The Hon. Chathura Galappaththi

¶ 01 Hon. Presiding Member, thank you for this opportunity. In Government speeches, the only argument was about postponement. Our Minister earlier said the NPP would win all local authorities. I must recall the Elpitiya Pradeshiya Sabha election held close to the Presidential Election: the Government side and the NPP each got 158 seats and the decision turned on the casting vote.

¶ 02 The Government now faces many crises. My argument is not about postponement, but whether this electoral system is right or wrong. Hon. Dayasiri Jayasekara also set out some deficiencies.

¶ 03 With a two-thirds power now, the Government should both hold the election quickly and also do the right thing for the country. There are major shortcomings in this electoral system. How fair is it to proceed with so many defects? If any Government Member says there is no problem, we are ready to debate that.

¶ 04 Previously, an idea emerged to have a Member responsible for each ward; that brought us this system—proposed by those unfamiliar with local governance. Out of 225 here, how many have actually come up through local authorities? Fewer than one in three, I would say. As someone from local government, I say this system has many serious problems. Hon. Dayasiri highlighted some. I am not talking about Budget timing or costs, but about whether this system is democratically suitable.

¶ 05 The main flaw is that this system does not produce leaders. Even if someone emerges as a ward leader, there is no pathway upwards—Provincial Council or Parliament—through this structure. Moreover, Members appointed under this system often lack understanding of local authority functions, like establishing village committees at GN level to generate proposals. The ward-Member often ends up like the previous village committee chair—not a leader. We are going lower, not higher, in leadership quality; those with fewer capabilities get elected.

¶ 06 Another issue: the Chairman too is elected from a ward. In practice, when a Chairman goes to work in another ward, problems arise. Many practical issues stem from the ward-based model.

¶ 07 We saw a wave where the Pohottuwa party captured many local authorities. If one party sweeps, those on the PR list become a mere group. Why then submit a list? Conversely, another party can be wiped out and end up appointing a group only from the list. Then, what criteria do they use? Percentages vary across wards due to party leanings; a weak candidate might become Chairman due to a high percentage in a stronghold, with problematic consequences. Thus, I personally think this system is counter to democracy.

¶ 08 What is the solution? With a two-thirds Government, bring back the old proportional (preference) system, but include youth and women’s quotas. That would solve many issues. The concern that only the rich can win under PR can be addressed by strong campaign finance regulation—disqualifying candidates or Members for violations.