Features
Sir Waitialingam Duraiswamy
Extracted From All Experience: Essays and reflections by Sam Wijesinha, 2001.
The State Council created under the Donoughmore Constitution had its first meeting on July 7th, 1931. It ran its full term and was dissolved on December 7th, 1935.The elections to the Second State Council were concluded on March 7th, 1936. Of the fifty seats for which nominations were received seven returned uncontested members, viz.
Bandaranaike Mr.SWRD for Veyangoda
Corea Mr.GCS for Chilaw
Duraiswamy Mr.Waitialingam for Kayts
Freeman Mr.HR for Anuradhapura
Jayatilaka Sir DB for Kelaniya
Kotalawela Col JL for Kurunagala
Senanayake Mr DS for Minuvangoda
On March 17th at the first meeting of the Council three persons were nominated for the post of Speaker. On the first ballot the result was:
Mr. Waitialingam Duraiswamy 27 votes
Mr. Francis de Zoysa KC. 17 votes
Mr. Charles Batuwantudawa. 14 votes
The third candidate was eliminated, and there was another ballot between the first two which resulted in:
Mr. Waitialingam Duraiswamy 29 votes
Mr. Francis de Zoysa KC 29 votes
Since both had equal votes there had to be a third ballot on which finally a Speaker was chosen:
Mr. Waitialingam Duraiswamy 30 votes
Mr. Francis de Zoysa KC 28 votes
So Mr. Duraiswamy, the Member for Kayts, was elected Speaker. It was a remarkable tribute that, in a Legislature of 39 Sinhalese and 19 others, a Tamil from Jaffna was elected to this prestigious post. Of the other six members who were uncontested, five were elected Ministers. The sixth Mr. Freeman, the former British Civil Servant who was elected the member from Anuradhapura, remained a back bencher.
Who was this remarkable member from Jaffna who defeated Francis de Zoysa, one of the foremost statesmen of this country, an eminently distinguished lawyer, a King’s Counsel and President if the Ceylon National Congress in 1925-26?
Sir Waitialingam Duraiswamy (he was knighted in 1936 was born in Velanai, an island on the west of the Jaffna peninsula, on June 8th, 1874. He was a son of Ayampillai Waitialingam who had spent some time in Malaya. Young Duraiswamy had his education at Jaffna College, Vaddukoddai where he excelled both in studies and in sports. Following the Jaffna tradition of seeking education whatever the difficulties, he was then sent across to India and joined Presidency College in Calcutta University. In 1897 he graduated with double honors in Mathematics and Science. He had the distinction of studying under Professor PC Roy and Jagdish Chandra Bose.
Returning to Ceylon, he joins the Colombo Law College and was admitted as an Advocate in 1902. He worked in the chambers HJC Pereira KC, who was later President of the Ceylon National Congress. HJC, as he was popularly known was not only a leading lawyer, but also a fighter for fair play and freedom. He exhorted workers to unite, which led in due course to the formation of Trade Unions. Young Duraiswamy this certainly had a great opportunity to obtain a good, all-round training in Pereira’s chambers.
Due to family responsibilities he returned to Jaffna and left behind his association with HJC, thereby abandoning the prospect of a successful career in Colombo. He set up his legal practice in Jaffna and in 1905, as an eligible young lawyer, married Rasamma, the daughter of Mudaliyar Sittampalam Sathasivam.
Whilst immersed in his advancing professional practice, he began his public life as a Founder member and Secretary of the Jaffna Association which, like the Ceylon National Congress, worked for the political advancement towards independence by democratic means. He was also a member of the Liberal party, led at that time by Sir James Pieris. In addition, he was joint Founder and Secretary of the Hindu Board of Education, which was responsible for establishing a series of schools. He was on the governing body of Jaffna Hindu College and the President of the Jaffna Paripalana Sabha, which was responsible for the publication of two newspapers.
For the next two decades he made steady progress in the profession to become the leader of the Jaffna Bar and to be appointed Crown Advocate, always the most coveted position in the field in Ceylon at that period. With his diverse interests in religious affairs, educational development and social service he was well recognized, warmly respected and deeply appreciated by the public of Jaffna.
By Ordinance No 13 of 1910, in terms of what are known as the McCallum reforms, a small semblance of the principle of representation through election was recognized for membership of the Legislative Council. One member was therefore elected in 1912 for the Educated Ceylonese Electorate of about 3,000 voters. One is very limited Educational franchise. Ponnambalam Ramanathan who had been in the Council from 1879 to 1892 as an Unofficial Nominated Member, was the choice of the electors. But agitation against the niggardliness of the concession, carried on for the next 10 years, resulted in the elective principle being extended by the Order-in-Council of 1920. This provided for election to 11 territorial and five non-territorial seats. Each of the provinces was to elect one member on a limited income franchise, with the much more largely populated Western Province being allocated three seats.
