Features
Perils to sustained growth
by Dr. G. Usvatte-aratchi
In 2013, Professor A. D. V. de S. Indraratne, the illustrious professor of Economics at Colombo, who was President of the Sri Lanka Economic Association, (they hold the 2023 sessions soon), along with his Committee, was prescient that the fiscal policies of the government might end in disaster and decided to devote the 2013 Sessions to explore ‘perils to sustained growth’ in the economy. The distinguished scholar and diplomat Jayantha Dhanapala was the Guest of Honour. I delivered the Keynote Address. The subject of my lecture was ‘Perils to Sustained Growth’.
Most economists then were troubled by the direction of fiscal and monetary policies at that time. They did not know for certain but were fearful that the massive public works that were undertaken with Chinese loans would not yield the output with which to service those loans. The greater part of the loans was to pay for burgeoning current expenditure. The government would hear none of those and went on with policies of large budget deficits.
A few weeks back, in a press release, the then President and Finance Minister and later Prime Minister of governments, shockingly took credit for reducing the tax revenue of the government year after year. It was shocking because whilst he reduced tax revenue of the government year by year, total government expenditure kept on growing. In a situation where tax revenue comprised more than 98 percent of total revenue of government, rising government expenditure had to be funded at the cost of a rapidly rising debt burden.
The debt from foreign sources had to be serviced with rising export income. Most alarmingly, the proportion of exports to GDP kept falling rapidly. Consequently, a budgetary crisis and a balance of international payments crisis would follow, as the day the night. It precipitated 2021-2022, when a President completely illiterate in economic policy reduced government revenue.
At the same time, he raised the demand for imports with agricultural policies that cut down the domestic food output. The fall in the output of export crops reduced import capacity. Little surprise that in 2022, the government had few choices but to declare bankruptcy.
In my Keynote Address in 2013, I laid bare the sequence of these likely events. I was surprised that policymakers took no notice of the clear warnings presented to them. I was shocked when the then President and Finance Minister, in late 2023, took credit for having actively contributed to that process of decay.
I had laid by that lecture because it was too long and ‘academish’ to be published in The Island, my usual outlet. (Most members of SLEA have higher degrees in economics.) There was no Review in Colombo that may have carried it. It was far too concentrated on Sri Lanka to be published in an international publication. However, after President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s claim, a few days ago, I thought I would seek the advice of the Editor of this newspaper on whether he and his readers would suffer the burden of reading that lecture. With his consent, I decided to publish it.
The text of the speech:
‘And so, we have gone on, and so we will go on, puzzled and prospering beyond example in the history of man.’Thomas Jefferson, 1812.How amazingly right Jefferson was: ‘puzzled and prospering beyond example in the history of man’! Yes, puzzled despite all the ingenuity of all economists since Adam Smith.
The central importance of sustained growth
The economic history of some parts of the world, during the last three hundred years, has been one of phenomenal economic growth. These parts include Europe, North America, Australasia and Japan. In 1,700 all people whether in Africa, Asia, America or Europe were more or less equally poor with a per capita income of about $700 per year at 1985 prices, less than $2 dollars per day. During the next 300 years these economies prospered ‘beyond example in the history of man’.
Much more recently we have had a large part of Asia, including China, Taiwan, India, Malaysia, and South Korea, Thailand and the two small economies of Hong Kong and Singapore grow at phenomenally high rates. In Latin America, after some spectacular growth at the turn of the 20th century, it is only recently that some countries have experienced sustained rapid economic growth. Africa is a late comer and there are signs that sub-Saharan countries finally may have begun to grow.
Sri Lanka has had a record of slow growth, ever since National Accounts began to be estimated but the last few years have shown an upturn in rates of growth. These rates of economic growth shorn of the fluff that the Central Bank tries to cover it with are not to be cavilled at. Your question at this session is how that higher rate of growth can be sustained, at least in the short term.
Let us not underestimate the central importance of fast economic growth to raise levels of living. C. Sivasubramonian (2000), [The National Income of India in the Twentieth Century, The Oxford University Press, New Delhi] estimated that the growth rate of GDP per capita 1901 to 1946-7 in India was 0.9 percent per year and the consequent rise in the GDP per capita was 0.1 percent per year.
