The Sri Lankan government’s reported plan to import double cabs for Members of Parliament (MPs) and state institutions has ignited a heated debate, highlighting the deep contradictions in the political discourse surrounding austerity, fiscal discipline, and public accountability.
The controversy unfolded in Parliament after opposition MP Ravi Karunanayake raised questions over the government’s rationale in considering vehicle imports estimated to cost nearly Rs. 65 billion. This comes at a time when MPs’ other privileges — including pensions and subsidized meals — have been subject to proposed restrictions as part of a broader effort to reduce political perks.
Karunanayake accused the government of duplicity, noting that while it campaigns on the rhetoric of trimming extravagant entitlements, it simultaneously contemplates a costly program to supply luxury double cabs to legislators.
“It has been reported that double cabs are to be imported for MPs. This is the same government that criticized the privileges enjoyed by MPs at the public’s expense. How can you justify the plan to import double cabs under current circumstances?” he asked.
The issue strikes at the heart of the National People’s Power (NPP)’s campaign promises, which emphasized eliminating wasteful privileges for MPs.
Having ridden a wave of popular discontent against political excess, the NPP pledged to abolish pensions for parliamentarians and cut down other benefits deemed burdensome to taxpayers.
While the government has clarified that existing MPs will retain their pensions and that new rules will apply only to future entrants, critics argue that importing vehicles worth billions undermines the spirit of reform.
Responding to the opposition, Minister of Industry and Entrepreneurship Development Sunil Handunnetti sought to soften the controversy by insisting that the primary beneficiaries of the new vehicles would be government officials, not MPs.
He highlighted that divisional secretaries and other administrators currently operate outdated vehicles, many over 15 years old, with repair costs outweighing their operational value. “Priority will be given to government officials, beginning with divisional secretaries. This is not exclusively about MPs,” he said.
However, Public Security Minister Ananda Wijepala, who also oversees parliamentary affairs, admitted that MPs are indeed part of the government’s considerations.
“This is the idea we have at the moment. However, we have not decided when it will be done. We don’t know whether it will be this year or next year,” he remarked, leaving ambiguity around the timeline and intent.
Analysts point out that the government is treading a politically sensitive path. On one hand, state institutions do require functional vehicles to carry out administrative and public service duties effectively, especially in rural regions.
On the other, the inclusion of MPs in such a procurement program at a staggering national cost risks reinforcing public perceptions of privilege, waste, and misaligned priorities.
At a time when Sri Lanka is struggling with fiscal consolidation under the IMF program, public trust is fragile.
Critics warn that any move perceived as prioritizing politicians’ comfort over citizens’ hardships could fuel voter anger, particularly given rising living costs and austerity measures imposed on households.
For now, the proposal remains in the planning stage, but the political debate it has triggered underscores a broader question: whether Sri Lanka’s leadership is willing to match its rhetoric of sacrifice and reform with genuine restraint in practice.
