Trade unions representing a number of sectors that have a direct and significant impact on the public’s day-to-day lives have threatened to launch an islandwide strike today (15). They represent education, health, banking, and ports sectors, and their opposition is against the Government’s new tax policy. This is after failed attempts by the Government to curb these protests. 

The Government’s approach to dealing with protests is problematic since it is not sustainable, effective, or public friendly. In addition to discussions that have not resulted in considerable positive results, all that the Government has done to deal with protests is implementing rigorous anti-protest measures, including deploying the Police and the defence forces to control protests by any means necessary, and declaring as essential, various services that are being disrupted or are likely to be disrupted due to strikes, thus making strikes at those services illegal. Even though these measures have been effective in ending protests, they have further aggravated the economic pressure on the people, which have become evident with growing anti-Government protests.

It is true that the Government’s ability to ease the burden of certain decisions in the short run is limited. High utility tariff hikes, high tax and interest rate hikes, and austerity measures are a part of the country’s economic recovery, which have been recommended by economists and international entities that support Sri Lanka, and these decisions are a part of the solution that the country needs. However, implementing such decisions that affect an entire nation is a responsibility that goes beyond merely telling the people that they have to learn to live with those decisions.

In fact, the public has taken to the streets to raise their concerns with regard to the decisions mentioned above, not only because of their impacts but also to oppose the fact that they did not receive an opportunity to have a say when those decisions were made. It is because they did not receive such an opportunity before the tax hike that they have had to demand meetings with the Government to discuss alternative tax solutions now. This situation bears resemblance to the erstwhile Government’s decision to implement a 100% organic policy with no discussions with the stakeholders, which led to an islandwide disaster which then compelled that Government to hold talks with the stakeholders. This is not a matter of how badly the Government wants to make certain decisions, or how serious the reasons for those decisions are. This is a matter of the Government lending an ear to the public that elected it to represent them. If the Government does not allow the public to have their say, it is not practically possible to represent or serve them. 

Opposition against the Government, which, through intermittent protests, affected the day-to-day life of the public, is likely to morph into an islandwide, long-term spate of protests which has the capability of disrupting most essential services including health, banking, and import and export-related services. This is after certain professionals who engaged in protests could not avail themselves of a meeting with the Government, and meetings held with the Government or small-scale protests did not lead to positive, tangible results. In other words, the Government’s inability or unwillingness to address the stated issues – or at least provide promising plans – is now resulting in more damage to the public’s lives and the overall economy.

The Government must understand two things. Firstly, decisions that are not public-friendly and/or are arbitrary cannot last long in a democracy, and at some point, usually after unnecessary troubles, have to be retracted. Secondly, protests are a mere symptom of the issue, not the actual issue, and therefore, it is the economic hardships that need to be addressed. Taking into account this reality, even if it hurts the Government’s pride, it should adopt a more receptive approach, which allows all concerned parties to convey and discuss their concerns, when dealing with protests. Such an approach could not only end protests but prevent the need for the people to stage protests.