At that rate you would have needed 700 years for GDP per capita to double! Contrast that with the experience between 2000-2001 and 2010-2011 when per capita GDP grew at 6.0 percent per annum. [These numbers are from Jean Dreze and Amartya Sen (2013), An uncertain Glory, India and its Contradictions, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ]. If that rate of growth were sustained over 35 years, living standards would rise eight times during the lifetime of an individual. However, recently we have seen perils to those high rates of growth.
‘… bang, confidence collapses, lenders disappear, and a crash hits.’
Perils to sustained growth have been studied over a long period of time. In the 20th century itself it was a major field of study. In those times this subject went under the title Trade Cycle. The last volume I remember is Robin Matthews’ ‘The Trade Cycle’ that came out in the year after I graduated. Wesley C. Mitchell’s ‘What Happens during Business Cycles’ had come out beyond the Atlantic much earlier in 1951. The subject is now studied as ‘Crises’, much of that literature coming out in America.
The most recent major study is Reinhart’s and Rogoff’s ‘This Time Is Different’ [2009], in which they studied debt default, whether domestic or foreign, which brought about crises that broke the process of sustained growth. Disruptions to growth arising from such crises are now the major threat to sustained growth, at least in the short and medium terms.
It was Reinhart’s and Rogoff’s conclusion after careful study that ‘… failure to recognize the precariousness and fickleness of confidence, especially in cases in which large short-term debts need to be rolled over continuously, is the key factor that gives rise to the ‘this-time-is-different syndrome’. Highly-indebted governments, banks, corporations or households can seem to be merrily rolling along for an extended period, when bang, confidence collapses, lenders disappear, and a crash hits.’ As you know this happened in the US and Europe in 2007-2008 and it almost took place in India in July-August this year.
The development of crises in the modern sense [the term has a respected longer-term usage] started in the 1970s. President Nixon freed the dollar from the price of gold in 1973. Petroleum exporting countries amassed large volumes of savings looking for financial investment opportunities. So was born the phenomenon of ‘petro-dollars’.
As emerging developing countries grew fast on the strength of exports, they amassed huge surpluses on the external account which formed sovereign wealth funds. The sum of such sovereign funds now probably exceeds $ 15 trillion sufficient to swamp any probable attempt to defend a rate of exchange of a country against adverse movements. And the electronic transfer of funds made it possible to jump from one market to another to profit from even small differences in interest rates, giving a new meaning to D. H. Robertson’s 1926 terms ‘money on wings’. Market opportunities became well known to advisors with the incredibly rapid transfer of information.
With these developments, major economic policies of countries, except those whose currency was acceptable for payment anywhere in the world and those others with huge exchange reserves, found their major domestic policies, ransom to market forces in international capital markets. India with $285 billion in foreign exchange reserves dared not defend the rupee against capital flight in mid-2013. Don’t take seriously the bravado here that $7 billion can do anything to protect the Sri Lanka rupee against even a small shift of short-term capital out of the country.
We spend more than we earn
I have used that extended quotation in the previous but one paragraph because the fundamental problem in our economy is that our economy spends more than it earns [GDP]. That gap is closed with resources from overseas. [This is explained extra-ordinarily well in Arvind Panagariya [2008], India, The Emerging Giant, Oxford University Press, Oxford].
A part of this gap is closed with savings of citizens of this country working overseas and remitting those savings to their home country, with foreign investments directly in the economy, another part with spare resources from accumulated foreign savings if any, and, in its absence, loans from overseas. In our case, in the domestic economy, the private sector does not invest all that it saves.
The government borrows a part of private savings to cover its own expenses. The balance savings it needs are borrowed from overseas. Our economy during the last five years has been accumulating foreign savings by borrowing from abroad, mainly to hedge against fast movements of short-term capital which comprise a part of our national debt. The flow of debt accumulates to form the foreign debt stock of the country. That part of the foreign debt owed by government has been high and fairly stable over the last few years.
To foreign markets and the short end of the market
There has been a marked shift to borrow from overseas and to borrow in the short term. This drive has been motivated by the need to keep interest on government debt in check because interest payments on government debt like all other government expenditure must come out of the Consolidated Fund to which all receipts of government in turn are credited.
Interest rates overseas continue to be lower than at home and interest rates at the short end are usually lower than interest rates at the long end. But these shifts to foreign sources and the short end itself are themselves fraught with serious risks. Any rise in interest rates in other markets shifts money sitting here short term immediately to fly to those other markets. Any loss of confidence in direction of domestic economic policy has the same consequences. To that degree, domestic economic policy is ransom to foreign investors.
