The PA government is in a state of political uncertainty. In the face of a UNP-sponsored no-confidence motion gathering momentum, it has become suspicious not only of its political enemies but also of its allies. It appears that the government has lost its capacity to look into matters serenely and logically. Given its track record, it is quite natural that it entertains fears of losing power.
Although the PA government consists of a number of political parties, it does not have a majority that ensures stability. As a result a crossover by seven or eight MPs would be enough to change the government.
Even in the last parliament, the PA did not have a clear majority. But it managed to remain in office because a number of parties supported the government from outside.
Today’s scenario is quite different. Although the number of parties supporting the PA government has increased, the number of seats they hold together in Parliament is fewer than what the PA had in last parliament. The former PA government had the support of 120 MPs including those of the SLMC and the CWC that had entered into a deal with the PA. The EPDP, which had nine seats and the TULF, which had five seats, followed a policy of supporting the government while remaining outside. Thus the gap between the government and the opposition was as large as 37 seats.
In the present parliament, although the PA and its allies have 117 seats, no party outside the government supports it. Although the UNP’s strength in Parliament has also decreased from 94 seats to 89, the strength of the combined opposition has gone up to 108. Thus the gap between the government and the opposition has been narrowed to nine seats. In other words, to topple the government, the combined opposition needs the support of eight or nine MPs in the government. Not only are party leaders like Arumugam Thondaman and Rauf Hakeem unhappy with the present state of affairs in the PA, but several government MPs are also said to be unhappy with party policies. The President accused Mr. Thondaman and Mr. Hakeem of having received money from the LTTE.
Although Mr. Thondaman did not respond to the allegation, he remains displeased with the PA leadership. He thinks that the prospects of his party would improve if he goes back to an alliance with the UNP with whom his party had a long term alliance. The government’s relations with the SLMC also have strained after the President criticised Mr. Hakeem over the Mawanella incidents and his refusal to back government plan to introduce local government reforms. The SLMC has 11 seats — more than what is required to topple the government.
In the meantime, there appears to be some differences of opinion among ministers as well.
Even certain ministers like S.B. Dissanayake, who are considered to be loyal to the President, are reported to be entertaining a view that the PA is facing a bleak future unless the leadership is changed. The President thought talks with the LTTE would help defuse the no-confidence motion. But with the LTTE placing a demand for de-proscription, this strategy has to be changed.
Although the President was willing to lift the bar for a limited period, she had to give up the idea because of the strong objection raised by Prime Minister Ratnasri Wickremanayake. The result was that the opposition was able to have a strong basis to get the consent of all the Tamil political parties except the EPDP.
The common aim of the opposition parties is to defeat the government by a no-confidence motion and to set up a temporary all-party government for the purpose of carrying out democratic reforms. If the opposition succeeds in doing so, the President knows the process could go on until the abolition or a reform of the Executive Presidential System.
The opposition will be able to put into practice the idea of forming a temporary all-party government to implement democratic reforms, only if it is able to defeat the government through a no-confidence motion before October. After October, the President can dissolve parliament because according to the constitution, dissolution is possible only after a parliament completes one year.
Thus till October, she can gain time by employing various means, including proroguing it. However, Parliament can be brought to a standstill by a prorogation only for a maximum two months. The time available from June to October is five months. In any event, dissolution might also prove disadvantageous to the PA, given its record of broken promises and failures.