Abolition of MP pensions – high in populism but low in rationale

The Government has issued a gazette notification for the Parliamentary Pensions (Repeal) Bill, paving the way for the abolition of pension entitlements for Members of Parliament and their spouses. The move represents a signature pledge of the Government’s manifesto, which was extremely popular among the masses. The approval of the Cabinet of Ministers to go ahead with the highly anticipated legislative action was granted in 2025 June while the final draft later received clearance from the Attorney General.

Already, two petitions have been filed before the Supreme Court, challenging the constitutionality of the intended legislation to revoke the Parliamentary Pensions Act. The petitioners represent affected former legislators who stand to lose their retirement perks in the event the bill is passed by the Parliament. The affected Ex MPs have pointed out that a significant number of retired MPs had served for periods ranging from five to thirty-five years, dedicating their lives to public service, often at the cost of losing career opportunities as well as lucrative financial benefits in their respective professions, trades or businesses.

The bill would also help to boost the image of the NPP administration, which has been grappling with adverse publicity over a multiplicity of issues such as education reforms, shameful inclusion of the reference to an adult dating website that includes sexually explicit material in the Grade 6 English Language Text Book besides accusations of political interference with the Department of Police to rescue Government MPs who were faulted for various transgressions of the law and order.

Over the years, sympathisers and propagandists associated with the JVP/NPP have been driving the narrative that the entire political class, except themselves, is corrupt. The lopsided doctrine found validity among the gullible islanders, particularly in the aftermath of the Economic Armageddon the nation had to endure in 2022. However, the stories we hear about the difficulties faced by former MP Nandana Gunathilake, who passed away a few days ago, demonstrate how unfair and inaccurate such politically motivated generalisations are. The former JVP presidential candidate had not even had the means to meet his health and medical expenses despite having been a former Cabinet Minister apart from having headed the Urban Council of Panadura – a local authority that earns a fair amount of money.

There are many former parliamentarians who have lived their lives honourably without getting involved in acts of corruption, and plunder of state resources. Those individuals need financial security in the winter of their lives when there is no one to care for them. Terminating the pensions of such former MPs is nothing but travesty of justice and can be considered quite cruel and inhuman too. Few have even speculated the attempt by the ruling dispensation to pursue this bill vigorously was driven by the intent to take revenge from the deceased JVP defector who proved to be a huge thorn in the flesh for the NPP in the recent past. The late politician earned the wrath of the NPP’s top leaders for exposing the affiliation of Ranga Dissanayake – who was appointed Director General of the Bribery and Corruption Commission by the incumbent President – with the JVP. The parliamentary pension was his only source of livelihood.

Paradoxically though, few Cabinet Ministers of the current administration, who are now at the forefront of agitating for the elimination of the parliamentary pension system, have also benefited from the very system which they are trying to abolish, when they were in the opposition. As per the letter issued by Finance Director of the Parliament, G. Sarath Kumara to the then MP Madhura Vithanage on the 23 February, 2023, the two prominent NPP Cabinet Ministers K.D. Lalkantha and Bimal Ratnayake were beneficiaries of the Parliamentary Pension Scheme 3 years ago when they were out of the legislature.

Eliminating the financial safety net of MPs could result in legislators being financially induced by forces with vested interest to achieve their selfish objectives that may be harmful to the society overall.