|
|
|
  |
| Sunday, 30 January 2005 |
 |
|
 |
Features |  |
| News Business Features Editorial
|
On behalf of tsunami victims: Political Stunts by Bishops and Vice Chancellors by Prof. S. Ratnajeevan H. Hoole As an Anglican of five generations I was ashamed and saddened to read of my bishop publicly stating that foreign troops helping tsunami victims must leave as soon as their work is over. I publicly dissociate myself from his unchristian views. While we locals have conferences with high tea on how to help tsunami victims, many foreigners and foreign organisations have been actively engaged in the field, really helping. My wife, working with a child-centred NGO, has witnessed soldiers - little boys and girls of 18 or so in age, sweating and red as she described them - working long hours enthusiastically like machines to clocks, carrying loads that we would not even try carrying. And this with no fuss while some locals stood at a distance holding their noses. The Bishop may have good political reasons for wanting foreign armies out. And indeed they must go when their task is over. But that has to be taken up discreetly at a higher political level. The public statement he made is really to firm-up his political base within the Church. It would hurt these young men working for us in whose hearts I see only love and idealism. There is no deeper lack of Christian charity than in hurting these well-meaning young men and women. If the Bishop has a quarrel it is with our and their political masters. Similarly, a Vice Chancellor without our permission deducted more than Rs. 1 million from our January salaries. He then quickly ran to the President with a favour-currying statement to be the first Vice chancellor to give to the President's Fund for Relief - as if he was making a great personal sacrifice to give other people's hard earned money. It was a decision without any authority from us employees. It amounts to theft to advance his political fortunes - for it is widely believed that the University had borrowed large sums from the President's Fund and had been unable to respond to repeated audits on the return of the money. Worse, we have been robbed of the best part of giving - feeling good over giving of our own volition. As a matter of principle, I am publicly calling for the return of the money unless express authorization is received from each person who was so taxed. It is not that we do not want to give. But we like to say to whom our contributions should go, how much we will give and through whom we will give. If this precedent is not contested, Vice Chancellors will hereafter start giving our money to anything they like, including bogus charities. |
|
| News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security
| Produced by Lake House |
