The state-run newspaper Daily News howled 'The Sunday Times lies bared', and only went on to, unwittingly maybe, confirm the story, asking where else could the President stay if she was to meet other heads of state. It was one of those cases where a newspaper writes the headline first and then wonders how to fit in the article to suit the headline.
Since the article appeared in The Sunday Times, the President's Office has not said a word, though our reporter has subsequently stated that there was one error in the report; the President was not hosting a reception at the Waldorf-Astoria where she was staying. Instead, she chose the UN dining hall for her reception. The state media could not even point that out.
From all accounts there wasn't a single Head of State present at her reception. The state-run Daily News which impressed on its readers the importance of the President having to meet world-leaders could only report in its front-page under the headline 'President meets world leaders' that the highest ranking personalities present at her reception were the Foreign Ministers of East Timor and Gabon!!!
The only world leaders she met were Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi, whom she seems to have met at another reception (going by the video footage available) and Pakistan President Gen. Pervez Musharraf whom she had to call on.
In Sri Lanka, there were others too, who asked this question. "Can the President entertain at a buth-kade?" asked one irate reader, uncertain whether there were, in fact, buth-kades in New York. Which reminds one of the story of a certain Sri Lankan newspaperman who having downed five too many drinks at a cocktail party in New York (while covering a previous visit of the President) asked his host to get him a three-wheeler to get back to his hotel.
Many other readers were not amused. Most of them were angry because the next story they would have read is that they, the yakkos (proletariat) having already faced sky-rocketing prices in food and essential items like gas and fuel, were now being warned of still higher prices in the days to come, of not only food, gas and fuel, but also of an upward revision of electricity rates.
And then at the bottom of that page they must have seen a story of how some unknown persons were given valuable state land by President Chandrika Kumaratunga ostensibly to develop the property. They did sweet nothing, but 're-sold' it to an arms dealer who made big bucks thanks to selling armaments to the Sri Lankan Forces during the many failed (and some successful) military operations during her previous tenure.
In the process, those favoured persons netted in Rs. 150 million just for having been given this state land by President Kumaratunga. That figure is, of course, the over-the-table figure, as the story said.
Such behaviour is what makes Sri Lanka a typical third-world, third-rate, country. A so-called Republic, rivalled only by some Banana Republics in Latin America or some of the African states, where the leaders have the time of their lives while the poor grovel for a living, and the in-betweens make a killing as the front-men for their leaders.
The 'President Kumaratunga entourage in classy Waldorf' story not only caused a stir among the ranks of Government, but in the Opposition as well.
One good thing is that they are still concerned about public opinion. It's just that they try not to do anything about it. The story also referred to former Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe leaving behind a staggering US dollars 26,000 telephone bill at the UN Plaza Hotel when he visited UNGA last year with a team of hand-picked journalists.
Sri Lanka's former Ambassador to the UN, Charlie Mahendran, a one-time career diplomat and later UNP card-carrying member, has promptly denied this, saying the sum was much less, and that it included not only the phone bills of the former Premier's entourage, but much more. This is what Charlie Mahendran says;
"I was the Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the United Nations in September 2003 when (Prime Minister) Ranil Wickremesinghe visited New York (for the UNGA). I distinctly remember that the entire cost of the delegation which included hotel charges, limousine service and official taxes and telephone calls which was strictly monitored was under US $ 26,000 and was paid by the Permanent Mission in New York".
It's a kind of blanket denial that does not throw much light. So the newspaper reporter was detailed to contact him and ask him to explain further. Then, he says that when The Sunday Times had written about former premier Wickremesinghe's delegation leaving behind such a staggering phone bill, his explanation had been called for, and that he gave a full break-down of the expenditure at the time.
He says the total expenditure for the then PM's delegation was US $25,700. He goes on to say that the expenses of the " others " were paid by the different ministries (as if that is not tax-payers' money). He then goes on to make an unsubstantiated statement that he has heard from his former staff at the UN Mission in New York that the Foreign Ministry has allocated US $120,000 for the President's current visit, and that would not be enough. Unfortunately, the Foreign Ministry will not confirm anything nowadays.
When we asked our reporter in New York Michael De Silva who filed last week's story for his response to former Ambassador Mahendran's letter, this is what he had to say;
On November 16 last year, The Sunday Times itself published an article from New York titled "With UN dues still unpaid, Sri Lanka could lose voting rights". The article said: "At a time when ministers and senior officials are on junkets every week at taxpayers' expense (the last ministerial and media delegation to the UN left a $21,000 phone bill, along with a cable TV bill for porn movies viewed in their hotel rooms), why is it that the government cannot afford to pay its UN dues on time as it did in earlier years?"
Michael de Silva goes on to say that neither the Ministry of Foreign Affairs nor the Sri Lanka Mission to the UN (which was headed by Ambassador Mahendran) denied this-- either formally or informally. Our story went unchallenged. Why has Ambassador Mahendran disputed this story now, why has be maintained his stony silence for so long?, he asks.