Our governments have spent more than they collected in revenue for many years. In 2012, the ratio of total revenue of government to GDP was 13 percent and of total expenditure to GDP 20 percent. The ratio of government revenue to GDP has fallen consistently for several years. There has been some check on the growth of public expenditure, obviously not so severely as to bring down considerably the need to borrow from overseas. In any case, it is hard to make a case for cutting down government expenditure in this economy.
We know too much about the dreadful neglect of education and health in the aggregate and the dire need for reconstruction and development both in the Eastern and Northern Provinces and in the plantations in the central region. There must be immense restraint on the desire of an essentially populist government to control government expenditure in this manner.
Government cannot really cut down expenditure anymore without raising the ire of the public to boiling point. We are too close to what happened in Greece and Spain to risk that. Government must seriously consider why government expenditure on defence and public order and safety must remain at 15 percent of the total both in 2009 and 2012.
It certainly cannot raise government expenditure without first raising government revenue. It is the same populist inclinations which make it hard for government to tax people on whose vote it depends to win elections. Government has taxed heavily consumption of high-income groups. Without taxing the general public, it is in no position to raise revenue to pay for higher expenditure. And a populist government will not do it. That is the point at which long term growth becomes hostage to short term stability.
(To be concluded)
by Dr Gotabhya Ranasinghe
Senior Consultant Cardiologist
National Hospital Sri Lanka
When we sought a meeting with Hon Dr. Ramesh Pathirana, Minister of Health, he graciously cleared his busy schedule to accommodate us. Renowned for his attentive listening and deep understanding, Minister Pathirana is dedicated to advancing the health sector. His openness and transparency exemplify the qualities of an exemplary politician and minister.
Dr. Palitha Mahipala, the current Health Secretary, demonstrates both commendable enthusiasm and unwavering support. This combination of attributes makes him a highly compatible colleague for the esteemed Minister of Health.
Our discussion centered on a project that has been in the works for the past 30 years, one that no other minister had managed to advance.
Minister Pathirana, however, recognized the project’s significance and its potential to revolutionize care for heart patients.
The project involves the construction of a state-of-the-art facility at the premises of the National Hospital Colombo. The project’s location within the premises of the National Hospital underscores its importance and relevance to the healthcare infrastructure of the nation.
This facility will include a cardiology building and a tertiary care center, equipped with the latest technology to handle and treat all types of heart-related conditions and surgeries.
Securing funding was a major milestone for this initiative. Minister Pathirana successfully obtained approval for a $40 billion loan from the Asian Development Bank. With the funding in place, the foundation stone is scheduled to be laid in September this year, and construction will begin in January 2025.
This project guarantees a consistent and uninterrupted supply of stents and related medications for heart patients. As a result, patients will have timely access to essential medical supplies during their treatment and recovery. By securing these critical resources, the project aims to enhance patient outcomes, minimize treatment delays, and maintain the highest standards of cardiac care.
Upon its fruition, this monumental building will serve as a beacon of hope and healing, symbolizing the unwavering dedication to improving patient outcomes and fostering a healthier society.We anticipate a future marked by significant progress and positive outcomes in Sri Lanka’s cardiovascular treatment landscape within the foreseeable timeframe.
by Fr. Emmanuel Fernando, OMI
Jesuit Fr. Aloysius Pieris (affectionately called Fr. Aloy) celebrated his 90th birthday on April 9, 2024 and I, as the editor of our Oblate Journal, THE MISSIONARY OBLATE had gone to press by that time. Immediately I decided to publish an article, appreciating the untiring selfless services he continues to offer for inter-Faith dialogue, the renewal of the Catholic Church, his concern for the poor and the suffering Sri Lankan masses and to me, the present writer.
It was in 1988, when I was appointed Director of the Oblate Scholastics at Ampitiya by the then Oblate Provincial Fr. Anselm Silva, that I came to know Fr. Aloy more closely. Knowing well his expertise in matters spiritual, theological, Indological and pastoral, and with the collaborative spirit of my companion-formators, our Oblate Scholastics were sent to Tulana, the Research and Encounter Centre, Kelaniya, of which he is the Founder-Director, for ‘exposure-programmes’ on matters spiritual, biblical, theological and pastoral. Some of these dimensions according to my view and that of my companion-formators, were not available at the National Seminary, Ampitiya.
