to create the
healthy public opinion that is required for dispelling envy, jealousy
and all uncharitableness which not only poison human relations but
undermine the efficiency of the nation.
Unless we do this, Sri Lanka is doomed to become the most backward
country in South and South East Asia.”
Both the institutions of the Gramarajya system, and small, efficient
District Councils will be the first steps towards making Sri Lanka a
modern nation. |