|
|
 |
 |
| Sunday, 15 June 2003 |
 |
|
 |
Letters |  |
| News Business Features Editorial
|
Please forward your letters to [email protected] in plain text format within the e-mail message, since as a policy we do not open any attachments.
The SLT bill for April has just been received by me. I observed that a completely new format has been introduced to this bill and the letters and the figures are in small print, making it difficult for senior citizens to read the figures typed on the bill, even in broad daylight. The VAT Registration Number is printed on the face of the bill, but the VAT amount charged from the domestic customer, if any, is not shown separately in the bill. However, under the item "Monthly Rental", which I presume is Rs. 200 an amount of Rs. 240 is printed. Is this amount inclusive of VAT? When GST & NSL were in force, SLT showed them separately in their bills, but now it is only VAT. So, why cannot they show this ONE item separately, if they earlier showed GST and NSL separately in their bills. The Secretary, Ministry of Mass Communication should please look into this matter. Lionel Leanage, The Benevolent Society of the organization of Professional Associations (BSOPA) is a part and parcel of the Organization of Professional Associations (OPA). The trustees of the OPA are also trustees of the BSOPA. The prospectus of the BSOPA was sent to nearly all professionals. Deposits have been tendered monthly or by means of a lump sum. I too joined this society and paid the stipulated sum. The constitution of the society Sec. 32 (b) states that members who have completed 10 years of service or have reached a certain age are entitled to a refund of the total sum contributed together with the stipulated interest and any further sum as the committee of the Society decides. Further it was stated that if desired a monthly sum by way of a pension would be paid if the member desires. All the depositors who were gullible enough to believe the attractive and rosy promises made by the former secretary cum Treasurer were led up the garden path. Some of the promises were death relief payments establishment of holiday resorts, lotteries where the prizes would leave our deposits untouched etc. The prospectus further states that the Public Trustee is the custodian of the Fund and any office bearer mishandling the money would be severely dealt with. Now according to the report of the Committee to investigate the cheques drawn on the BSOPA accounts, no one has been dealt with so far. I, along with several other professionals joined the BSOPA at the very inception and all of us have completed the relevant period of time to obtain the promised benefits. The Trustees of the BSOPA are also trustees of the OPA. Letters written to the Hony. Secretary cum Treasurer were never answered even though self addressed stamped envelopes were enclosed. The former secretary cum Treasurer is an Attorney at Law. The new Secretary too is silent. As a last resort I wrote to the President Elect of the OPA who promptly replied and promised to try his best to grant redress. On his directions the executive committee of the OPA appointed a committee to look into these matters. But the former secretary cum treasurer absented himself. Of the three persons who were requested to be present only two were present. The committee found glaring irregularities in the issue of cheques amounting to thousands of rupees. Several thousands of rupees have been drawn on behalf of some office bearers without official sanction. The President Elect is trying his best to help the members who were gullible enough to deposit their money in the society. People are losing faith in bankers. When professionals act in the same manner, the question arises as to who could be trusted ? G.H.I. de Zoysa, I would like to draw your kind attention to the amendment dated 28th October 1998 (Reference LDB/97/41/111) on the minutes on Pensions, which appeared in Part 1: Section (1) of the Gazette of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka dated 4th December 1998, and which provided that where a retired public officer is re-employed in a pensionable post after a break in service and has completed a service of two years after re-employment his pension shall be revised on a hypothetical basis on the revised salary, as at the date of retirement from the re-employed service. It was stated that the amendment made in the minutes on Pensions by paragraph 1 of this notification shall be deemed for all purposes to have come into effect on 1st January 1997. I believe that this amendment and the Minute on Pensions must be regarded as sacrosanct and revered as the guidelines and meticulously followed by all concerned sans any deviation. I retired from the post of Departmental Assistant Controller of Immigration and Emigration on 22.1.1995. My salary at the time of retirement was RS. 52,320 per annum. I also received a commuted gratuity of Rs. 94,176. I was placed on a monthly pension of Rs. 3924. I had passed the open competitive examination for Translators in 1965 and worked for a brief period in the then Ministry of Industries and Fisheries. An interview was held on 7.9.1997 at the Ministry of Public Administration consequent to an advertisement in the Daily News for which I applied. I was appointed on contract as a Translator in the Government Valuation Department by the Director of Combined Services. The appointment was initially for a period of one year with effect from 1.1.1998. A stipulation was made in my letter of appointment that my pension would not be revised although I filled a permanent and a pensionable vacancy for which monetary allocation has been made and still continues in the estimates. I was initially placed on a salary of Rs. 69,312 per annum. I was later placed on an annual salary of Rs. 9,0120 in terms of the Public Administration Circular No. 2/97 (11) which is applicable to the Grade 1 of the Translators' Service. I was given an extension of a further year by the Secretary to the Ministry of Finance from 1.1.1999 to 31.12.1999. In this letter there is no stipulation that my pension would not be revised. I was given a further extension of one year from 1.1.2000 which ended on 31.12.2000. This particular appointment was again given by the Director of Combined Services and the stipulation to the effect that my pension would not be revised was included. I went on approved overseas leave and returned to the island on 17.3.2001. I was re-appointed as a Translator in the Government Valuation Department with effect from 2.4.2001 on a contract basis for still another year. There again the obnoxious stipulation was made in my letter of appointment by the Director of Combined Services in blatant disregard of the provisions in the Minute on Pension. I was not interested to continue in service as my pension would have been frozen under the unthoughtful and insulting circular No. 17/2001 of 10.7.2001 issued by the Public Administration Ministry and decided to leave. The folly has been realised later and the Circular stands amended to attract and accommodate unsurpassed talent. I have completed three years of Contractual Service without a break as a Translator and unequivocally qualify for a revision of my Pension. I therefore applied to the Director of