Here, quite apart from Ambassador Mahendran's stony silence for so long, we do notice a discrepancy in the figures. While our story refers to US $26,000, the reference seems to be to US $21,000. A distinction without a difference, but a difference nevertheless.
So, if we go on the basis that the sum of US $21,000 is the sum total, former Ambassador Mahendran is still unable to say what that phone bill amounted to. He limits his formal answer to saying that the total cost of the delegation " was under US $26,000 ", then when asked subsequently goes on to distinguish the PM's delegation (whose bill was $ 25,700, yes, that is under $ 26,000 - by $ 300) from the " others " (whose bills were paid by other ministries, whoever they may be).
Mahendran therefore, does not seem to be able to say for sure, what the telephone bill of the "others " was. Our reporter now adds, that the bill not only included telephone bills but in-house cable tv bills, which as everyone knows, mean in-house movies.
This is what our reporter says; "The former UN envoy is generous enough to provide a figure for the total bill (which we are told is also in dispute). But can he recollect the breakdown for the phone bill and the hotel's cable tv bill? We have been told that the phone bills not only included charges tagged onto the hotel room (where usually rates are exorbitantly high for overseas calls), but also charges on cell phones (which the Sri Lanka delegation and some of these hand-picked journalists were armed with), and on phones used from an office rented out for the delegation in the UN Plaza Hotel. Even while that office was kept locked during the night, some of the reporters had convinced the reception desk to give them access primarily to use the phone to call friends and relatives all over the world, not just in Sri Lanka. Additionally, the phones in the Sri Lanka Mission were also used for private calls to Sri Lanka. And they all add up to the monumental figure".
"Incidentally", says Michael De Silva, "as an example in lessons learnt, a ministerial and media delegation which went to Washington DC months later from Colombo was warned that the Sri Lanka embassy will not be responsible for any overseas phone bill charges made at the hotel. All or most overseas calls were made only through cell phones which were personally monitored by an embassy official to prevent the New York debacle. The Sri Lanka Mission to the UN had no such monitoring. Perhaps Ambassador Mahendran was too busy to keep tabs on the misuse of phones by Sri Lankan delegates -- even though some of his staffers were more diligent. Perhaps he was not aware of what was going on under his own watch".
While former Ambassador Charlie Mahendran has tried valiantly to defend his party leader and former Premier, the Minister of Tourism, Investment and Industries Anura Bandaranaike has also entered the fray, or at least his faithful servant, A.H.M. Onais, his private secretary has done so on his behalf, clearly not only on the Minister's instructions, but also with help by the Minister in New York. The Minister writes to The Sunday Times, referring to his own trip to New York as part of his sister's delegation. He says "I shall explain at the proper forum, at the proper time, about the benefits of my travel to the country.." in response to a question the newspaper seems to have raised about his many overseas trips.
One would suppose the "proper time" is right now. In his letter he does not still say what he was doing in London for four days prior to his journey accompanying his President-sister to New York when she arrived there to catch a connecting flight. Nor does he say in his letter what on earth he was doing in New York in the first place.
Then, typically, Minister Anura Bandaranaike goes off at a tangent to avoid the question at issue. He says; "I shall also table all the many foreign travels and its cost, travel costs, and other related expenditure of cohorts, in Parliament of J.R. Jayewardene, R. Premadasa and wife, and Ranil Wickremesinghe, in full, for posterity. Even lesser UNP mortals like Foreign Minister A.C.S. Hameed stayed at the very same Waldorf-Astoria fourteen times!
He asks the newspaper whether it is only interested in the costs of Bandaranaike-led Governments, and then says; "The many travels of Ranil Wickremesinghe, hotel bills, travel costs, names and designations of varied 'cohorts' and 'vast entourages', monies paid to his foreign-speech-writers will also be tabled in Parliament - and let the fun begin', asking how the newspaper is going to handle that one.
We might safely say, that we will handle 'that one', the same way we are waiting to handle the 'other one', i.e. his great boast that "more heads will roll at the BOI " after he sacked two officials and made the headlines with that statement. It's over four months now, and no more heads have rolled.
But we welcome his boast (not so much his boast, but if he can put the tax-payers' money where his mouth is, really) that he will divulge all the costs of all those VVIP travels - over the years, at state expense.
And yet, when it comes to his own turn, what does he do? The newspaper had yet another report last week which pointed out that when Minister Bandaranaike went on a previous trip to London (in June this year), he had exhorted the newspaper to get the bills of his stay from, among others, the Sri Lanka High Commission in the UK.
When the newspaper asked High Commissioner Faiz Musthapha for these bills, telling him that Minister Bandaranaike wanted us to get these from him, the lawyer-turned diplomat opted to deflect the issue by arguing a case for having to send the bills to some accounting officer in Colombo.
That is how things are covered up in this country. So, when Minister Bandaranaike says he will do a full monty on all these expenses, which must of course, include himself and not be just selective, we must welcome it.
