Features
All hype and hot air?
The Colombo Climate Summit:
An interview with Dr. Rohan Pethiyagoda
by Ifham Nizam
The challenge before us, as a nation, is to build national resilience to climate change, says internationally recognised Sri Lankan scientist and policy advocate, Dr. Rohan Pethiyagoda, in an interview with The Island. “If the West wants us to reduce emissions, they should damn well be made to pay for it. As for us, we should reduce emissions only if and when this serves our national interest, that is, when it generates sustainable growth for us.”
Excerpts:
Q: Your keynote address at the Colombo Climate Summit held earlier this month raised some eyebrows because you said that bribery and corruption were one of the biggest threats that faces Sri Lanka in its response to climate change. What did you mean by that?
A: We have to recognise the fact that recent Sri Lankan governments have been corrupt on an industrial scale. In the run up to the 2015 election, the Yahapalana Coalition claimed massive corruption on the part of the Mahinda Rajapaksa administration. However, since then, Sri Lanka has sunk four more points towards the bottom of the Corruption Perceptions Index of Transparency International. We are now in the top 35% of the world’s most corrupt countries, our worst score ever. Everything from visas to wind power is being farmed out to cronies by the government without going through a transparent competitive bidding process.
Our national response to climate change, for example, will involve preventing saltwater intrusion into our 103 rivers as sea level rises in the coming decades. It will call for massive civil engineering interventions that will dwarf even the Mahaweli Project. It will cost tens of billions of dollars. This will be a gift to politicians anxious to exploit this opportunity for personal gain. That is why corruption threatens the building of national resilience to climate change. And that is why, unless we get the system change that the youth demanded when they booted Gotabaya Rajapaksa out of office in 2022, we are going to slide from bad to worse.
Q: There have been allegations on social media that the Climate Summit was all hype and hot air, serving only to greenwash the real issues. For example, it omitted to include many environmental NGOs and even government agencies associated with climate. Your response?
A: The Summit was organised by the Ceylon Chamber of Commerce (CCC) and therefore aimed primarily at business and industry. It did not set out to formulate national policy. And the CCC did a great job, bringing in experts from across the world to lend their expertise. The challenges that climate change poses to business are very different to those that it poses to government. Businesses are concerned mainly with issues of sustainability. That is to say, how they can maximise their profitability while minimising their carbon footprints, maximising their energy efficiency, ensuring agricultural productivity, generating renewable energy, transacting climate-associated financial instruments, and so on.
The challenges before government, however, are very different. Government has to do stuff like building resilience to sea-level change, planning agriculture in a warmer world, investing in energy infrastructure, devising interventions to conserve biodiversity in a changing climate, managing urban water supply, irrigation and hydropower as rainfall regimes change, and so on. In fact, the government would do well to have its own climate summit to plan the National Response to Climate Change.
As I pointed out in my addresses to the summit, many of the national institutions that need to be at the forefront of our response to climate change are hopelessly underfunded and inefficient. I referred especially to the moribund Department of Meteorology, which badly needs a firecracker lit under it. But agriculture research, too, is lagging badly behind. As far as I know, none of our crop research institutes are developing new cultivars of tea or rice in greenhouse conditions that model future climate regimes. We have to do these things if we are to overcome the massive challenges that a changing climate poses.
Q:President Wickremesinghe has urged that Sri Lanka takes a lead in establishing the world’s first climate university. Isn’t that a step in the right direction?
A: Frankly, I think this is a waste of time and resources. First off, the word ‘university’ derives from the Latin root ‘universitas’, meaning ‘the whole’. In other words, a place that teaches everything. You do not have universities that teach only one subject. That is called a school, a faculty or an institute. It would have been better to invest the enormous sum of money he is trying to raise for this venture in the creation of climate schools in some of our universities. In fact, universities such as Peradeniya already have excellent programmes in the associated sciences. And goodness knows our existing universities are badly underfunded.
But the president is no fool. He knows that like ‘biodiversity’ in the 1990s, ‘terrorism’ in the 2000s, and ‘diversity, equity and inclusion’ in the 2010s, ‘climate’ is the international buzzword of this decade. At a time when Sri Lanka is insolvent and at the sharp end of the UN Human Rights Commission, mooting a climate university paints him and the country in a benign light in the international community. I suspect that this was the consideration driving his rhetoric about a climate university. I would be astonished if such a university ever comes into existence in Sri Lanka. But to be fair, his rhetoric does an excellent job of glossing over our many defects in the eyes of the gullible West.
Q: You raised some eyebrows in the run-up to the Summit when you were quoted as saying “There is no climate emergency”. However, UN Secretary General António Guterres has said that every country should declare a climate emergency. Does this mean that you are a climate change denier, a climate sceptic?
A: There is no doubt that climate is warming at an apparently unprecedented rate, and that human greenhouse gas emissions are exacerbating this warming. I fully support reducing greenhouse gas emissions globally and building national resilience to climate change. But I do not believe we require a state of emergency to do this. I should explain this.
First off, although Mr Guterres has verbally called on nations to declare emergencies, the UN itself has not declared an emergency. The UN’s procedure provides for it to declare a Level-3 emergency in such situations, but Guterres has not done that. As it happens, not even the UN’s own Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (the IPCC) has advocated for a state of emergency. Meanwhile, even as Mr Guterres sings his hypocritical song, he continues to criss-cross the world in his private jet.
