Earning the right way

President Maithripala Sirisena went on record this week saying he will not approve a proposal to pay parliamentarians a Rs. 200,000 allowance, which would be welcomed by many. But the issue of how much public representatives are paid and whether they are worth the multitude of allowances, perks, pensions and other incentives they are liberally given is worth discussing, especially with multiple elections around the corner.     

Every few years the issue of increasing salaries for parliamentarians throws up a storm of controversy, so much so that when it was proposed last time the Government decided to postpone it. However, this has never stopped the flow of luxury vehicles and other perks to favoured politicians. There is no transparency in what parliamentarians or politicians of other rungs are paid and this is not freely accessibly to the public. It is essential to get a sense of the numbers to demand better performance and professionalism from parliamentarians.

When questions were raised in Parliament on how much ministers and parliamentarians got paid in 2016 and in 2018, there were no clear answers. Reports indicate MPs get paid about Rs. 200,000 each month inclusive of perks, yet these are all estimates and there are no concrete numbers. The estimates vary from Rs. 500,000 to a few million, especially for cabinet ministers. The varied and convoluted system of salaries, allowances, house rent, insurance, the provision of support staff, security, phone and other payments are largely unknown. This is worse among parliamentarians who are ministers or hold other official positions within the State.

Usually the only time parliamentarians are slammed is when the allocations of duty free vehicle permits do the rounds. Yet economists have repeatedly pointed out the Government has to get on track its own spending, not just in what gets haemorrhaged from corrupt deals and loss-making State Owned Enterprises (SOEs), but on what is spent on the Diyawanna members. Not only is this a gross transgression of public trust, it also breeds corruption and wastage.

Further, salary hikes and perks for parliamentarians cannot be justified unless the public clearly knows what is already being paid. Since the Sri Lankan Government is fond of modelling itself on Singapore, it can follow the Lion State in this respect very easily. Singapore is well-known for paying some of the highest salaries in the world to its civil servants and politicians, but it also has a one-strike policy regarding corruption, which brings us to the second point. Not only should parliamentarians be well qualified to be given a transparently accounted salary, they should then be held to the highest of professional standards.

Under the current system, even members who are not elected and barely deign to attend Parliament can avail themselves of perks and vehicles worth millions of the public’s money. Such an unfair and archaic system must end and parliamentarians, like all other hardworking citizens, must earn their keep. Politicians, if they are honest and professional, should be paid fairly, but their performance also needs to be evaluated consistently. An average employee in the private sector is subject to yearly and sometimes even quarterly evaluations, but politicians receive only one each term. The entire approach to political salaries in general, and parliamentary salaries in particular, has to change to reflect higher public expectations.