Protection of elders and
welfarism
The degree to which the Lankan state has been
orientating itself towards welfarism is evident in two recent
notable initiatives launched by it in respect of local elders,
besides the numerous social welfare measures implemented by it
over the decades. One is the proposed formulation of an
insurance scheme for Senior Citizens. The second is the Ranaviru
Mawpiya Rakawarana project which was flagged-off by President
Mahinda Rajapaksa and which speaks volumes for the sense of
gratitude of this country towards those elders whose sons and
daughters made the supreme sacrifice in the theatre of war on
behalf of Sri Lanka.
Elders, as in the case of women and children, are a highly
vulnerable social segment. Inasmuch as women and children are
increasingly imperiled by deteriorating local social conditions,
our elders too are proving hapless in the face circumstances
which are not of their creation.
For instance, more and more young adults are finding it hard
to cope with their lot in the face of present economic trends
and this is curtailing their capacity to fend for their elders,
which was not the general case in times past. Accordingly, it
should not come as a surprise if more and more elders are not
cared for completely or are handed over to Elders’ Homes and the
like in the hope that they would be fended for by these
institutions.
Accordingly, some form of financial and material protection
for our elders is most welcome and the obligation of the state
is particularly pronounced in the case of those elders whose
children laid down their lives for this country in the course of
the 30 year conflict. Therefore these welfare measures with
regard to our elders are most commendable and we urge the state
to go more than the extra mile to ensure the protection and
security of our children and women too.
To put things in a wider perspective, it needs to be
mentioned that the issues related to women and children
emphasize the importance of strengthening our Human Rights
legislation and connected legal regimes. Besides, these sections
of our population should be progressively empowered so that the
relations of power in society would be tilted in their favour.
Right now, power relations are structured to boost adult male
social domination and this deleterious feature greatly weakens
the local democratic ethos.
The provision of social protection requires a tidy sum of
money and this could mean that equally important financial
commitments by the state may need to be de-emphasized, but the
state has no choice but to forge ahead with these social
security projects. This is because welfarism has always been an
enduring element of our philosophy of governance. Ours is a
caring state and this aspect of Lankan governments is closely
bound- up with the ethical principle of caring, which is rooted
in our religions.
A popular belief is that no one in Sri Lanka dies of
starvation. This is seen to be true and it is to our welfare
tradition that the credit is owed for these strengths. Among
other things, these notable achievements have enabled Sri Lanka
to claim that she is a Middle Income Country. However, not many
countries in the one-time wealthy West could claim that their
vulnerable social segments enjoy a minimum level of social
security today.
In fact, in some countries in the crisis-hit Euro Zone, more
and more persons are turning up at Soup Kitchens, which provide
the poor with a cup of broth. Not all these Kitchens are
state-run.
We are seeing in these developments the importance of
steering a middle path in economic policy and management. We
cannot take a completely rightist path and give free rein to
economic liberalization because it would result in a widening
wealth gap and the gradual dispossession of the have-nots. On
the other hand, we cannot follow a policy of complete state
control of the economy because this would result in the
strangulation of all economic enterprise. What should be chosen
is a middle path, where free enterprise and social planning
combine well, as is mainly the case today. |