Cricket while the country burns?

Originally appeared on The Morning.

By Dhananath Fernando

In the mid 1990s, when Sri Lanka’s Cricket was performing extraordinarily well, there was an accusation that then President Chandrika Bandaranayake Kumarathunga was announcing unpopular policy decisions while public attention was on cricket. After Sri Lanka won a match, and while people are celebrating the next morning, the prices of items such as bread and LP gas are increased. There were even rumors that LTTE leaders had said “Sri Lankans remember any event only for two weeks”. Today, while public & media attention is focused on our historic cricket win against Australia, our policymakers seem to think that the attention diversion from cricket would save them from a historic Economic crisis. They are definitely wrong.

While IMF representatives are in Sri Lanka to explore the details of the programme, the drive for reforms among policy makers is extremely slow. Even more than 2 months after announcing the suspension of external debt, we have not yet provided any policy direction for stakeholders on reforms that we intend to follow to overcome the crisis.

So far, it seems like another round of political musical chairs without any genuine effort from policymakers to enact economic reforms. The school of thought that favored bringing political reforms hand in hand with Economic reforms is also now in question due to the situation with the 21st amendment. According to the Prime Minister, as per his recent speech in Parliament, we have to show our willingness for reforms to get the support of other countries. So what willingness has been indicated by our policy makers on any reforms? We have only been going to other countries and organizations with a begging bowl to find money for essentials on a weekly basis, and sadly that has become the new normal. We are at a very high risk of some level of social unrest with no reforms on the table and the poor leadership on display from our representatives. A short video clip uploaded by a journalist of a man in a fuel queue alerted me to the degree of risk we are in. The journalist asked about the impact of the economic crisis from this particular person in the queue. He said, with a very calm tone and patient body language, “I am a chauffeur and a father of 3 kids. I kindly request our leaders to not test the patience of fathers like me. The current protests & ‘Galle Face Green protests’ are broadly by youth. Not by fathers like me. Fathers like me do everything for our kids. We can’t see them suffering. When a father crosses the border of patience we don’t know where it will stop,” he said, with a measured tone and with a lot of depth.

While this column highlighted many preliminary reforms over the last two years, there are new reforms that we have to expedite given the severity of the crisis. As recent news stories have indicated, the debt restructuring in Sri Lanka seems likely to be very complicated and time consuming. In particular, the news that Hamilton Reserve Bank is suing Sri Lanka in American Federal courts indicates how complicated the situation could become. As per the report, they possess more than 25% of the July 2022 bond series and are requesting the full amount to be paid; they possess a share of the bond large enough to make them a ‘blocking minority’ which can block and delay the entire debt negotiating programme. The IMF, for their part, has indicated that they want to see a clear direction on debt restructuring if they were to support Sri Lanka. Bilateral partners such as China and Japan will also play a vital role in the entire process.

Given this situation and our slow approach to Economic reforms even after announcing debt restructuring, we will be left with a lot more debt to be paid. If we move at this pace, there is no doubt that we will have subsequent defaults even after restructuring, if we fail to boost economic growth. Therefore, the establishment of an independent debt office is extremely important. Our debt portfolio is diverse and expensive so highly skilled financial analysts should manage our debt in line with global trends. Following the dilution of our Civil Service, that level of skill is unfortunately not available in our public sector. Given the salary scale of the public sector we can’t expect talent with the calibre of skills of a fund manager to stay in the public sector. Simply put, a salary scale of LKR80,000 will not attract a fund manager who has to manage a few billion rupees worth of debts. Therefore, the independent public debt office should have a different salary scale (based on key performance indicators) and independent regulation if we are to have a sustainable problem for our debt crisis. We are where we are today due to our poor debt management. The “Common Minimum Programme” by the National Movement for Social Justice has indicated the same.

Furthermore, this crisis will inevitably impact many private enterprises and a record number of businesses will go bankrupt. In a market system it is unavoidable that while some companies succeed, others will fail. Our legal framework should allow the failed firms a faster exit so entrepreneurs can bounce back with a new business or otherwise utilise their time productively. Investing their energy and money on something productive instead of on an already failed business will inevitably affect the overall productivity and efficiency of the economy. Unfortunately, Sri Lanka does not have unified bankruptcy laws. So when a company fails, exit is not easy. More money, time & energy has to be invested to manage a bankruptcy as a result. There are some exceptions laid out as provisions in the Companies Act, but for most micro, small and medium enterprises - which are sole properties and partnerships - the absence of a bankruptcy law will cause severe repercussions. Sri Lanka should proactively think of these issues before the situation gets out of control.

Our policymakers should realise that the hunger and anger of the common man has created a volatile and flammable situation. There is no way for cricket or any other diversion to stop the righteous fury of a hungry man, so it is imperative that we bring about Economic reforms before a spark ignites the entire situation and pushes us deeper into crisis.

The opinions expressed are the author’s own views. They may not necessarily reflect the views of the Advocata Institute or anyone affiliated with the institute.

Economic reforms before constitutional reforms, please

Originally appeared on The Morning

By Dhananath Fernando

Kumar Sangakkara in his famous Colin Cowdrey Lecture at London’s hallowed Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC) in 2011 said: “In cricket, timing is everything.” Not only in cricket but in economics and politics too, timing is everything.

Unfortunately, Sri Lanka’s track record on “economic reforms” has been very poor and completely devoid of timing. We have been completely ignorant of the need for economic reform and things are now at a dire stage. Across the board, even the Government has conceded that things are not easy!

