Talk is one thing, action quite another

Manjula Fernando

Prof. Jayadeva Uyangoda Pic: Sudam Gunasinghe

Prof. Jayadeva Uyangoda, a respected academic is one of the professional members of the National Institute of Education (NIE) Council, removed by the Education Minister a fortnight ago. Currently in Delhi, as Rajni Kothari Chair, Center for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS), Prof. Uyangoda in an email interview given to the Sunday Observer explained what happened. Excerpts:

Q: Do you think the proper procedure was followed when the professional members were removed from the NIE Council ?

A: No, I don't know. They may have followed the procedures, in the sense that, the Minister has the right to remove the Council Members.

Q: Any reasons given, in the letter received by you (from the Secretary)?

A: There were no reasons given, except to say that the NIE no longer needed my services.

Q:What could have prompted the Education Secretary to take that sudden decision?

A: I don't know the reasons. My guess is that probably they needed a council which would work with the DG, with no criticism, dissent, disagreement, or ideas for reform, or a commitment to the government's initial policy of transparent good governance. But, the Secretary, Education may not have taken this decision on his own.

As he himself admits, he wrote the letter on the Minister's instructions. But, interestingly, the Secretary shared all our concerns, criticisms and proposals made at Council Meetings.

There was no disagreement whatsoever, between us and the Education Secretary, who is the ex-officio chair of the Council.

Q: The official media release issued by the Media Secretary of Education Ministry on July 26 read- "there were serious internal disagreements within the Council and it was affecting the progress of the NIE". Do you agree with this statement?

A: There were serious disagreements between the DG and us on governance issues, as well as on the role and responsibilities of the NIE. We were arguing for a robust and energetic role to be played by the NIE in all aspects of its mandate in accordance with the NIE Act, whereas the Acting DG had a very minimalist understanding of what the NIE should be doing.

We saw the NIE as an institution allowed to decay and decline under the previous government. We argued for its revival and regeneration through reforms, capacity building and good and accountable governance. There were discussions, debates and disagreements on these issues, and they were not necessarily bad. Probably, people who had been used to a culture of command, authoritarianism and voluntary submission to authority for years, saw debate and dissent as something strange, unusual and unacceptable. Paradoxically, the NIE was, and is, in such a severe institutional crisis that neither the NIE officials nor the Education Ministry could comprehend that it was in a crisis!

Q: Do you plan to take up this issue with any higher authorities in the government? Will you resort to any future action over this sudden removal from the Council?

A: Dr. Nirmal and I wrote to the Prime Minister, after he took over the NIE under his office, a long letter, in May this year, explaining the institutional crisis of the NIE and making suggestions to resolve the crisis. We even proposed a comprehensive institutional review for the NIE. The PM of course acknowledged our letter through his secretary. We don't know of any follow up action.

I don't think I want to take any further action on the issue, except reflecting on how difficult it is to reform and regenerate Sri Lanka's public sector institutions even under a government that has come into power promising such an agenda. But, I have an intellectual and personal commitment to strengthen the public discourse on good governance reforms. This experience is an example I can use, to make a case for revisiting and re-inventing the good governance agenda.

Q: What were your expectations for the NIE and our school education sector?

A: The NIE should do what it is required to do by the Act. Advising the Minister on education policy, doing regular and quality research for that objective, revising and updating syllabi and teacher guides, launching new initiatives for school text books in all three languages, in collaboration with other government entities, broadening its teacher training programs -- all these require capacity building of the NIE, particularly, at its top level.

Tragically, the NIE does not seem to comprehend that there is a serious crisis in Sri Lanka's school education sector.

Q: In the aftermath of this development, do you regret taking up this Government position?

A: No, I don't regret. We made an effort. It failed and taught me some important lessons about the nature of the Sri Lankan State as well as the public sector institutions, and the limits of what political leaders say and actually do.

This experience made me a bit wiser.