Welfare and the 'dependent' mindset

Come what may, the welfare system is vibrantly alive in this country and this is something the rulers and the ruled alike could take pride in. To be sure, the 'welfare basket' is costing Sri Lanka a pretty penny but the people are enabled to tide over their difficulties and make ends meet on account of the state subsidizing at least part of their expenses.

The recent price hikes of essentials such as fuel and electricity have taken many off balance but the state was quick to come out with a relief basket to meet at least part of the people's needs and this is a positive which should not go unnoticed. No less a person than President Mahinda Rajapaksa is going among the people right now and leaving no stone unturned to meet their essential requirements.

Such concern has its roots in the commitment of progressive governments in this country to the basics of the welfare state. In fact yesterday the Progressives of this country celebrated the 56th anniversary of the 'Social Revolution of 1956.' That is, the coming into being of a body-politic that for the first time in post-independence Sri Lanka gave pride of place to the ordinary people of this country.

This was an important turning point in the political history of this country because Sri Lanka's internal political power balance tilted strongly in favour of the ordinary man, woman and child after the historic electoral triumph of the Mahajana Eksath Peramuna in 1956 headed by the legendary S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike.

Coupled with this dramatic shift in power came an economic development paradigm which placed emphasis on the mobilization of the people in achieving development and on taking to the people welfare measures which would help greatly in their empowerment in every conceivable respect. In other words, the people came to be seen as a vital driving force of history. The people's representatives from this time onwards were mainly from the more disadvantaged sections of society and these representatives, thanks to the welfare state system which gave them a Free Education, went on to be the drivers of post-independence Sri Lanka.

However, welfarism could be said to have suffered setbacks from time to time from then on, although the essentials of the system remained intact.

There were the years following the 1977 polls triumph by the UNP, for instance, which not only saw the 'rolling back' of the political map of Sri Lanka but also witnessed the steady diminishing of the local welfare system.

Suddenly subsidies and welfare assistance to the people were seen as a hindrance rather than as an incentive to socio-economic development. Accordingly, the welfare state too was drastically cut down to size and the 'unkindest cut' of the abolishing of the 'rice ration' too was administered with ruthless efficiency.

It is the height of political irony that the self same UNP is today attempting to portray itself as championing the cause of our welfare-sustained public.

Be that as it may, there is no denying that the cost-effectiveness of current welfare measures must be carefully assessed by the state, although the state would remain committed to the principle of welfarism as long as progressive-minded persons are at the helm of governance. The government would need to do some tight rope walking on this front because it has to strike a balance between meeting the essential needs of the people and discouraging in them what Prime Minister D. M. Jayaratne has referred to as a 'dependent mentality.'

But the most vulnerable sections of Sri Lankan society must be looked after by the state and the latter is doing this quite readily, thereby testifying to the vibrancy of our welfare legacy. For instance, the fuel needs of the poor are being met. Such measures make us wonder whether the Opposition could have a case against the state on this score.

But the concomitant of the 1956 development paradigm is the mobilization of the people in the development effort and this must be initiated and sustained forthwith.

The empowerment of the people and their mobilization in the development drive must go together and this is the most decisive answer to the 'dependence' syndrome.