Comparing AKD to King Parakramabahu

By C. A. Chandraprema

A video clip doing the rounds on web-based media platforms shows a former secretary of the agriculture ministry stating at a JJB (Malimawa) press conference that when Anura Kumara Dissanayake was the Minister of Agriculture, Livestock, Lands and Irrigation in the Chandrika Kumaratunga government in 2004, there was a surplus of paddy in the country and that on the instructions of the minister, a part of this surplus was sold to the World Food Programme and that this was akin to exporting rice during the time of King Parakramabahu.

This was sycophancy at its worst, targeting a gullible audience made up mainly of young people with very little awareness of history and whose opinions are formed by whatever comes to them via the internet. We all know that AKD was never a member of any government before April 2004. Hence if there was a surplus of paddy in the year that he assumed ministerial office for the first time, that can only be the result of development projects implemented by preceding governments. It should be obvious to anyone that AKD could not have done anything to deserve any credit for a paddy surplus in 2004.

The Mahaweli Project is the main reason for Sri Lanka becoming more or less self-sufficient in rice. Hence the full credit for any paddy surplus in the year 2004 should go entirely to the UNP government of 1977-94. The JVP vehemently opposed the Accelerated Mahaweli Project of the J.R.Jayewardene government in the 1980s. If the then UNP government had heeded what the JVP said at that time about the Accelerated Mahaweli Project, AKD would not have had a paddy surplus to sell to the WFP in 2004. It is indeed strange to see parties that opposed the Accelerated Mahaweli Project in the 1980s claiming credit for its results today.

Throughout its history, the JVP has only opposed or sabotaged development projects. A phase of the Udawalawe Project was being implemented in the late 1980s during the JVP’s second insurrection and a report of the International Water Management Institute has described how JVP death squads extorted money from the contractors and murdered workers on the project thus causing a delay in its implementation.

Opposition to all and sundry

The JVP has a history of opposing all development projects initiated by all governments. In the 1980s, they opposed the Accelerated Mahaweli Project. When the Colombo Port City was being built, the JVP claimed that there wasn’t enough sand and metal in the country to complete a project of that magnitude, and opposed it. They opposed the construction of highways during the Rajapaksa government. The anti-development project mentality of the JVP can best be illustrated by their opposition to the Uma Oya Project  which commenced construction in November 2011. The aim of the project was to construct a dam and a reservoir in the central highlands across the Uma Oya and to carry water from this reservoir through a system of tunnels into yet another reservoir and then onwards to a hydro-power project and finally into the Kirindi Oya to supply water to the Moneragala and Hambantota districts.

Around 2015-2017, water started seeping into one of the tunnels being constructed in the Uma Oya project. In drilling a tunnel, it is natural for ground water above it to seep into the tunnel and it would be necessary to seal the tunnel to prevent such seepage as the machine drills further. However, the German machine used to drill this tunnel had not been equipped with the accessories necessary to seal the tunnel. It was revealed later that this was due to some error on the part of the project consultants. Be that as it may, in 2017 on the advice of some Norwegian experts, the accessories necessary to seal the tunnel as the machine moved forward were obtained and the water seepage  issue ceased to exist. The Uma Oya Project is now nearing completion and is due to be commissioned some time during this year.

When the water seepage issue gained media attention, the main political force in the country that rose up against the Uma Oya Project was the JVP. Anura Kumara Dissnayake made impassioned speeches in Parliament  describing how thousands of wells, streams and springs in the Bandarawela area had dried up and how thousands of agricultural land had been abandoned due to the lack of ground water as a result of the seepage into the Uma Oya tunnel. He described how the walls of thousands of houses and other buildings in the area had cracks appearing as a result of the change in the ground conditions. He stated that construction work on the Uma Oya Project had commenced despite objections by environmentalists and other experts and that water was to be diverted through this project to the Hambantota port and airport to fulfill the desires of the Rajapaksa government.

The ground level campaign against the Uma Oya Project was led by the Badulla district JVP stalwart and ex-Parliamentarian Samantha Vidyaratne. He described this project not as a multi-purpose project but as a ‘bahu vinashakaree’ project and stated that this project has been planned by those willing to even ‘give their mothers for money’ and that all this was the doing of ‘rulers who did not think about the country’. He called for an immediate halt to the Uma Oya Project and gave examples from France, Thailand and South Korea where large scale development projects had been halted half way.

Uma Oya is a project that had been under discussion since the Bandaranaike era in the 1950s. The Dudley Senanayake government of the late 1960s, the Premadasa government in the early 1990s, the Chandrilka Kumaratunga government of 2000, and the UNP government of 2001, all carried out studies regarding this project. After all those studies and discussions, cabinet approval was obtained to commence the project on 26 January 2005. This was on the basis of cabinet paper No. 05/0036/039/002 which was presented to cabinet by Anura Kumara Dissanayake who was the Minister of Agriculture, Livestock, Lands and Irrigation at that time.  AKD had stated as follows in that cabinet paper:

“For the development of the South East Dry Zone in Sri Lanka, particularly the Hambantota and Moneragala districts, there is no other alternative unless water is diverted from Uma Oya to the South East Dry Zone.”

“Strategy for economic development of both Hambantota and Moneragala districts changed during the recent past and diversion of Uma Oya to Kirindi Oya is now seen in the perspective of recently conceived Ruhunupura development. The infrastructure of Ruhunupura development consists of the development of the Hambantota harbour into one of the modern harbours in the region, international airport in the Moneragala district, and an oil refinery…For all these new developments, projected water requirement has been estimated as 100 MCM in the year 2030. In the absence of a reliable source of water in the area, water from Uma Oya is seen as the only alternative to supplement this requirement.”

“Therefore high priority should be given for this project.”

 A party of protest

 Even though AKD claimed in parliament that the Uma Oya Project had been inaugurated to fulfil the desires of the Rajapaksas, the cabinet paper presented to the CBK led cabinet by AKD himself, in January 2005, many months before Mahinda Rajapaksa became President in November 2005, has explained very well, the reasons for commencing the Uma Oya Project. In 2017, JVP activists had actually opposed a project that they themselves had initiated through a cabinet paper! This illustrates the mentality of the JVP. This is a party that has opposed every development project brought forward by every political party in power. Ultimately, they opposed the only development project that they themselves had initiated in their six decade long history.

Let us for a moment forget that it was AKD himself who had presented the initial cabinet paper on Uma Oya. Even if some problem emerges in the implementation of a development project initiated by someone else, the immediate reaction of a responsible political party should be to seek ways and means of solving the issue and moving forward rather than demanding that the project be abandoned. Problems do emerge in the implementation of large scale development projects. If the JVP reacted the way they did in 2017 to a minor issue which was easily resolved by procuring a few pieces of additional machinery, one can only imagine how they would have reacted in a case of a more serious issue.

The JVP is essentially a party of protest. When an opportunity to oppose something presents itself, they tend to quite literally, forget themselves. They do not possess the attitude of mind necessary to be able build or develop anything. A political party that seeks to rule the country should have the capacity to look rationally at problems that emerge in the day to day running of the country as well as in implementing major development projects. A party that sees demonstrations and agitation against all and sundry as the solution to all problems will never be able to make a positive contribution to the country.