-By Financial affairs correspondent
(Lanka-e-News -28.Jan.2025, 10.30 PM) Sri Lanka has long been a nation of vibrant discourse, where opinions flow freely and voices rise in passionate debate. In recent times, a particular think tank, Advocata, and an individual named Murtaza, have emerged as self-proclaimed commentators on the country's fiscal policies. But this begs the question: how qualified are they to speak on such complex matters, and are their voices contributing to meaningful solutions or merely adding noise to an already difficult economic situation?
To begin with, Murtaza appears to be a businessman with roots in the tea export industry, a sector that has benefited historically from Sri Lanka’s favorable tax concessions. While there’s no harm in running a business, it’s important to distinguish between being an entrepreneur and being an economist with a solid understanding of fiscal policies.
Reports suggest that Murtaza’s ancestors migrated to Sri Lanka, leveraging the country's economic opportunities, including tax breaks. Yet, with no visible academic or professional credentials in economics or taxation, Murtaza has taken it upon himself to lecture the National People's Power (NPP) government on fiscal policy. The question that arises is simple: what qualifies Murtaza to comment on Sri Lanka’s fiscal challenges?
Fiscal policy—the management of a nation’s revenue, spending, and debt—is not a subject for the uninitiated. It requires decades of study, expertise, and experience. Drafting tax policies or restructuring national finances involves intricate knowledge of economic principles, public administration, and global market trends.
Murtaza, with his background in running a business, might understand basic bookkeeping or tax compliance for a private entity. However, this experience does not translate to expertise in managing the fiscal policy of an entire country. Experts in taxation, for instance, often dedicate 30 to 40 years to studying, implementing, and drafting complex legal frameworks. Such individuals are steeped in the nuances of tax law, international treaties, and economic impact assessments.
It is one thing to run a tea export company; it is quite another to craft policies that affect millions of citizens. Simply put, expertise in one area does not automatically grant authority in another. Murtaza’s lack of credentials raises doubts about the value of his opinions on Sri Lanka’s fiscal challenges.
Similarly, the role of Advocata as a think tank must be scrutinized. A think tank’s primary purpose is to contribute to public discourse through rigorous research, evidence-based analysis, and informed recommendations. However, when such institutions fail to demonstrate academic rigor or rely on individuals with questionable expertise, their credibility comes into question.
Advocata’s commentary on Sri Lanka’s economic policies often appears to be long on criticism but short on actionable solutions. While criticism is a vital component of a healthy democracy, it must be constructive and grounded in facts. Advocata’s positions frequently come across as ideological rather than evidence-based, raising concerns about whether it truly represents a voice of reason or merely serves as an echo chamber for individuals like Murtaza.
Sri Lanka is not a country that lacks intellectual capacity or expertise. The nation boasts a wealth of highly educated professionals, from economists and tax experts to legal scholars and public administrators, who are more than capable of addressing the country’s economic issues.
The Sri Lankan people have demonstrated resilience in the face of numerous challenges, from civil conflict to natural disasters and economic crises. This resilience is not born out of ignorance but rather a deep understanding of their country’s strengths and weaknesses.
For individuals like Murtaza, who may lack a nuanced understanding of Sri Lanka’s socio-economic fabric, it is crucial to recognize that their external observations are not necessarily more valuable than the lived experiences and expertise of Sri Lankan professionals.
Murtaza’s approach of publicly advising the government on matters he seems underqualified to discuss raises an important point: when does free speech turn into uninformed interference? While anyone has the right to voice their opinion, it is equally important to ensure that such opinions do not mislead or misdirect public discourse.
As the saying goes, “It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.” If Murtaza lacks the credentials, research, or understanding to contribute meaningfully to fiscal discussions, he might do well to step back and let those with the necessary expertise lead the conversation.
Moreover, Murtaza’s comments, combined with his business background and ancestral migration story, risk alienating a public already wary of external influences and opportunistic actors. Sri Lanka’s kindness should not be mistaken for weakness. The country has survived and thrived in the face of adversity, and it does not require unsolicited advice from those with “tiny, tiny, tiny” knowledge, as one might put it.
Criticism of any government is a cornerstone of democracy, but it must come from a place of informed analysis. Sri Lanka’s economic problems are complex, stemming from years of mismanagement, global challenges, and systemic inefficiencies. Solving these problems requires collaboration between qualified experts, policymakers, and the public.
What the country does not need is uninformed criticism from individuals who lack the credentials or experience to offer practical solutions. Whether it is Murtaza or any other self-styled commentator, the principle remains the same: if you lack the expertise, it is better to listen and learn rather than speak out of turn.
Murtaza, if you truly wish to contribute to Sri Lanka’s progress, consider investing in meaningful research, collaborating with qualified economists, or supporting initiatives that address the country’s pressing challenges. The same applies to Advocata. If you want to be taken seriously as a think tank, focus on evidence-based analysis and avoid being perceived as a platform for armchair critics.
Sri Lanka is a nation of educated, resilient people who are fully capable of navigating their economic challenges. What the country needs is not unsolicited advice but constructive collaboration and informed dialogue.
In the meantime, Murtaza, it might be best to focus on your tea business and let Sri Lanka’s qualified experts handle fiscal policy. After all, running a successful export business is no small feat—it is something to be proud of. But perhaps it’s best to leave the economics to the economists.
---------------------------
by (2025-01-28 17:17:03)
Read 28206 Times
Leave a Reply
0 discussion on this news