With the eyes of the nation focused on Parliament, the no confidence motion (NCM) against the Speaker of the house, progresses. The Government's frenzy to ‘defend’ the Speaker and the Opposition’s efforts to dethrone him makes for good theatre, for those who observe it. 

However, to the keen observer, it is clear that the house, Sri Lanka’s arena of law making, has returned to its ‘traditional’ culture of being more about political survival than the progression of the nation. Gone are calls for collective action, for bipartisan support to help Sri Lanka move out of a crisis.

Today, the talk in the chamber has returned to ‘party politics’ and portraying ones’ self as being ‘more suitable’ for re-election. The fallout from the ruling party, the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) decision to appoint Member of Parliament Rohitha Abeygunawardana to head the parliamentary watchdog, Committee on Public Enterprises (COPE), has opened the gates of wrath against the move. While it is encouraging to view opposition members launch a barrage of criticism at the new COPE appointment of a tainted member of the Government, one cannot but find cynical that some of those who do so are trying to paint themselves as exemplars of virtue. The Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) has called on Abeygunawardana to show how he has accumulated wealth. The call is being echoed on social media by many. While it is important to find out how Abeygunawardana amassed his fortune, the question has to be asked, why only him? Is it because he was appointed to head the COPE? What is needed is that all lawmakers and the parties they represent, be transparent about their assets and income. 

The need for transparency and regulation of campaign financing is also a key issue which should be taken up for debate. However, it is likely that many of the ‘225’ and those who have been in the Legislature, and those engaged in local government politics will resist such a call. If Sri Lanka has learnt its lessons from the past, the public should continue to keep pressure on assets declarations and financing, as they are key indicators of corruption and lobbying. The rapid resignations of opposition members of Parliament from the COPE in protest has been received well by many. However, the question why those same members who were part of the 2015 Yahapalanaya Government, didn’t resign from key positions in protest to what was transpiring then, is problematic. Where did this sudden love of the moral compass emerge from? Could it be that they too have recognised that the public desire for accountability will play a key factor in the upcoming elections?    

Further, while the outrage about the speaker’s alleged behaviour, and the appointment of Abeygunawardana to the COPE take centre stage, the question about how effective parliamentary ‘Committees’ such as the COPE, remains. What has COPE really achieved? Do they have the teeth to be effective? The effectiveness of the Parliamentary Committees have been long questioned, with little change taking place. The appointment of Abeygunawardana itself has worsened the faith in such instruments and once again raised the issue of the need for structural reforms for the Legislature to improve the situation.  Given the corrupt nature of Sri Lankan politics, can parliamentary oversight really be effective in the current status quo? These are questions a disdained public ask, but the political spectrum of the country has failed to address as of yet.        

However, the reality is that the No Confidence Motion against the Speaker, who is charged with being impartial, is symbolic of the sentiments many Sri Lankans feel about the island's governance structure. The calls to evict the ‘225’ remains strong and some of the politicians can see the writing on the wall. The scramble to paint themselves as ‘reformed’ or ‘more suitable than others’ will continue as they bank on the short-sightedness of the Sri Lankan voters to sling shot them back to business. 

Nevertheless, the 2019-2023 period has seen a strong growth in civic consciousness in Sri Lanka, with more youth and women becoming more politically aware, and active. The Sri Lankan voter will seek answers for the above questions, and want a better governance model. They will seek constitutional reforms, especially on transparency and accountability in governance. Who in the political spectrum can deliver that, remains unclear.