Stability in chaos

At the very outset there is chaos in the political sphere in the United Kingdom. Liz Truss has resigned as prime minister and as the leader of the Conservative Party, triggering yet another leadership race. The internal party election is expected to be completed within a week to decide the UK’s next prime minister. At the last general election in 2019 the Conservative Party won a landslide majority but the man who led this victory, Boris Johnson was forced to resign two years into his term. Johnson was replaced by Truss little over six weeks ago. 

Liz Truss now goes down in UK history as the prime minister with the shortest tenure in office with a mere 44 days. Her downfall was the disastrous mini budget that reduced taxes on the wealthy in what was the largest tax cut since 1972. It triggered a domestic financial crisis, weakened the currency and increased the mortgage costs for millions of citizens. Rarely has a budget caused such political and political damage. While the tax cut was in line with the Conservative Party politics in general which often advocate for less taxes, limited government spending and pro-growth policies, it was perceived as delivering a promise to the wealthier segments of society at the cost of the general public.  

As the repercussions of her budget began to show effect, a week ago, the UK’s Daily Star newspaper set up a webcam on a lettuce to see if it would have a longer shelf-life than the prime minister and to her humiliation, the lettuce defeated Truss. Despite these comical developments, there is little potential for violence, disruption of the economy or breakdown of civil administration due to these political upheavals. This stability even amidst serious political chaos is testament to the strength of the UK’s parliamentary system which ensures that the legislature and the institution of government continues and evolves irrespective of the political fortunes of individuals, or the parties involved.

During these seemingly chaotic times in the UK there is an obvious comparison with Sri Lanka. Our country is facing its worst economic crisis in history due to a similar misadventure with its finances by the previous Gotabaya Rajapaksa administration. In November 2019, at the behest of several business and corporate interests, well-represented through the Viyathmaga organisation, the Rajapaksa government slashed taxes on the wealthy creating a massive shortfall in government revenue. This was further exacerbated by bad policies on maintaining an artificial exchange rate and burning foreign currency reserves to prop up the currency.

Yet, while the Gotabaya Rajapaksa administration and a handful of officials made one mistake after the other and dragged the whole country down to the abyss there were hardly any checks and balances and possibility of course correction. This was due to the concentration of power with the executive presidency further cemented through the 20th Amendment to the Constitution enacted in October 2020. Parliament’s oversight of the republic’s finances was diluted, and independence of vital commissions undermined. The destiny of the whole country was entrusted to an individual who was supremely incompetent and inept to the task.

The Sri Lankan presidency has been bestowed with almost god-like power and anointed the officer bearer as the principal political power centre in the country. By constitutional design executive presidents are immovable once elected to office. What was meant to bring in stability, avoiding the quick changes in government as witnessed today in the UK and Ceylon prior to 1978, the executive presidency has in fact delivered the opposite.

What may seem like chaos in the UK hides the stability its political system offers through the democratic institution of parliament while on the other hand the pseudo stability promised in the current governance system in Sri Lanka only ensures political disgruntlement due to an entrenched head of state who cannot be disposed of using reasonable democratic processes during a term. It should be a lesson taken to heart on the ability of democratic institutions, rather than individuals, to deliver stability to a State.