|
|
|
Kandy
Unites for a Common Cause
In
our highly politicized society where the motto is “Divided
We Stand” it is nice to see an event that cuts across party
lines and brings people together in a common endeavour. We refer
to the meeting that Mayor Kesara Senanayake summoned to discuss
the rehabilitation and conservation of the Kandy Lake that we report
elsewhere in this edition of the newspaper. The lake is near and
dear to all of us. It is the Lake more than anything else that allows
us to boast that Kandy is one of the most beautiful cities in the
world. It is probably not an exaggeration, but only if we are able
to preserve it the way it is. The truth is we are not doing a particularly
good job of it. Perhaps the Kandy Lake Project, the new car park
and such other things that are planned for the city would be the
beginning of a serious effort to do a better job.
Reverting
back to the meeting on the lake, we are happy that it took place.
As mentioned above it was on a very important issue for our city.
But there are more reasons for our satisfaction. In our bitterly
divided society the UNF mayor, his deputy and the councilors on
their side have joined hands with their opposite numbers in the
UPFA, Governor Monty Gopallawa who also traces his politics to the
latter party, and district parliamentarians and other elected officials
from all political hues to give leadership in unity for the project.
As a concrete expression of that unity of purpose Governor Gopallawa
announced a generous grant of Rs 65m from the UPFA government for
the project.
The senior officials, especially the Director of Irrigation Mrs.
Y G M C Godaliyadda, also have risen to the occasion. Engineer Godaliyadda
was forthright in her explanation of the problems concerning the
Kandy Lake. Without any hesitation she told the meeting that a variety
of institutions and private individuals, among whom are some of
the richest, most powerful, most prominent, most educated members
of the Kandy citizenry were responsible for the pollution of the
lake. Her figures showed that Rs 85m were available for the rehabilitation
program. However, another R 144m at 1999 prices would be required
to complete the work. Given inflation in the last five years, the
figure probably is at least one-third more today. All the senior
officials who spoke admitted that the job could not be properly
done without an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and that such
an assessment would be done without delay. We urge them to deliver
on that promise.
One other pint that needs a comment is Mrs. Godaliyadda's passing
reference to the proposed sewerage project. Her point was that the
long-term conservation of the Kandy Lake was inextricably linked
to the construction of the Kandy sewerage system and purification
plant. Like the battle of the sites for the Peradeniya University
in the 1940s, this too is now mired in a battle of the sites. In
the case of the university people were fighting to have it in their
own area. Understandably in the case of the sewerage project people
are fighting to have it in somebody else's area. But this issue
must be resolved as quickly as possible.
Finally, and most importantly, in summoning this meeting Mayor Senanayake
has done something that few public officials, elected or appointed,
rarely if ever do, and that is consult the public on important issues.
Parliamentarian Dimuthu Abeykoon was absolutely right to note that
this should be the first of such consultations.
This newspaper firmly believes that democracy becomes meaningful
only when the citizenry is given a chance to voice its opinion between
elections. Mayor Senanayake has done exactly that in this instance.
We would like to see this good habit being repeated not only on
some what innocuous subjects such as the Kandy Lake but also on
more controversial but equally important issues such as traffic
new buildings in the town centre, and preservation of old buildings.
May be the mayor, governor and others should have the next public
meeting on the sewerage project. After all as the Director of Irrigation
noted, without the sewerage project the Kandy Lake is doomed in
the log run.
|
|
Railway
Authority Must Not be Abolished
The Railway Unions, backed by the PA and the
JVP when the latter two were in opposition in 2003 bitterly
opposed Ranil Wickramasinghe's move to establish the Railway
Authority. It was described as a “reactionary”
move with a hidden agenda to privatize the railway. During
the last general election the UPFA made a promise to abolish
the Authority and make the Railway again function as a government
department. Now the Unions are pressing the government to
do what they promised. I suspect that the government is under
orders from the World Bank and other donors not to do it.
This is a stupid promise that the UPFA leadership made to
win votes, and I hope they won't keep their promise for the
sake of the country in general and the railway users in particular.
As I show below even the railway workers would benefit from
a well functioning Railway Authority.