Ever since that time, our Oblate formators/ accompaniers at the Oblate Scholasticate, Ampitiya , have continued to send our Oblate Scholastics to Tulana Centre for deepening their insights and convictions regarding matters needed to serve the people in today’s context. Fr. Aloy also had tried very enthusiastically with the Oblate team headed by Frs. Oswald Firth and Clement Waidyasekara to begin a Theologate, directed by the Religious Congregations in Sri Lanka, for the contextual formation/ accompaniment of their members. It should very well be a desired goal of the Leaders / Provincials of the Religious Congregations.
Besides being a formator/accompanier at the Oblate Scholasticate, I was entrusted also with the task of editing and publishing our Oblate journal, ‘The Missionary Oblate’. To maintain the quality of the journal I continue to depend on Fr. Aloy for his thought-provoking and stimulating articles on Biblical Spirituality, Biblical Theology and Ecclesiology. I am very grateful to him for his generous assistance. Of late, his writings on renewal of the Church, initiated by Pope St. John XX111 and continued by Pope Francis through the Synodal path, published in our Oblate journal, enable our readers to focus their attention also on the needed renewal in the Catholic Church in Sri Lanka. Fr. Aloy appreciated very much the Synodal path adopted by the Jesuit Pope Francis for the renewal of the Church, rooted very much on prayerful discernment. In my Religious and presbyteral life, Fr.Aloy continues to be my spiritual animator / guide and ongoing formator / acccompanier.
Fr. Aloysius Pieris, BA Hons (Lond), LPh (SHC, India), STL (PFT, Naples), PhD (SLU/VC), ThD (Tilburg), D.Ltt (KU), has been one of the eminent Asian theologians well recognized internationally and one who has lectured and held visiting chairs in many universities both in the West and in the East. Many members of Religious Congregations from Asian countries have benefited from his lectures and guidance in the East Asian Pastoral Institute (EAPI) in Manila, Philippines. He had been a Theologian consulted by the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences for many years. During his professorship at the Gregorian University in Rome, he was called to be a member of a special group of advisers on other religions consulted by Pope Paul VI.
Fr. Aloy is the author of more than 30 books and well over 500 Research Papers. Some of his books and articles have been translated and published in several countries. Among those books, one can find the following: 1) The Genesis of an Asian Theology of Liberation (An Autobiographical Excursus on the Art of Theologising in Asia, 2) An Asian Theology of Liberation, 3) Providential Timeliness of Vatican 11 (a long-overdue halt to a scandalous millennium, 4) Give Vatican 11 a chance, 5) Leadership in the Church, 6) Relishing our faith in working for justice (Themes for study and discussion), 7) A Message meant mainly, not exclusively for Jesuits (Background information necessary for helping Francis renew the Church), 8) Lent in Lanka (Reflections and Resolutions, 9) Love meets wisdom (A Christian Experience of Buddhism, 10) Fire and Water 11) God’s Reign for God’s poor, 12) Our Unhiddden Agenda (How we Jesuits work, pray and form our men). He is also the Editor of two journals, Vagdevi, Journal of Religious Reflection and Dialogue, New Series.
Fr. Aloy has a BA in Pali and Sanskrit from the University of London and a Ph.D in Buddhist Philosophy from the University of Sri Lankan, Vidyodaya Campus. On Nov. 23, 2019, he was awarded the prestigious honorary Doctorate of Literature (D.Litt) by the Chancellor of the University of Kelaniya, the Most Venerable Welamitiyawe Dharmakirthi Sri Kusala Dhamma Thera.
Fr. Aloy continues to be a promoter of Gospel values and virtues. Justice as a constitutive dimension of love and social concern for the downtrodden masses are very much noted in his life and work. He had very much appreciated the commitment of the late Fr. Joseph (Joe) Fernando, the National Director of the Social and Economic Centre (SEDEC) for the poor.
In Sri Lanka, a few religious Congregations – the Good Shepherd Sisters, the Christian Brothers, the Marist Brothers and the Oblates – have invited him to animate their members especially during their Provincial Congresses, Chapters and International Conferences. The mainline Christian Churches also have sought his advice and followed his seminars. I, for one, regret very much, that the Sri Lankan authorities of the Catholic Church –today’s Hierarchy—- have not sought Fr.