Sri Lanka is experiencing a second wave of Covid-19 and the continued imposition of curfew in parts of an important district such Gampaha, which is a key economic centre, is a cause for concern. The recent lockdowns also cover a free trade zone, the country’s main international airport, and many export-oriented factories. Hence, one cannot simply ignore the economic impact of this health crisis.

Our economy contracted by 1.6% in the first quarter of 2019 and the second quarter data is yet to be released. On the positive side, our exports have exceeded the $ 1 billion mark in September and our remittances have increased by 28% YoY (year-on-year). While this increase in remittances is a good sign, this sudden increase may be due to workers sending home their final savings due to job losses. Another positive sign is that our stock market is performing well with about Rs. 5 billion turnover with more than 41,000 transactions, the highest since 2011. However, on the other hand, following Moody’s credit rating downgrade and even prior to that, the departure of foreign investors from the stock market can be observed, and our treasury bills have been undersubscribed as of late.

Unfortunately, with Covid-19 infections picking up again, it is unlikely that people will see further relief measures from the Government, as the Government’s finances are in a complicated situation; in fact, they are probably worse off than our household finances. Reopening the country for tourism will most likely be postponed, at least until the end of the first quarter of next year, and further moratoriums or government handouts may be unlikely, given that the budget deficit for 2021 is expected to be around 9% of GDP.

In this context, we have to admit that our economy cannot be fixed just by incremental reforms. Superficial changes or stopgap solutions will not help us reach where we aspire to be.

Unfortunately what we are seeing at the moment are attempts to micromanage what is essentially a macroeconomic problem, while serious core economic concerns are reaching a boiling point. Measures such as the reduction of tariff lines on a few consumable goods and allowing the importation of some ingredients for the production of incense sticks are just a couple of examples of ad hoc micromanagement of the macroeconomy. When a senior minister has to engage himself in a micro-task such as creating a tiny tariff reduction on just one HS (Harmonised System) code, it prevents them from prioritising the broader issues to navigate the economy at a time where the country is facing the unprecedented crisis of Covid-19.

A similar situation was reported to have occurred during the 1970s where the Minister of Finance had to go through a file every morning to evaluate the licence requests for the importation of motor vehicles. When a Finance Minister has to sit and supervise such a micro issue, it is obvious that many other policy priorities will be either ignored or mismanaged.

The World Bank predicted an economic contraction of about 6.7% for 2020 even before the emergence of the new wave of Covid infections, but mainstream conversation has been focused on constitutional reforms, particularly the 20th Amendment. It is true that people have provided a clear mandate for a new constitution, but our policymakers have to think of the timing of the new constitution and other constitutional reforms. The country and people’s needs and expectations have shifted, especially as the entire world is grappling with a pandemic. New needs and lifestyles have been created. Consumer and citizen behaviour and priorities have undergone a massive transformation. This doesn’t mean that the mandate for a new constitution is no longer valid, but the timing and focus being given to a new constitution has to be reconsidered. This matter could just as easily be taken up whenever the current crisis has been dealt with.

There is no doubt that our constitution is far from our expectations, but the brewing economic crisis (not just in Sri Lanka but across the world) requires 100 times greater focus for the economy to be put back on the right track.

The previous Government too was spending its energy on a new constitution without focusing on much-needed economic reforms. After spending significant time and resources during its tenure on a proposed constitution, it was ultimately not even presented to Parliament. Much-needed economic reforms were postponed and we ended up with 2.3% economic growth with stagnation in exports and foreign direct investments.

It is a political reality that there is a trade-off between constitutional reform and economic reform. Ultimately, for both constitutional reforms and economic reforms, one needs to sacrifice some political capital as, naturally, there is opposition to any type of reform. It all comes down to prioritising what reforms are urgent considering the internal and external environments.

Serious legal reforms can be carried out to positively affect businesses and the business climate before these planned constitutional reforms. As I have highlighted before in this column, Sri Lanka’s land regulations, regulations on micro and small enterprises, and employment regulations can be easily reformed to bring faster results. Age-old laws, regulations, and bureaucratic practices continue to hamper investment. Therefore, instead of a heavily energy-consuming constitutional reform process, we can focus on getting our economic fundamentals right. Creating competition and competitiveness is the way to go.

Over the years, while we have been discussing constitutional reforms, our regional peers have moved ahead of us, especially on the economic front. For example, Vietnam increased its exports from $ 50 billion to $ 250 billion from 2008 to 2018, while Sri Lanka’s performance improved only from $ 7.5 billion to $ 10 billion in the same period.

National Budget 2021

Now the Government has a golden opportunity to bring in a series of economic reforms through the upcoming national budget. A clear direction through serious reforms will bring back credibility to the Government and the economy, and send a positive signal to investors locally and globally. Sri Lanka’s economic problems have gone far beyond ad hoc fixing. Now it can only be fixed through macro reforms.

Then comes the question of what sort of reforms. In the world of business and economics, it is incentives that drive growth and innovation. It is by expanding markets and access to markets that growth can be achieved. It is through competition and by creating a level playing field that growing economies, including our regional peers, have achieved growth. So, for a market of 21 million people, our reforms have to be based on setting up proper incentives, connecting with other markets, and improving productivity for those who work hard and value-free exchange of goods and services.

Bringing in these macro changes before micromanagement has to be at the forefront of government policy. Unfortunately, we have no other alternative if we are serious about creating a prosperous country. Let’s hope that Sri Lanka will get its timing right at least this time and establish the right fundamentals for a competitive economy.

The opinions expressed are the author’s own views. They may not necessarily reflect the views of the Advocata Institute or anyone affiliated with the institute.