House focuses on education

A point of order raised by Opposition Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe in Parliament on Wednesday pertaining to a statement made by a UPFA Parliamentarian after the conclusion of an adjournment debate on July 18 led to heated arguments between the Government and the Opposition ranks on the validity of the point raised by the Opposition Leader. Speaker Chamal Rajapaksa who drew his attention to the remarks made by the Opposition and Government benches informed the House that he would further study the matter and inform his decision to the House.

Wickremesinghe in his point of order attempted to highlight that allowing UPFA MP Hunais Farook to make a statement on the Mannar incident soon after the day's businesses of the House was ended is a violation of the provisions of the Parliament Standing Orders. He pointed out that the UPFA MP was allowed to make a statement in the House on July 18 even after the reply speech by Deputy Education Minister Wijith Wijayamuni Zoysa of an adjournment debate was completed. Wickremesinghe said this is contrary to the Parliament traditions and Standing Orders as the presiding member allowed the MP to go on.

However, the remarks made by the Opposition Leader led the Opposition and Government members to come out with various contradictory statements to consolidate their arguments. UPFA MP A.H.M. Azwer who first countered the Opposition Leader's argument informed the House there is no clause in the Standing Orders for the Opposition Leader to raise this point of order. Therefore Azwer requested the Speaker to expunge all these references made by Wickremesinghe from the Hansard.

Azwer told the House that he was the presiding member when MP Farook wanted to speak on that day. Azwer elaborating his position told the House, according to the provisions of the Section 138 of Parliament Standing Orders, the Chair could decide whether an MP could be allowed to raise such matters even after the conclusion of the adjournment debate. He said that he allowed the MP to raise this matter of national importance under these provisions in the Standing Orders.

UNP MP Lakshman Kiriella who responded to MP Azwer's remarks was of the view that matters of national importance could not be taken after an adjournment debate. TNA Parliamentarian M.A. Sumanthiran pointed out that matters of national importance should be raised by either Leader of the Opposition or a leader of Parliamentary group. If an ordinary MP had been allowed to speak after the adjournment debate, then that was in contrary with the Standing Orders.

Chief Government Whip and Water Supply and Drainage Minister Dinesh Gunawardena maintained the view the incident took place at a time when the sittings were on. The Chair could decide whether such a speech be allowed or not. A Parliamentarian was permitted to bring up a matter of national importance and the Chair decided to continue.

There is no violation of Standing Orders. If attempts are made to question the decisions taken by the Chair in this manner, it would be difficult to conduct Parliament proceedings.

Subsequently a privilege issue raised in Parliament on Tuesday by MP Farook regarding the conduct of the Mannar Magistrate also led to a heated exchange of words between the Opposition Leader and several Government legislators. MP Farook told the House when he appeared for some clients who were accused in the Mannar Court incident case, the Magistrate had summoned him to the Chamber and reprimanded him for a speech he made in Parliament a few days earlier that made a reference to the conduct of the Magistrate. The MP was of the view his rights as a Parliamentarian were violated by the Magistrate and requested the Speaker to inquire into this incident of a breach of his privileges.

The Opposition Leader noted that if a privilege issue or any allegation is being made against an official administering justice in the country, it has to be done through substantive motion. Wickremesinghe said the House has to differentiate between whether it is a matter of privilege or an attempt to interfere in the work of the judiciary. However, Speaker Chamal Rajapaksa said the courts of law or any other institution could not question an MP on what he or she said in Parliament. That amounts to a breach of Parliamentary privilege. The Speaker told the House he was bound to safeguard the privileges of all MPs and announced the privileges of the MP has been violated. He assured the House he would also inquire into the matter further.

The strike action launched by the university teachers was once again highlighted in the House following a statement made by the Opposition Leader. He said the university teachers' strike action is worsening day by day and the G.C.E. Advanced Level paper marking has also become a problem as the striking academics have decided not to participate in scrutinising of answer scripts. Wickremesinghe said the entire university system in the country has become inactive due to this problem.

Higher Education Minister S.B. Dissanayake, making a reply speech, informed the House it is wrong to interpret that the entire university system is affected by this problem as the lecturers of four universities and the Trincomalee Campus have abstained from the ongoing strike action. He said the Government also granted an unprecedented salary increment to the university teachers recently.

The Minister said he requested Economic Development Minister Basil Rajapaksa to intervene in this issue. He described some of the demands put forward by the university teachers as laughable demands.

He briefed the House how the Government has increased the allocations for the higher education since 2000 to date. He also noted the only years that this did not happen were 2002 and 2003 under Ranil Wickremesinghe's government.

The Z score controversy came into light in the House when Opposition Leader made a special statement in the House claiming the Z score crisis has developed into catastrophic proportions owing to the manner the problem was handled by the relevant Government institutions. He said the hopes and confidence reposed on the free education and the examination system have been shattered. It is the responsibility of Parliamentarians to save children from this situation. It is the duty of of the Opposition to apply pressure on the Government to rectify the injustice caused to those children.

Higher Education Deputy Minister Nandimithra Ekanayake who made the reply speech stated the Government would not take measures to cause injustice to any student based on the Z-score issue. He said President Mahinda Rajapaksa has instructed the authorities to find a solution without causing injustice to any student.

However, once the Deputy Minister stood up to make his reply speech, the Opposition Leader drew the attention of the House to the absence of Higher Education Minister S.B. Dissanayake to reply to his statement. This led to an argument between the Opposition Leader and the Deputy Minister while the Opposition members also interrupted the Deputy Minister's speech.

Minister Dinesh Gunawardene who intervened told the House, in the absence of his Minister, a Deputy Minister has the right to answer a statement raised by the Opposition on behalf of him. The Minister told the Opposition Leader that the Higher Education Minister has to attend a ceremony. The Deputy Minister Ekanayake requested the Opposition Leader not to attempt to fish in trouble waters.

He alleged when the attempts are being made to sort out the issue, the UNP attempts to create unnecessary problems and an anti-Government trend out of this issue. The Deputy Minister told the Opposition that this should be seen as a national problem irrespective of political affiliations.