To describe, as UPFA politicians did, the establishment of
the Railway Authority as a “reactionary” move
is hilarious to put it mildly. A “reactionary”
move is one that opposes progress or reform. In that sense
to assess whether creating the Railway Authority is reactionary
or not, one must ask two questions. First, did the Sri Lanka
Railways (SLR) do a good job of providing an efficient service
to the country? Second, if not what needs to be done to reform
the railway?
Kandy
Railway Station
|
The answer to the first question
is simple. The CGR in recent decades has done an absolutely
lousy job. Those of us who traveled on trains in the 1950s
and 1960s recall clean trains running on time. But today in
every respect the train service has deteriorated to an unbelievable
degree. One would expect additional services with the growth
of population and the opening of new regions such as the Mahaweli
area. No such thing has happened. There has been an increase
in commuter traffic in the Colombo metropolitan area but the
main reason for that is the absurdly low fare structure that
makes trains more attractive than buses. In general the trains,
especially the long distance services, are not punctual; carriages
are dirty, and most important the accident rate has risen
sharply.
Although Finance Minister Sarath Amunugama did not mention
the Railway among the five money-eating state agencies that
he wanted to be rid of, SLR deserves to be in that company.
In 2003, for example, its total income was Rs 1,321m and its
total recurrent expenditure was Rs 3,383m resulting in an
operating loss of Rs 2063m that the treasury had to provide
from tax money. An additional Rs 1437m was given by the government
to SLR for capital expenditure. Consider some of the implications
of this situation. The main beneficiaries of this huge subsidy
are Colombo railway commuters, by no means the poorest in
our country. One can make a case in terms of social benefits
for some subsidy to make city workers live in villages and
travel to Colombo for work. If not many of them will try to
move to Colombo leading to urban overcrowding. But such a
subsidy should be decided more rationally. Certainly there
is no case for a subsidy for long distance travel which the
present fare structure provides.
The Central Bank (Annual Report 2003, p. 126) accurately attributes
this sad state of affairs in SLR to “insufficient investment
in track maintenance, lack of locomotives and compartments,
weak signaling systems, management deficiencies, overstaffing
and irrational fare policies …”
Not many members of the public may know that the legislation
to establish the Railway Authority was passed in 1993 under
the D B Wijetunga administration. But it did not come in to
effect until it was gazetted in 2003 by the Wickramasinghe
administration. But even that was only a half measure because
section II of the Act relating to employees was not put into
operation under union pressure.
The case for a Railway Authority is simple. The Railway as
a government department has totally failed to perform despite
several attempts at “reform.” The railway needs
a flexible management to take some key decisions. For example,
the SLR holds some of the most valuable real estate in Colombo
and elsewhere. A good portion of it in Colombo is used as
a yard for discarded rolling stock. Some of that land that
is now wasted can and should be privatized and the funds that
are raised should be used to capitalize the railway and embark
on a major revitalization program. An independent railway
authority under right management appointing government officials
under a new title or appointing political henchmen is not
right management - will be able to do a lot for the country,
railways users and the employees.
Those who oppose Railway Authority fear that this is the first
step to privatization. If a privatized railway can do better
than SLR the country will benefit from it. But I doubt that.
Privatization of British Rail has not produced very good results.
Also the world over, railways generally run under some form
of state control and with state subsides. This is true even
of the US rail system Amtrak. Thus what is need for our country
is a semi-autonomous agency such as the Railway Authority
under dynamic and forward looking management.
The railway currently has about 16,500 permanent employees
and about 1,000 casual employees. They oppose the Railway
Authority because they probably feel insecure. This is the
outdated attitude of government employees who get comparatively
low salaries working in inefficient loss-making state enterprises.
In reality they would be better off under a more efficient
and expanded railway system. But they obviously prefer the
present lethargic system that prevails in SLR. UPFA politicians
supported them to gain a few votes. But now they are in a
quandary. They promised the country a better railway but now
they have to choose between the narrow and shortsighted self-interest
of 17,000 union workers and the people of this country.
Sam S
|
|
|
|
Design-host:
Webvision
Sri Lanka
|
|
|
News
Around Kandy
EDITORIAL