I have seen in this very newspaper several editorials during the Ranil Wickremesinghe period calling on Government Ministers to restrict their opulent styles, particularly their foreign jaunts at state-expense, especially when a Government is calling upon the people of this country to make sacrifices.
The cost-of-living is unbearably high. And even if some of the factors contributing to this are outside their control like rising fuel bills, curtailing foreign trips can be one area of sacrifice by the leaders.
Whatever his other shortcomings, former Finance Minister Kasi Choksy was someone who set an example by doing business by telephone and other ways, rather than finding any excuse to fly to some capital or other like many of his colleagues in the UNP Government would do. No one grudges President Kumaratunga a stay at the Waldorf. But the excuse that she needed to stay there to meet other world leaders can only come from her propagandists.
Indeed, US President George W. Bush stayed at the Waldorf. But Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh (Palace Hotel) and Pakistan President Gen. Pervez Musharaff (Roosevelt Hotel) did not stay at the Waldorf, they stayed in smaller hotels - and all of them got to meet President Bush. President Kumaratunga was at the same hotel as President Bush and did not get to meet President Bush.
The New York based widely circulated India Abroad described Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's visit as " traditional, extensive and devoid of hype". The headline ran " No tamasha for Manmohan Singh's visit."
In fact, Manmohan Singh met President Bush for an hour-long breakfast meeting shortly before the latter's UN address and strengthened bilateral relations between the two countries. Gen. Musharraf and even Aghanistan President Karzai met Bush separately. No one knows whether President Kumaratunga wanted to see President Bush. The point is that staying at the same hotel does not mean that you get to see any other State leader merely because he stays there as well.
President Bush and his neo-conservative Republicans are funny people. After-all, they even sent a message that they were not going to give British Conse-rvative Party leader Michael Howard an appointment if he visited Washington. Howard is not only a deeply committed Atlanticist, but also a possible Prime Minister of Britain. It’s just that Howard opposes the war in Iraq.
Michael Portillo, the former Conservative Minister who now writes a popular column to the London Sunday Times says "they (the Bush party) do not entertain even a whiff of heresy". So what chance would President Kumaratunga have had in meeting him, whether she stayed at the Waldorf or anywhere else.
But she did get to meet President Bush at the UN building on the day she and the US President made a speech (on day 1) of the UN sessions. That was at a luncheon - they were at the same table - UN Secretary General Kofi Annan's table, where she raised her glass of white wine to a toast proposed by President Bush welcoming these world leaders to the United States of America.
That opportunity of sitting at Kofi Annan's table with the US President was surely not afforded to President Kumaratunga because she was staying at an expensive hotel like the Waldorf. The UN cannot be so snobbish, could they? No, Kofi Annan had President Kumaratunga at his table on the opening day the last time she spoke as well (on that opening date) - even when she was staying at the Harley Hotel, in the UN neighbourhood.
Anura Bandaranaike says he will be rushing back by today to attend the commemoration ceremonies connected with the death anniversary of his late father, S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike, who was ironically assassinated on the eve of his departure to speak at the UN General Assembly in 1959. Sister Chandrika will not be here for the occasion as she has opted to stay back in London over the weekend.
No official communique has been issued by her office about her whereabouts - it is almost as if the people of Sri Lanka don't care where she is.
To say now that the free-spending foreign jaunts of Cabinet Ministers were never an issue cannot be true. It was a matter of such concern that President Kumaratunga herself introduced a Code of Ethics for them. In it, she specified that no Minister should travel overseas more than four times each year.
This is thoroughly unrealistic and should have had some exemption clauses. But exemption clauses give rise to excesses and the President, in her wisdom, kept to the four-trip rule. Her own brother has been the second to break her rule, only after Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar. The JVP, which inspired this Code and the four-trip rule sings a slightly different tune as well now. They probably see things differently, now that they are in the corridors of power.
In his interview with this newspaper last week, their General Secretary Tilvin Silva appears to have moved an amendment to the rule. He says something like, yes, it must remain four trips per year, but any amount of private trips are permitted. What he must know is that the same people who voted his party to office, and those who did not, are commonly groaning under the weight of price increases. His new Government has no money to pay for subsidies to cushion these blows.
Neither does his Government have money to spend on his Government's Ministers, including those from his party going on foreign trips. The situation is so bad that one UPFA Cabinet Minister left an unpaid hotel bill in India earning Sri Lanka a terrible name in the hospitality trade of that country. Missions throughout the world are called up to pay these bills, and the Foreign Ministry is now complaining that they just cannot go on paying and calling for the relevant Ministries to meet their bosses' bills.
But who is to speak up for the taxpayer, including those millions called upon to pay indirect taxes who are finding it increasingly difficult to meet their own bills and now must ultimately foot all those accumulated Ministerial bills as well.
(http://www.sundaytimes.lk/040926/columns/political.html)