Aloy’s expertise for the renewal of the Catholic Church in Sri Lanka and thus have not benefited from the immense store of wisdom and insight that he can offer to our local Church while the Sri Lankan bishops who governed the Catholic church in the immediate aftermath of the Second Vatican Council (Edmund Fernando OMI, Anthony de Saram, Leo Nanayakkara OSB, Frank Marcus Fernando, Paul Perera,) visited him and consulted him on many matters. Among the Tamil Bishops, Bishop Rayappu Joseph was keeping close contact with him and Bishop J. Deogupillai hosted him and his team visiting him after the horrible Black July massacre of Tamils.
Sri Lanka-Singapore Free Trade Agreement
By Gomi Senadhira
senadhiragomi@gmail.com
“You might tell fairy tales, but the progress of a country cannot be achieved through such narratives. A country cannot be developed by making false promises. The country moved backward because of the electoral promises made by political parties throughout time. We have witnessed that the ultimate result of this is the country becoming bankrupt. Unfortunately, many segments of the population have not come to realize this yet.” – President Ranil Wickremesinghe, 2024 Budget speech
Any Sri Lankan would agree with the above words of President Wickremesinghe on the false promises our politicians and officials make and the fairy tales they narrate which bankrupted this country. So, to understand this, let’s look at one such fairy tale with lots of false promises; Ranil Wickremesinghe’s greatest achievement in the area of international trade and investment promotion during the Yahapalana period, Sri Lanka-Singapore Free Trade Agreement (SLSFTA).
It is appropriate and timely to do it now as Finance Minister Wickremesinghe has just presented to parliament a bill on the National Policy on Economic Transformation which includes the establishment of an Office for International Trade and the Sri Lanka Institute of Economics and International Trade.
Was SLSFTA a “Cleverly negotiated Free Trade Agreement” as stated by the (former) Minister of Development Strategies and International Trade Malik Samarawickrama during the Parliamentary Debate on the SLSFTA in July 2018, or a colossal blunder covered up with lies, false promises, and fairy tales? After SLSFTA was signed there were a number of fairy tales published on this agreement by the Ministry of Development Strategies and International, Institute of Policy Studies, and others.
However, for this article, I would like to limit my comments to the speech by Minister Samarawickrama during the Parliamentary Debate, and the two most important areas in the agreement which were covered up with lies, fairy tales, and false promises, namely: revenue loss for Sri Lanka and Investment from Singapore. On the other important area, “Waste products dumping” I do not want to comment here as I have written extensively on the issue.
1. The revenue loss
During the Parliamentary Debate in July 2018, Minister Samarawickrama stated “…. let me reiterate that this FTA with Singapore has been very cleverly negotiated by us…. The liberalisation programme under this FTA has been carefully designed to have the least impact on domestic industry and revenue collection. We have included all revenue sensitive items in the negative list of items which will not be subject to removal of tariff. Therefore, 97.8% revenue from Customs duty is protected. Our tariff liberalisation will take place over a period of 12-15 years! In fact, the revenue earned through tariffs on goods imported from Singapore last year was Rs. 35 billion.
The revenue loss for over the next 15 years due to the FTA is only Rs. 733 million– which when annualised, on average, is just Rs. 51 million. That is just 0.14% per year! So anyone who claims the Singapore FTA causes revenue loss to the Government cannot do basic arithmetic! Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, I call on my fellow members of this House – don’t mislead the public with baseless criticism that is not grounded in facts. Don’t look at petty politics and use these issues for your own political survival.”
I was surprised to read the minister’s speech because an article published in January 2018 in “The Straits Times“, based on information released by the Singaporean Negotiators stated, “…. With the FTA, tariff savings for Singapore exports are estimated to hit $10 million annually“.
As the annual tariff savings (that is the revenue loss for Sri Lanka) calculated by the Singaporean Negotiators, Singaporean $ 10 million (Sri Lankan rupees 1,200 million in 2018) was way above the rupees’ 733 million revenue loss for 15 years estimated by the Sri Lankan negotiators, it was clear to any observer that one of the parties to the agreement had not done the basic arithmetic!
