Features
Are we educating our children in right way?
Need for rethink on Sri Lankan education
By Professor W. A. J. M. De Costa
Senior Professor and Chair of Crop Science, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Peradeniya
A few months ago, a former student of mine doing a PhD in Computational Biology in a top-ranked US university, while holding a teaching assistantship in the same university, called me. She was quite upset that the undergraduate students in her laboratory practical class had openly confronted her and told that her weekly quizzes were too difficult. On inquiring what was too difficult, they had said that her questions were not directly from their lecture notes or practical guidebook and that the students could not anticipate the type of questions that were coming. I knew that my former student spends a lot of time and effort in formulating questions for her weekly quizzes, making sure that her questions stimulate the thinking of students when searching for the answer and force them to apply the theory that they had learned in the lecture to solve a practical problem. However, the reaction of the students (she did not tell me whether the students who protested openly were a majority or not) clearly showed that they did not like being taken out of their comfort zone. While I was surprised that this incident happened in a top-ranked US university, it wouldn’t have surprised me in the least if it had happened in a Sri Lanka university. This would have been a common occurrence in Sri Lankan universities, if not for the semblance of outward respect (and a considerable measure of the fear of reprisal) for lecturers that is still maintained in Sri Lankan universities, thanks to the eastern culture. Nevertheless, it is an incident that begs the question whether the learning habits, that are nurtured by the system of education in Sri Lanka from childhood onwards, are in fact the right ones, both for the individual and for the country as a whole. Based on my experience of teaching in a leading Sri Lankan university for over thirty years, following a period of four years as an undergraduate in the same university, the answer to the above question is an emphatic ‘No’. What saddens and disappoints me is the observation that the learning habits of the students as well as the teaching habits of the lecturers have ‘moved in the wrong direction’ so that the future does not look promising in terms of producing a graduate who fulfils the needs of the country which spends so much on the so-called ‘free education’. In this article, I wish to highlight some of the fundamental flaws in the way Sri Lanka educates its young generation.
A system of education and a population of students driven by examinations and rote learning
Sri Lankan education is a succession of examinations, starting with the Grade Five scholarship exam, followed by the GCE O/L and the GCE A/L, and continuing in the universities. All these examinations are structured in a pattern that has been set for well over several decades, with very little change. They are also based on curricula which are very heavy on subject content. The extremely competitive nature of these examinations, especially, the Grade Five scholarship exam, which offers the possibility of entrance to the so-called ‘elite’ schools, and the GCE A/L, which offers admission to an extremely limited number of university places, forces students into a set of learning habits which are detrimental to the development of their creative capabilities and critical thinking. The private tuition culture which started in the late 1970s has developed into a very elaborate network, which caters exactly to the needs of the examinations. The teaching is meticulously focused on developing the students’ capabilities to do well in the competitive examinations. This teaching is accompanied by preparing the students for examinations by getting them to practice answering questions from examinations of previous years. This is widely prevalent even in the Physical Science stream, which consists of subjects such as Mathematics and Physics, where logical reasoning rather than memorising is the skill that needs to be developed. Instead, ‘practice makes perfect’ has been the rationale, with the perception that a student who has done a greater number of similar questions has a greater probability of doing well in an examination, where questions are set according to a pattern that has been set and continued for over several decades. I was surprised to learn about 10 years ago that in the GCE(A/L), this practice of answering questions from previous years has moved on to memorising model answers written by a tuition teacher. This culture of rote learning has advanced to such an extent that ‘tuition classes’ are held for prospective entrants to the medical and engineering faculties on the subjects that they will learn during their first year in the university.
For the students who come through this dizzying maze of tuition classes, revision classes and practice examinations, and get into the university (only about 2% of the population in any age cohort), a set of learning habits that strengthens their habit of rote learning awaits in the university system. They are given access to the lecture notes of senior students and a group of supposedly competent senior students conduct what are called ‘Kuppi Classes’, which is a system ‘tuition classes’ aimed at filling the brain with subject content prior to the examinations (hence the meaning ‘filling the small bottle’ which is the brain). During a visit to a leading university in the Western Province which coincided with an examination period, I came across a ‘Kuppi Time Table’ for students in the Faculty of Science in the students’ canteen, which demonstrated the extent to which this culture of rote learning aimed at passing examinations was prevalent among the university student community. In science-based degree programmes with significant components of laboratory and field practical classes, it is common practice for a large majority of students to copy the lab report of a few supposedly competent students in the batch. This whole culture is strengthened and perpetuated by the institutionalised practice of ‘ragging’, strongly supported by the Students’ Unions, where students who do not subject themselves to ragging are denied access to the ‘Kuppi classes’ and the lecture notes of their seniors. The end product of all this is a graduate who expects a previously set pattern to bench mark his preparations to every single challenge that he/she faces in his/her profession. Preparation based on the practice of solving/meeting a similar problem/challenge that had occurred in the past is often the only strategy that these graduates know about. Hence, it is no wonder that they become almost clueless when the problems/challenges that come their way in their profession deviate even slightly from those that had come previously. This also explains the widespread incompetence in problem-solving among the government officials, at all levels of administration. While the politicians are rightly blamed for the current plight of Sri Lanka and its long-term post-independence failure, the system of education that has produced a set of mediocre and sub-competent officials, technical experts and bureaucrats should share the blame in equal measure.
