Comments on: Minister of what????? https://groundviews.org/2007/01/29/minister-of-what/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=minister-of-what Journalism for Citizens Thu, 22 Feb 2007 06:36:45 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.1 By: groundviews https://groundviews.org/2007/01/29/minister-of-what/#comment-457 Thu, 22 Feb 2007 06:36:45 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/2007/01/29/minister-of-what/#comment-457 Fifty-seven parliamentary advisory committees to monitor Sri Lanka’s Ministries
Wednesday, February 21, 2007, 14:35 GMT, ColomboPage News Desk, Sri Lanka.

Feb 21, Colombo: The Sri Lanka Parliament yesterday approved a proposal to appoint 57 parliamentary advisory committees to monitor the country’s Ministries.

The parliamentary advisory committees will be comprised of more than five but less than 31 MPs and will monitor the activities of the 57 Cabinet Ministries in Sri Lanka.

Leader of the House Minister Nimal Siripala de Silva submitted this proposal to the Parliament.

]]> By: JustMal https://groundviews.org/2007/01/29/minister-of-what/#comment-456 Wed, 31 Jan 2007 02:34:14 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/2007/01/29/minister-of-what/#comment-456 The election system needs to be changed to accomodate changes like these. It’s impossible for any government to stay in power without having a massive cabinet and keeping a blind eye on corrupt activities of ministers. It’s a classic catch 22.

The proportional election system is what’s at fault here, not any president or prime minister. Why would they want such a huge cabinet full of crooks, thugs and traitors.

]]> By: David Blacker https://groundviews.org/2007/01/29/minister-of-what/#comment-455 Tue, 30 Jan 2007 11:33:24 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/2007/01/29/minister-of-what/#comment-455 Snut, as I’ve already said, even if your Pork Theory was correct, a powerful minister (by your own admission) has more pork to dispense than a minor one. So a few high-powered ministers can dispense a lot more than maany low-powered ones. But this is nothing to do with dispensing anything to anyone (since the crossover and appointments won’t benefit the public), but gather a more powerful base for the administration until the next elections.

]]> By: sittingnut https://groundviews.org/2007/01/29/minister-of-what/#comment-454 Tue, 30 Jan 2007 08:58:22 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/2007/01/29/minister-of-what/#comment-454 " not "sole purpose of parliament is to dispense “pork”" . that is the difference between description of reality and intentions. a debate without clearly recognizing reality is futile, except as a way to create hot air or text. what i said is true in almost any country with a welfare democracy. as long as a government dispenses something somebody will want to get the credit (or at least the appearance of it ). btw that is also why the contention made here that jvp will get more votes bc of this is not true. ever hear of a minister getting less votes bc he became a minister? i would bet that 8 or so mps in the government benches who are missing out will be the ones who will lose in next election. a two bit minister, as most of them are, are by definition not powerful. at the very top ( with pres. and main ministers) may have more power and even ideas and well intentions, but they too have to get votes. nanda: "Remember the build up prior to July 1983" ?!? may be you should write a comment ( or even a post ) with mores details and clarity so that we can share and understand your 'apprehensions'.]]> what i said was “a politician is judged primarily by his/her ability to distribute patronage or ‘pork’” not “sole purpose of parliament is to dispense “pork”” . that is the difference between description of reality and intentions. a debate without clearly recognizing reality is futile, except as a way to create hot air or text.
what i said is true in almost any country with a welfare democracy. as long as a government dispenses something somebody will want to get the credit (or at least the appearance of it ).
btw that is also why the contention made here that jvp will get more votes bc of this is not true. ever hear of a minister getting less votes bc he became a minister? i would bet that 8 or so mps in the government benches who are missing out will be the ones who will lose in next election.

a two bit minister, as most of them are, are by definition not powerful. at the very top ( with pres. and main ministers) may have more power and even ideas and well intentions, but they too have to get votes.

nanda:
“Remember the build up prior to July 1983” ?!?
may be you should write a comment ( or even a post ) with mores details and clarity so that we can share and understand your ‘apprehensions’.

]]> By: nanda https://groundviews.org/2007/01/29/minister-of-what/#comment-453 Tue, 30 Jan 2007 06:25:42 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/2007/01/29/minister-of-what/#comment-453 Strange that we talk about this scam in such sophisticated ways. The sage continues. Cross overs, buying and getting support at the cost of the millions and making some sri lankan families fabulously rich. No question that it will be the extreme parties on either side (JVP and LTTE) having the last laugh about this. Did you read the US statement this morning? No illusions anymore: a millitary solution managed and directed by the US and some advisors with green cards. To make this happen political support must be rallied and, in sri lanka, can be bought. No need for a rational analysis of Ministerial posts. How many of them have private armies (thugs, political supporters with arms) and how will they behave now that they can operate freely? Remember the build up prior to July 1983.

]]> By: Jack Point https://groundviews.org/2007/01/29/minister-of-what/#comment-452 Tue, 30 Jan 2007 06:12:59 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/2007/01/29/minister-of-what/#comment-452 Des, they already HAVE a Minister of Ministers. This is what I presume the Minister for Parliamentary Affairs does….

]]> By: David Blacker https://groundviews.org/2007/01/29/minister-of-what/#comment-451 Tue, 30 Jan 2007 04:13:01 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/2007/01/29/minister-of-what/#comment-451 Des: In the UK, the Civil Service has a large say in the administration and running of ministries and departments. The politician himself is only responsible for policy, while implementation is carried out by the civil servants. So since policy concerning energy will hardly differ between petroleum and electricity, it makes sense to group them in a single ministry. I don’t know if there are constitutional restrictions on ministries, however.

Snut: A minister in charge of a large ministry with many departments willl be able to dispense far more “pork” than your “two-bit” minister in charge of say Social Inequity Eradication. So if you feel that the sole purpose of parliament is to dispense “pork”, it can still be done better by streamlining. I, however, feel that there’s more to governance than that. Call me a dreamer.

Deane: That would be the Minister of Administration.

]]> By: Deane https://groundviews.org/2007/01/29/minister-of-what/#comment-450 Mon, 29 Jan 2007 14:00:56 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/2007/01/29/minister-of-what/#comment-450 i propose a Minister of Ministers, surely its a vast enough subject.

]]> By: Des https://groundviews.org/2007/01/29/minister-of-what/#comment-449 Mon, 29 Jan 2007 11:37:18 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/2007/01/29/minister-of-what/#comment-449 Is there really a Minister for Supplementary Crops Development? wow, i guess i missed that one. Thanks for that table David, making it clear the way it should be.

Does anyone know of experiences elsewhere and how other governments manage to desist from handing out ministries? Are there constitutional restrictions, or do members of parliament receive sufficient income so that they manage to avoid such temptation.

The JVP must be laughing and no doubt looking forward to collecting more votes in the future due to their call to streamline cabinet and not taking up such positions.

]]> By: Kadalay https://groundviews.org/2007/01/29/minister-of-what/#comment-448 Mon, 29 Jan 2007 11:26:27 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/2007/01/29/minister-of-what/#comment-448 The bottom line here is that “there is no such thing as a free lunch”.

The Chintanaya man wants his share of the pie for as long as he can bite into it. So do the MP’s seated on the opposition benches where it appears that life will be one hellhole for some time to come. To each his own… They seek what they need in return for what its worth. Supply and demand, remember?

]]>