Six years later, according to a report published by “The Morning” newspaper, speaking at the Committee on Public Finance (COPF) on 7th May 2024, Mr Samarawickrama’s chief trade negotiator K.J. Weerasinghehad had admitted “…. that forecasted revenue loss for the Government of Sri Lanka through the Singapore FTA is Rs. 450 million in 2023 and Rs. 1.3 billion in 2024.”
If these numbers are correct, as tariff liberalisation under the SLSFTA has just started, we will pass Rs 2 billion very soon. Then, the question is how Sri Lanka’s trade negotiators made such a colossal blunder. Didn’t they do their basic arithmetic? If they didn’t know how to do basic arithmetic they should have at least done their basic readings. For example, the headline of the article published in The Straits Times in January 2018 was “Singapore, Sri Lanka sign FTA, annual savings of $10m expected”.
Anyway, as Sri Lanka’s chief negotiator reiterated at the COPF meeting that “…. since 99% of the tariffs in Singapore have zero rates of duty, Sri Lanka has agreed on 80% tariff liberalisation over a period of 15 years while expecting Singapore investments to address the imbalance in trade,” let’s turn towards investment.
Investment from Singapore
In July 2018, speaking during the Parliamentary Debate on the FTA this is what Minister Malik Samarawickrama stated on investment from Singapore, “Already, thanks to this FTA, in just the past two-and-a-half months since the agreement came into effect we have received a proposal from Singapore for investment amounting to $ 14.8 billion in an oil refinery for export of petroleum products. In addition, we have proposals for a steel manufacturing plant for exports ($ 1 billion investment), flour milling plant ($ 50 million), sugar refinery ($ 200 million). This adds up to more than $ 16.05 billion in the pipeline on these projects alone.
And all of these projects will create thousands of more jobs for our people. In principle approval has already been granted by the BOI and the investors are awaiting the release of land the environmental approvals to commence the project.
I request the Opposition and those with vested interests to change their narrow-minded thinking and join us to develop our country. We must always look at what is best for the whole community, not just the few who may oppose. We owe it to our people to courageously take decisions that will change their lives for the better.”
According to the media report I quoted earlier, speaking at the Committee on Public Finance (COPF) Chief Negotiator Weerasinghe has admitted that Sri Lanka was not happy with overall Singapore investments that have come in the past few years in return for the trade liberalisation under the Singapore-Sri Lanka Free Trade Agreement. He has added that between 2021 and 2023 the total investment from Singapore had been around $162 million!
What happened to those projects worth $16 billion negotiated, thanks to the SLSFTA, in just the two-and-a-half months after the agreement came into effect and approved by the BOI? I do not know about the steel manufacturing plant for exports ($ 1 billion investment), flour milling plant ($ 50 million) and sugar refinery ($ 200 million).
However, story of the multibillion-dollar investment in the Petroleum Refinery unfolded in a manner that would qualify it as the best fairy tale with false promises presented by our politicians and the officials, prior to 2019 elections.
Though many Sri Lankans got to know, through the media which repeatedly highlighted a plethora of issues surrounding the project and the questionable credentials of the Singaporean investor, the construction work on the Mirrijiwela Oil Refinery along with the cement factory began on the24th of March 2019 with a bang and Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and his ministers along with the foreign and local dignitaries laid the foundation stones.
That was few months before the 2019 Presidential elections. Inaugurating the construction work Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe said the projects will create thousands of job opportunities in the area and surrounding districts.
The oil refinery, which was to be built over 200 acres of land, with the capacity to refine 200,000 barrels of crude oil per day, was to generate US$7 billion of exports and create 1,500 direct and 3,000 indirect jobs. The construction of the refinery was to be completed in 44 months. Four years later, in August 2023 the Cabinet of Ministers approved the proposal presented by President Ranil Wickremesinghe to cancel the agreement with the investors of the refinery as the project has not been implemented! Can they explain to the country how much money was wasted to produce that fairy tale?
It is obvious that the President, ministers, and officials had made huge blunders and had deliberately misled the public and the parliament on the revenue loss and potential investment from SLSFTA with fairy tales and false promises.
As the president himself said, a country cannot be developed by making false promises or with fairy tales and these false promises and fairy tales had bankrupted the country. “Unfortunately, many segments of the population have not come to realize this yet”.
(The writer, a specialist and an activist on trade and development issues . )
US sports envoys to Lanka to champion youth development
Rahuman questions sudden cancellation of leave of CEB employees