The role of educators
A system that produces a majority of ineffective/sub-standard graduates, devoid of key competences, cannot have survived for so long if it has not been strengthened, wittingly or unwittingly, by its other stakeholders. In this regard, the educators, consisting of the curriculum experts in the relevant governmental institutions such as the National Institute of Education, and academics in the university faculties have failed in designing and implementing a system of education, curricula and examinations which are much less dependent on rote learning practices for success. Curricula have been progressively expanded with more and more information reflecting advances in the respective subject areas and disciplines. However, there has not been a proportional removal of outdated information so that the subject content that the students have to study has continued to expand in volume. Such an expansion reduces the space for students to engage in learning by exploration via reading and discussion, thus forcing them towards repeated reading and memorising of a set of lecture notes. The examinations have been made highly structured, which takes the novelty out of the questions. What makes the matters worse are the evaluation schemes where only answers containing specific words or sentences are considered ‘correct’ while answers containing the same meaning but written in different words and sentences are considered ‘incorrect’.
This practice is especially prevalent in the evaluation schemes of the GCE A/L examination. Such highly structured and repetitive examination papers and marking schemes inevitably condition the students’ minds to anticipate a certain structure and type of questions and write a certain type of answer, which has been memorised and/or practiced in advance. While such psychological conditioning helps the students to do well in examinations, it also leaves them clueless when confronted with an examination paper or a question, which deviates even slightly from the pattern of the previous years. Therefore, it is no wonder that the majority of students who graduate through such a system of evaluation are incapable of problem-solving and ‘out of the box’ thinking when confronted with real-life problems in their professional work environments. Such work environments include the very institutions which provide education where generations of teachers and lecturers who have come through this system perpetuate the same system.
During the 1990s, almost all universities and faculties in Sri Lanka converted their curricula to the so-called ‘course unit’ system. The whole subjects, which had hitherto been taught over the course of one academic year and evaluated in year-end examinations, were broken in to several smaller ‘course units’, which were evaluated at a higher frequency (the so-called continuous evaluation) via a series of quizzes, written assignments and mid-term and end-term examinations. This system of teaching and learning is practiced in an overwhelming majority of universities globally and the merits of continuous evaluation appear to be advocated by an equally overwhelming majority of education experts. However, as a product of the old ‘whole subject-one examination’ system, I have observed, over the course of the last three decades, several flaws in directly transplanting the ‘course unit’ system (which at that time was predominantly prevalent in the US and Canadian Universities, but not in the European Universities) in Sri Lanka on a student population who are psychologically conditioned in to rote learning within an examination-oriented system of education. The biggest flaw is the fragmentation of the process of learning and the subsequent knowledge gained and retained by the students. When one whole subject is broken down to several smaller units which are evaluated separately, the students’ learning is focused on getting through the smaller units. In this process, understanding the connections between different smaller units and building inter-relationships between different aspects of a whole subject, which is an integral aspect of deeper learning, is neglected. It has been a common experience for us teachers to find that students have forgotten most of what they had learned previously in the course units which had been completed and examined. It is a direct result of the ‘Kuppi’ type of learning where the ‘small bottle’ which is filled just before the examination is emptied as soon as the examination is over!
Introduction of the course unit system to Sri Lankan universities caused a change in student behaviour which, arguably, has had far-reaching consequences. The increased frequency of assessments and examinations on an already examination-oriented student population directed them even more towards preparing for examinations (often via rote learning methods and ‘Kuppi’ classes) at the expense of spending time on sports and extra-curricular activities, which are essential components of the holistic development of a ‘complete’ graduate and a human being. The weaning of students away from sports and extra-curricular activities from the 1990s onwards was clearly evident in a large residential university such as the University of Peradeniya, which offers a wide range of facilities and opportunities for sports and extra-curricular activities. There is no doubt that the introduction of the ‘course-unit’ system of curricula was the major cause of this shift in student behaviour. During my time as an undergraduate in Peradeniya in the early- to mid-1980s, I remember many of my own batchmates, who had not previously engaged in sports and extra-curricular activities during their school days, getting involved and participating in games and activities and thoroughly enjoying the experience despite not being in the official university teams.
Concluding remarks
The underlying structural flaws in the Sri Lankan system of education, teaching and learning is often hidden by the argument that many (but only a tiny fraction of the whole) Sri Lankans who have come through this system have gone on to reach top rungs in their chosen professions in the developed west. However, the true test of an education system of a country is that it should produce a human resource base equipped with competencies (and values) which are required to address the multi-pronged challenges that the country faces in trying to bring about its national development and prosperity. The trajectory that Sri Lanka has travelled as a nation during its 75-year post-independence period and the patently evident current trend of brain drain brings into stark question whether its ‘free-education’ has achieved its intended objectives. It is clear that a comprehensive re-think and a careful overhaul of the current Sri Lankan education system, including its core principles, values and modes of operation, is essential for the country to realize the full potential of its human resource base for the benefit of its own development and prosperity.
The writer has been a university teacher and a researcher for more than thirty five years and has received special training in university staff development, including teaching and learning methodology, at the University of Kassel, Germany.
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
