Since time immemorial, whether rural or urban, the basic amenities and services to the residents have been provided by the Local Authorities (LAs). A standard all over the world.
In the Past
The Local Authority system in Sri Lanka from 50 years ago, was an accomplished system. The Chairman/Mayor of LAs was knowledgeable about the local laws, etc. He or she knew the local area dynamics. He had at his disposal the “mambermahattaya and later nona”. These ward members represented the people and gave his or her best to the village.
I can still remember that the Chairman/Mayor was always an educated person who had a good family background. His upbringing itself taught him to be service-oriented. Hence his life was dedicated to serving the people. Therefore, the competition among the ward members was to serve the masses. The Mayor/Chairman not only guided them but also ensured that resources were made available to carry out speedy action. That to me was a perfect system.
At that time it was unheard of members getting involved in the contracts of the Council for personal gain. Their primary concern was ‘giving’ and ‘serving’. Any wrongdoing meant that they would lose the respect which people had for them. Honour and integrity were so important that losing either for financial benefit was considered low and unacceptable behaviour.
The introduction of the open market economy was partly responsible for the change for the worse with regard to the manner in which the local authorities functioned. A change of face and a change of fate awaited the local governance modus operandi. It started with a small section of ruling members getting involved in contracts of the councils and trying to make some easy money. However, still a majority remained committed to their role and responsibility.
13th Amendment
In 1987, under the 13th Amendment came the Provincial Council System changing the whole system of local governance. Previously the local government authorities enjoyed a pride of place as there was only the Central Government above them. However in 1987 this changed, and the Provincial Councils stood between the two, creating a total eclipse of functions, roles and resources. As a result, the attention and the focus of the Parliament went to the Provincial Councils leaving Local Authorities to fend for themselves while losing their former glory.
The preferential voting system further crippled the Local Authorities as a result of political parties bringing in unsuitable and unsavoury characters into the system through whatever means. Respectable and Honourable candidates stood no chance in the race with ruffians who were popular for wrong reasons. Lavish spending and distributing freebies and handouts became the most unscrupulous way of campaigning, which by now ensured that nearly 60 to 70% of the council members and Chairmen/Mayors voted into office were the most unsuitable characters to administer such an important institution.
Not Knowing the LA Laws
Today we have a situation where a good 70% of the members do not know the laws with regards to the local authorities. In addition, the officials in these institutions are not fully conversant with the laws either.
If you analyze, about 60 % of the Mayors/Chairmen in this country rely on ‘brawn’ and not brain. Their governance strategies are intimidation, thuggery and hand-outs. Very rarely does one come across LA leaders who are willing to listen to reason. It is also rare to find officials who will do the right thing, as they too would like to go with the flow for their own survival.
What is worrying is that the members fail to understand that the power they derive is from the council and the council has to follow or be run in terms of decisions taken at the committees during the monthly meetings. Often, the Mayor/Chairman is in gross violation of the committee decisions. Some ‘development’ initiatives are carried out by the Mayor/Chairman without the approval of the committees bull-dozing decisions with his ‘assumed’ authority. When officials have very little knowledge and no power to question, such unscrupulous leaders can get away with anything. Prudence, efficiency and accountability invariably become things of the past. The leadership of these esteemed institutions feel that what they do with the money from rate payers is their business and forget that they have an obligation to be accountable to them for every action taken.
Publicity Hype
Then there is the publicity hype for the slightest action taken. Banners, cutouts and hoardings are put up to drill into people’s heads who did what. Trying to gather cheap publicity is everyone’s priority, not realizing that the money spent on these things belongs to the people. The lavish spending does not end there. Even when resources are available, the practice now is to outsource the work, so that kick-backs or commissions
are guaranteed.
The approval process for development plans has also become a lucrative activity for many a Mayor/Chairman and members of the council. When someone comes with a problem, the decision is deliberately delayed until the person is willing to do ‘anything’ to speed up the process.
Ignorance of leadership
There are knowledgeable and experienced members in the councils. This is a problem to the Mayors/Chairmen who think that they know everything but in reality know the minimum. The practice is to sideline knowledgeable officials who question the decisions and actions of the Mayor/Chairman. A Mayor/Chairman need not know everything, but if they are assisted by members who are knowledgeable, the wise thing for the Mayor/Chairman to do would be to get those persons to work out the best solution. Giving pragmatic solutions to the ratepayers’ problems is the key to the success of local authorities’ leadership. Sidelining officials, members and others who are knowledgeable is in fact doing a disservice to the ratepayers. Such an act can in fact be taken up in a court of law.
Sad to say that today, a majority of the present-day leadership is only capable of shouting, stamping their feet, hurling insults, frightening officials and achieving what they want by hook or by crook. This just shows that they are unaware of the laws governing the local authorities.
CENTRE NO BETTER
The situation at the Centre is no better. At least we can be happy that among the 225 parliamentarians we still have some quality MPs. Previously those who served in local government gradually rose to the position of Mayor/ Chairman and then were elected into parliament, thus allowing those with knowledge and experience at the local government level to represent the people in Parliament.
Currently inexperienced people are being parachuted into parliament. Contesting at local government elections is like applying for a job with pay and benefits. As the number of local government representatives rises to 6,000, imagine the plight of the local authorities when uncouth people are voted in because people have no choice. The dreaded effect will be far greater than having the same types in the Parliament and the Provincial Councils.
OMBUDSMAN FOR LAS
Deep politicization of all institutions under the purview of Parliament, Provincial Councils and Local Authorities has completely destroyed the Superior Administrative Fabric that was prevalent in the past. At this juncture, we must go back to the drawing board and see what needs to be done. The country can prosper in double quick time if local authorities are protected. Currently, it is the Provincial Commissioner of Local Government who oversees the activities of the Local Authorities. He or she has a bounden duty to independently supervise the activities and take drastic action when there is maladministration.
That independence is lost at the hands of the Chief Minister. At present there is a Commissioner for the province, but I propose that a Commissioner be appointed for each district for this system to work effectively. The Local Government Reforms Report which was tabled in parliament in 1996 is still gathering dust. It appears that the Centre is not interested in the LAs.
But people do have serious issues but no one to turn to. In the meantime, the Centre should consider an Ombudsman for local authorities, an office to which the ratepayers could go to with their unresolved problems or when they suffer at the hands of local authority officials. This should be a short-term measure until each district appoints an independent person for each province or district as an ombudsman. His or her decisions MUST be accepted by the councils through legislation. Finally we must remember that LA representatives are here to serve the public and not themselves. If we do not redress this situation, uncouth, unsavoury and unsuitable garbage will gather in the local authorities and eventually such people will administer this country