Second, as Sri Lankans know only too well, a state of emergency is a terrible thing. It suspends normal laws, it gives unlimited power to government, it sets aside human rights and freedoms, and it puts mature, thoughtful planning to one side and engenders ill-conceived knee-jerk reactions by government. We all saw all this play out in Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s disastrous management of the covid emergency, overriding the Health Ministry’s Public and Community Health professionals and turning over management of the pandemic to the army. People were arrested and even abducted for having covid, houses were raided, Muslims were prevented from burying their dead, and billions were spent on procuring covid test kits from cronies without a transparent procurement process. Previous governments used emergencies to incarcerate, torture and murder thousands of youths. We should have learned by now that emergencies are not things you can trust Sri Lankan politicians with.
Finally, you need to recognise that our response to climate change is going to take decades: certainly, beyond the end of this century. Do people seriously intend to have a state of emergency for the next 70 or 100 years? Only a very ignorant person would say so.
Q: But don’t we have a responsibility to be good global citizens? Should we not do everything we can to reduce emissions?
A: Look, for the past two centuries, the West industrialised at the cost of the global environment. The 50% increase we have seen in atmospheric carbon dioxide over that period is almost in its entirety caused by the West. They enriched themselves at the cost of the global environment with the one hand while suppressing us through colonialism with the other. And now they have the cheek to tell us, the developing world, that it is our job to be good global citizens? Look at it this way. Say that a cake was made for the whole world to share. Then, the West elbows its way to the table, gobbles up 90% of it and fattens itself. Having done that, it tells us “Now there’s only 10% left. Please be good global citizens and share this 10% equitably among yourselves and with us.” My answer is No. The developing world should simply tell the developed world to fly a kite. They caused this mess, and they should pay to clean it up, not us.
The challenge before us, as a nation, is to build national resilience to climate change. If the West wants us to reduce emissions, they should damn well be made to pay for it. As for us, we should reduce emissions only if and when this serves our national interest, that is, when it generates sustainable growth for us. But then, even when wind power, for example, has become dirt cheap worldwide, we are paying three times the world price for it here in Sri Lanka because corrupt people are lining their pockets with loot.
In my view, Sri Lanka should even consider withdrawing from the UN’s COP (Conference of Parties) process. Now we are at the 29th COP, which if nothing else, shows that the first 28 COPs were failures. They have done nothing to attenuate climate change. These COP meetings involve thousands of officials flying to global tourism hotspots every year, cramming into five-star hotels and returning home with papers full of promises and platitudes. None of that ever gets turned into so-called climate action. It is a waste of time, and we should have the courage to say so and refuse to dance to the West’s tune. Of course, they will try to cut so-called aid to us. But if we state our case clearly to the citizens of the West, showing that their governments’ demands that we mitigate climate change are just an extension of the colonial enterprise, I think we will win the day. We need to call out the West’s hypocrisy.
Q: That’s a strong word. Can you seriously make such a claim?
A: What, hypocrisy? Of course, I can. Just take the UK. Britain’s greenhouse gas emissions are now 50% lower than they were in 1990. The UK is the poster child of the developed world. Three cheers! But how did they do it? First, they exported a lot of their emissions by turning from a high-carbon manufacturing economy into a low-carbon service economy. Goods for the UK market are now increasingly manufactured overseas, so the exporting countries’, principally China, are doing the emitting on the UK’s behalf. The UK has also been replacing high-CO2 coal as a source of energy with ‘renewable’ wood-pellets imported from North America. Millions of tons of wood pellets. Its argument is that this is sustainable because the CO2 that wood combustion emits will be reabsorbed when those American forests are replanted. But they claim the emissions reduction now, even though the trees will not grow back for decades from now. Such examples, to my mind, are indicative of the lowest form of hypocrisy and we should call them out on it. But the UK may not be the worst offender: Germany is not far behind. So yes, I am serious when I call these countries hypocrites. Sadly, most of their citizens are unaware of the true facts, and I don’t blame them. They too, are misled by their governments.
Q: You make everything sound pretty hopeless…
A: Ah, but I am optimistic. I think governments like the UK’s and Germany’s have been stampeded by activists into making promises that they simply cannot keep. But globally, humans have been wonderful innovators. Our hallmark as a species is innovating. I have no doubt that we will innovate our way out of global warming too. This is a long journey, and we are only at the beginning. If we keep our nerve and stay the course like responsible adults should, we’re going to come out of this just fine. But by then there will be new problems that call for yet more innovations. That’s the human predicament, the human story.
Q: Are there examples of innovations in Sri Lanka that help address climate threats?
A: There are many. Colombo Port City is a fine example of the kind of engineering we need to reclaim land that lies below sea level. Industry has been becoming more sustainable, too. Star Garments’ 35,000-square foot facility in Katunayake is South Asia’s first certified ‘Passive House’ factory: It uses 70% less energy than other buildings of comparable size. And if you think about it, the thousands of tanks and reservoirs scattered across the dry zone were built by Sri Lankan kings over the past 2000 years as a response to a climate threat, namely drought. What a phenomenal innovation that ‘hydraulic civilization’ was!
And then there are the ongoing efforts to reconnect fragmented wet-zone forest fragments by means of biodiversity corridors. Initiatives by NGOs such as the PLANT project of the Wildlife and Nature Protection Society, the rainforest and mangrove restoration projects of Biodiversity Sri Lanka, and the 2-km forest corridor at Endana near Kahawatta by Dilmah Conservation are leading the way in this regard. I urge your readers to support these pioneering projects. That is how, by everyone doing their bit, Sri Lanka can build resilience to the climate of the future.
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