Pensions for a revision of my pension as in the case of A. Jayawardana who served as a Class 1 Clerical Officer in the very Department of Immigration of Emigration in which I served, who after retirement served as a Translator on Contract in the Ministry of Transport and Highways. Mr. Jayawardana's Pension was revised under Reference PH/12/01/70054. The Director of Pensions replied me stating that my pension could not be revised and requested me to get the proviso deleted. Reference Wiwesa/4/07/12/01/700101 of 30.4.2002. Then I appealed to the Secretary to the Ministry of Public Administration and received a reply that he is not in a position to delete the proviso and added that revision of the Pension is a matter for the Director of Pensions - Reference R/4/5/6/1 of 10.06.2002. Thus I was relegated to the ebb of despair. No one should be oblivious to the obvious and nobody should be permitted to pass the buck! As a result I have been denied the realisation of equal opportunity which amounts to a violation of my human rights which is enshrined in the Constitution. Above all they have flagrantly and jointly violated and flouted your order which should take retrospective effect from 1.1.1997. Please extricate me from the quagmire of bureaucratic bungling and mete out justice. This is an impassioned plea to permit me to enjoy the result of my sweat of the brow before I finally depart . NANDA NANAYAKKARA, Negligence in government hospitals It is with great regret I have to state that negligence nowadays is very prevalent in most of the government hospitals. This is specially a common feature in maternity sections of hospitals. What I believe is that all staff including doctors should be responsible for these unfortunate situations. In maternity sections it is very often reported that mothers and babies die without valid reasons. It is concluded that such happenings are due to the negligence of hospital staff. Out of these the maternity section of Ragama Hospital (Colombo North Hospital) is the worst. Most unfortunate cases are reported from that hospital though not published. One instance is that on May 16, when my daughter was admitted to Colombo North Hospital for confinement. It was a normal delivery but the innocent baby died within two hours. The reason for death after post mortem has been given as birth asphixer. To my lay mind I believe that this cause could have been easily avoided if prompt action was taken and the life of the baby was saved. What I think for this calamity is that there could not have been a qualified doctor at the time of delivery. Very often only nurses and midwives are attending to these cases who sometimes are not experienced enough to handle such cases in the absence of a qualified and experienced doctor. This may be mainly due to the fact that doctors are allowed to engage in private practice. It has become the custom of the day that even yesterdays, passed out doctor is a specialist today. This private practice system has caused immence difficulties specially for poor and helpless patients. The doctors are much interested in running after money than attending to poor patients. In the circumstances it is time that government should take immediate action to abolish this private practice system and take special interest to improve the poor conditions and administration of government hospitals now prevailing to reduce unfortunate deaths of mothers and babies during child birth. A disgusted parent The heaps of garbage, chopped trees and branches, building debris, rotting animal carcases etc, dumped haphazardly along the road to Bellanwila Temple, encroaching and polluting the bird sanctuary; a protected area is a deplorable sight. Nobody seems to be bothered, least of all the Dehiwala - Mount Lavinia Municipal Council, under whose purview this area comes . Or is there any other authority, The Dept Of Wild Life, The UDA etc, who are empowered to be concerned and responsible ? There was a road widening project sometime ago and work proceeded at a brisk pace for a while and the people eagerly expected some sort of order and sanity but, suddenly, for reasons best known to them, everything came to a standstill and chaos prevailed again. Can some authority please explain to the public, the current state of affairs, or at least provide some protection to this protected area, to preserve at least what is left of this natural heritage. If the local politicians are ignoring the issue until the next election is due, to exploit the situation for their own benefit and advantage, it will surely be as disgusting as the garbage and the strench itself ! Nature Lover Was Jesus Christ's sacrifice a permanent remedy for sin ? This refers to a reply by V. Jayasooriya that appeared on Sunday Observer of May 11, under titled: 'Should animals be killed to appease God?' The subject of animal slaughter / sacrifice is becoming prominent and lengthy discussions are going on in almost all the leading newspapers. The writer unnecessarily diverts attention towards another subject which does not have any remote link with the subject under discussion. The Bible says: "The father shall not be put to death for the children, neither the children put to death for their father; every man shall be put to death for his own sins." (Deut: 24: 16). The idea that by believing in the blood of Jesus a man will be saved and redeemed from the punishment of sin, is directly opposed to the following sayings of Jesus: "I tell you, on the Day of Judgment men will render account for every careless word they utter; for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned" (Matt; 12:36,37). In Matt: 12.32 he says: "And whoever says a word against the Son of man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come'. In Matt: 18; 8,9 - Jesus says: "And if your hand or your foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away; It is better for you to enter life maimed or lame than with two hands or two feet to be thrown into eternal life. And if your eye causes you to sin pluck it out and throw it away; It is better for you to enter life with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into the hell of fire". In Matt: 13:49,50 - we read: "So it will be at the close of age. The angels will come out and separate the evil from the righteous, and throw them into the furnace of fire; there men will weep and gnash their teeth". In Matt: 6:14,15 - Jesus says: "For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father also will forgive you; but if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses". Again, when we read the 25th chapter of Mathew, verses 31 to 46, we will learn that the righteous will go into life eternal for their good deeds done in this world, and those who will be on the left hand 'shall go away into everlasting punishment', for not doing good deeds. All these people of the right and the left will be Christians who believed Jesus Christ. These sayings of Jesus cannot be reconciled with the doctrine of redemption. Then how is it possible that Jesus' sacrifice by dying on the Cross can be a source of salvation? Then how is it also possible there is no longer any sacrifice for sin? A. Abdul Aziz, |
|
News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security Produced by Lake House |
