Former Economic Reforms Minister Milinda Moragoda who was a live wire in the peace process between the UNF government and the LTTE spoke to the Daily Mirror on a range of issues including his decision to resign his cabinet portfolio that drew protests from his own ranks. He maintained his party was more moderate when compared with the UPFA and called for greater moderation and a national identity.

Question: Your decision to resign your Cabinet portfolio drew some criticism and even your own colleagues referred to it as a publicity stunt and accused you of breaching collective responsibility. How do you justify your decision?

Answer: As we know the term 'collective responsibility' is borrowed from the UK and even there today we see individual ministers and parliamentarians resigning from their posts over policy and personal issues.

Before taking the decision to resign from the Cabinet portfolio, I consulted the prime minister. And he approved it.

Having spent the major part of the last two years to get international support both moral and financial, I had a sense of frustration following the scrapping of the deputy ministry of Policy and Planning.

And I felt that in a caretaker government there was very little that a Minister of Economic Reforms can do.

All these factors combined with my desire to contest elections as an ordinary candidate, made me take this decision.

Everybody is entitled to their interpretation of my actions and as for my own judgement on this, my conscience is clear.

Q: This election comes at a time when both the majority Buddhists and minority Hindus, Muslims and Christians are showing a great sense of insecurity and trying to go back to their roots. How do you see this scenario?

A: Identity seems to be the issue at hand and the solution can only be given by moderates, who can address and reach out to all these groups.

We go for the election at a time when there is Pongu Thamil by the Hindus, Tableeq movement by Muslims and also a certain degree of awakening by Christian groups though not so much by the Catholics.

The efforts by the minority ethnic and religious groups to assert their identity have given rise to many insecurities among the majority Buddhists. And today we have Buddhist monks organized as political parties and contesting elections.

This is the strongest evidence that we have reached a crisis point. The political role of the clergy should have been restricted to advising rulers.

What we need today is moderation and emphasis on the national identity. I am not saying that we should undermine the importance of our religions and races.

Just have a look at India, how people belonging to diverse ethnic groups finally emphasize the Indian identity.

And the BJP under Prime Minister Vajpayee has today evolved to be one strongly representing this multi-ethnic multi-cultural identity and one takes the country to globalization with the slogan 'India shines'.

Unfortunately we have so far failed to reach that point. The victory of the moderates over the extremists at this election is essential to ensure that all communities feel secure.

Q: So are you saying that the UNP represents moderation and that the UPFA stands for extremism?

A: The UNP definitely stands for moderation and diversity. It is the main political party in the country and in a way it is the father of all parties here.

As for the Alliance it is too premature to say as to what exactly they stand for. It is in the formative stage. The rhetoric of different groups within the Alliance is such that is it very difficult to say where they sit. So we have to wait for some time to judge their ideological position.

Q: The general impression created is that the UNP is for secularism and the SLFP led alliances are more for chauvinism notwithstanding the minority allies. Do you think this is a fair judgement?

A: Just as in the case of the main parties in other countries, even in ours it looks as if we have moved in this direction. It is Robin Cook, the former Leader of Commons who said that now there are no lefts and rights but only chauvinists and cosmopolitans.

Although the word cosmopolitan has many connotations, in general terms, you can say that the UNP is cosmopolitan. And to a certain extent in the past SLFP-led alliances have been chauvinistic. But as for the new alliance we have to reserve judgement.

Q: Do you consider chauvinism bad?

A: Any form of extremism is bad. And therefore chauvinism is also bad especially in a multi-ethnic and multi-religious society.

Q: As of now the JVP slogans are more pronounced than those of the SLFP. Do you think there will be a dissipation of the SLFP following the alliance with the JVP?

A: It can be the other way round. We saw how the leftist Trotskite parties lost their clout after being part of SLFP alliances. There is no guarantee that it will not happen to the JVP.

Q: There has been a setback in the organizing of the UNP election campaign this time and many attribute this to the absence of Gamini Athukorale. Do you think this will be a handicap for the UNP?

A: There is no doubt about the fact that Gamini's absence is felt by all of us. But then I also feel that we have passed the era where we could convince the voters and attract voters through tamashas.

The electorate is mature. Mass rallies and meetings which were part and parcel of an election campaign in the past, are no longer essential. People make their judgements going by past performances, ideologies and other important features of political parties.

Q: So are you convinced that given the past performances of the UNP-led government and its political ideology the UNP will come back to power even without mass rallies?

A: Yes.

Q: You once said that if six out of ten projects by a government succeed then that can be termed as fairly good performance. On a scale of ten where do you place the UNP's last two years' performances in the economic and peace fronts?

A: In both cases something around 7.5.

Q: There have been criticisms over the manner in which the peace process was managed by the UNP. Among them is the one that the ceasefire agreement was drafted without consulting the President. As somebody actively involved in the peace process what are your comments?

A: All I have to say is that Prime Minister Wickremesinghe did his best given the circumstances that included cohabitation rancours. Managing a peace process is indeed a very difficult task and you have to be in it to realize that.

We have managed to silence the guns after two decades of war and the ceasefire has been in force for the last two years. That itself is an achievement. I am not saying that everything was perfect. But we did our utmost in trying circumstances. It was the late President R. Premadasa who said that the prime minister is like a peon.

And all I have to say is that the peon has done extremely well.