With his professional standing and his record of service to the public, Advocate Waitialingam Duraiswamy became the obvious choice to represent the Northern Province. He was the only Hindu elected to the Legislative Council of 1921 and was unopposed. Sir Henry Kotalawela (knighted in 1947), elected to represent the Uva Province was the only Buddhist. All the other nine territorially elected members, including Advocate ER Tambimuttu who represented the Eastern Province were Christians.
Sir Ponnambalam Ramanathan who was elected by the people both in 1912 and 1917 was knighted and nominated by the Governor as an Unofficial Member of the Legislative Council in 1921. It was claimed by NE Weerasooria in his book Ceylon and her People that ‘The distinction conferred on Sir Ponnambalam Ramanathan was the precursor of his secession from the Ceylon National Congress.
’ However, disappointment at the manner in which Sinhalese politicians insisted on taking all the elected seats in the Western Province as well as those for special groups (such as the Low Country Products Association, which had a voting membership of just 11) also doubtless contributed.
In 1922 Sir Waitialingam successfully moved a motion in the Council for prohibition on the basis of local options, which resulted in all taverns and foreign liquor shops being abolished in the Jaffna District. The option, it should be noted, was not exercised elsewhere and prohibition in the South seems to occur only through impositions on specific occasions.
It was at this time that the recommendations of the Salaries Commission for increases were included in the budget for 1923-24, a contravention of a promise given by Sir Andrew Caldecott, the Colonial Secretary. The Unofficial Elected Members recorded a protest and eventually all 11 of them walked out of the Council. They resigned but were re-elected unopposed. Sir Waitialingam was one of the leaders of this protest which was organized by Sir James Peiris.
In 1923 the communal tensions that had been simmering for a couple of years came into the open with the question of a Memorandum about Minorities which had been ‘sent secretly’ to the Secretary of State for the Colonies, the Rt Hon Winston Churchill, with a view to thwarting the grant of responsible Government and recommending a return to communal representation. The Colonial Secretary refused to table a copy of this ‘Secret Memorial.’ But the Ceylon Daily News published a scoop about it which created a sensation.
At a public meeting in honor of Governor Manning at Jaffna, the genesis of the ‘Secret Memorial’ was revealed. Sir Ambalavanar Kanagasabai (Nominated Unofficial Member) said, ‘It was Sir William Manning who obtained for the Tamils the preferential treatment and concession as outlined in the draft.’ The Governor in reply paid a fulsome compliment to Sir Ponnambalam Ramanathan for what it was suggested for assistance rendered in drafting these proposals.
Reflecting on these events, I feel today what Prof. KM de Silva so elegantly expressed when he wrote, “The Sinhalese Leaders of the Ceylon National Congress allowed themselves to be embroiled in a needless conflict. It was on an intrinsically unimportant issue – that reserved seat for the Tamils in the Western Province. A timely concession generously made would have removed it from the arena of political controversy.
” This big mistake on a small matter eventually cost us the friendship and the benevolence of two of the most outstanding men produced in 152 years of British rule. Ponnambalam Ramanathan and Ponnambalam Arunachalam, to both of whom so much is due from so many in our land. But this unwillingness to yield gracefully from a position of strength, so that concessions have to be exhorted with ever increasing suspicion, seems to be part of a congenital incapacity that continues to destroy the country.”
It should be noted however that the two elected Tamil members from the Northern and Eastern Provinces – Waitialingam Duraiswamy and ER Tambimuttu rejected the “Secret Memorial.” Duraiswamy indeed went on record saying, “I cannot understand how age and experience could have been guilty of such egregious blunders; this is all the work of our old men. If they cannot lead in the right way they lead in the wrong way, but they always lead, that is their one and only ambition.”
Meanwhile he was again elected uncontested to the enlarged new Legislative Council of 1924 to represent the Northern Province (Western Division). Tambimuttu was also re-elected to represent the Batticaloa District of the Eastern Province. During this period Duraiswamy was the architect of the Conference held in 1925 at Mahendra, his home in Jaffna, at which the delegates of the Ceylon National Congress led by Mr. CE Corea and the Ceylon Maha Jana Sabha led by himself discussed further reforms. Incidently Mahendra was the home graced by the visits of Mahatma Gandhi and Rajagopalachari in 1927 and in 1931 by Jawaharlal and Kamala Nehru and their daughter Indira.
During this time Duraiswamy was a member of the Akbar Committee of the Legislative Council which opted for establishing the Ceylon University in the Kandy District. Regrettably he remains, I believe, the only outstanding member of that Committee not recognized by a tangible memorial on the Peradeniya Campus.
In 1928 as the President of the Jaffna Association he gave evidence before the Donoughmore Commission and pressed for self-government. This was accepted but, together with many others in the Legislative Council at that time, he was not entirely happy with the Donoughmore Commission’s recommendations. At the debate in the Council in 1929 on the proposal that they be brought into operation, he was in opposition, and subsequently led the Jaffna boycott of the 1931 elections to the newly created State Council.
In a speech at Jaffna in 1931 Sir Waitialingam repudiated the suggestion that the boycott was for communal reasons. He went on to say, “We are not weak to depend on such sectional ideas, we are able to think for the good of the whole of Ceylon. Never did I think of communalism when I advocated reforms for the Island. We Tamils always worked for the good of the whole country, making no difference between race and race. Our safety lies in the safety of the Sinhalese, our freedom lies in the freedom of the Sinhalese, our progress in constitutional reforms depends on the co-operation of the Sinhalese. The policy of “Divide and Rule” shall not make us great. Therefore, let me once again assure the people of Ceylon that we are acting on behalf of the whole of Ceylon, and not from sectional motive.”
Jaffna abandoned the boycott and came back into the mainstream of national politics in 1934 when elections were held for the four seats in the district. On this occasion Duraiswamy did not contest. Kayts therefore was won by Mr. Nevin Selvadurai. In 1936 however, in the general elections to the Second State Council, he was as noted above elected uncontested to the Kayts constituency.
I have tried briefly in these paragraphs to answer the questions I proposed at the beginning as to who this remarkable gentleman was who came from Jaffna to defeat Francis de Zoysa for the post of Speaker. His election to this post was a demonstration of the unbounded popularity, and the high esteem in which he was held by all sections of the country. He was a gentleman of a genial disposition with a ready smile, full of kind thoughts, kind words, and kind deeds. Blessed by nature with a graceful appearance, he had dignity in his deportment and the gift of a sharp intellect. Impartiality and fairness came to him naturally,
On his election as Speaker, Sir Baron Jayatilaka, the Leader of the House and Minister of Home Affairs, congratulating him said, “You can bring to bear on the questions that will come up a trained and disciplined mind and long experience, not only as a prominent member of the legal profession, but also as a member of the Old Legislative Council for over 10 years.
Jayatilaka and Duraiswamy were born in the third quarter of the last century, both were graduates of the Calcutta University when such academic qualifications were uncommon, both were professionally experienced lawyers and dedicated educationists with long records of public service. They were interested in their own literature, deeply learned in their respective religions, and highly respected by their own people.
They brought trained and developed minds to bear on the problems of their country without fear or favour. They advanced into parliamentary politics with the ripe experience of their chosen disciplines and the mature mellowness of their age. Both faced three elections, and both were returned three times without contest. Both had a serenity that reflected contentment.
In concluding his response to Jayatilaka, Duraiswamy said, “When the time comes for me to lay down the authority with which you have clothed me, I will do so conscious of having done our best, to help forward the progress of Ceylon.” That authority he was entrusted with in 1936 he laid down in 1947, having maintained the dignity and safeguarded the privileges of the State Council for an unparalleled 11 years.
He created healthy precedents and built-up honorable traditions. He sometimes quoted from Ramayana and the Mahabharata, the Thirukkural and the Bhagavad Gita to defend the rights of backbenchers and protect those of the less influential members of the House. He was able to direct, guide and inspire the most difficult raw material to handle – the young enthusiastic legislators of the State Council.
At this point it may not be irrelevant to mention that Duraiswamy was an outstanding athlete in his day and continued to maintain his healthy mind in a healthy body. He was the Founder member of the Tamil Union and its President for several years. I still remember a picture in a newspaper that showed him as Speaker bowling to the Governor Sir Andrew Caldecott, with Minister DS Senanayake behind the stumps.
When he laid down his office there was not one person in the State Council who had a single word against him. He was an exemplary Speaker by any standard, totally free from sectarianism and deeply devoted to the ideal of a Ceylonese nation. As he wished on the day he was elected, so he downed his authority, having done his best to help forward the progress of Ceylon. The never-failing springs of his constant strength were the fundamental principles of his deep faith and the unbroken traditions of his ancient culture. Truly then it might be said of him that, ‘he was a man not for an age, but for all time.’
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
