Features
Dining at the Victorian Bar and some racist encounters
Excerpted from A Life In The Law
by Nimal Wikramanayake
When I joined the Victorian Bar I wasn’t quite sure whether to attend the Annual Victorian Bar dinners. I thought that they might be the same rowdy affairs as they were in Ceylon. I had not attended the Bar dinner for 40 years until I received a wonderful invitation from that gracious lady, Melanie Sloss, then Chairperson of the Victorian Bar Council, and now a Supreme Court judge.
As I mentioned earlier, late in 1975 a number of us decided to leave the Calnin list and form a new list, the Duncan list. Dick McGarvie QC was our new chairman and Leo Lazarus QC was the vice-chairman. Dick decided to have a dinner so that he could meet and become acquainted the members of his new list.
The dinner was held, as far as I can recollect, in February 1976. Considerable quantities of alcohol were consumed by the new members before and during dinner. After dinner Dick McGarvie got up to speak. There were a number of inebriated rowdy barristers at this dinner. Several of them started shouting and bellowing “shut up” and “sit down” and made rude comments which I will not reproduce here.
With considerable aplomb, Dick stretched his hands out and said, “Gentlemen, please, no applause. Please no applause. You can applaud my speech when I finish.” This statement was greeted with roars of laughter and Dick went on with his speech uninterrupted. Afterwards he walked around and introduced himself to all the members of the new list. He walked up to my friend John Bolton and said, “My name is McGarvie.”
Bolton replied, “Arsehole, I’m not interested in your surname, what the fuck’s your Christian name?”
This story does not end there, for a month later Dick McGarvie was appointed to the Supreme Court. And who do you think appeared in the first case before Dick McGarvie? Bolton! Fortunately for Bolton, Dick McGarvie was a wonderful gentleman and he was extremely cordial to Bolton when he appeared before him.
Dick was no pushover. I remember one day appearing before him in the Practice Court when a young barrister turned up at 10.45 am to find that his case had been dismissed for non-appearance. He apologized to Dick and told him that he was sorry he was late but his watch was slow. Dick looked at him and asked, “What is the time on your watch now?” The young barrister went red in the face and started stammering. Dick told him never again to try to pull that chestnut on him.
The years rolled by and in 1982, although I had been at the Bar only ten years, I was appointed chairman of the Wayne Duncan list. We decided to have our annual dinner at a restaurant in Queen’s Road, which had formerly been a large family home. The meal was excellent, the speeches were good and we all had a good time. But, as usual, after the dinner, things began to deteriorate considerably. I was chatting with a few of my friends when someone came running up and told me that there was a disturbance between two barristers. Again, you must pardon me if I provide you with their names, for a good story is useless without names attached to it.
I was called to the disturbance to see a flaming row going on between the late Peter Jones and Betty King. I hope Betty will pardon me, as she has now retired as judge of the Supreme Court. Betty was sobbing and crying at the time. When I asked her what happened she told me that Peter Jones had flung her expensive shoes out of the hotel dining room and into the car park. It transpired that while Betty and Peter were having a dreadful row, Betty had pulled off one of her shoes to hit Peter with it. Peter promptly picked her shoe up and threw it out of the restaurant window, at which Betty pulled off the other shoe and tried to hit him; it suffered the same fate.
Several of us then went into the car park and spent about twenty minutes until we finally found Betty’s shoes. ‘thus list dinners in Victoria may sometimes, and I emphasize sometimes, be as bad as the Voet Lights dinners in Ceylon.
But don’t get me wrong, I had some very good times and some very interesting times at the list dinners. If one were to listen to the news every day, there is no good news reported on, because good news is not newsworthy. People would turn their television or radio sets off if they saw or heard about a couple walking happily through the Flagstaff Gardens. This is something I did regularly in my early years at the Bar with my two dear friends, Clive Rosen and Tony Lopes. In summer we would walk to the gardens and sit down to eat our sandwiches. But this is not newsworthy. It is thoroughly boring.
In 1982, my friend David Levin informed me that a young lad had arrived from England and wanted to join the Victorian Bar. He asked me if I could have him as a reader. His name was Richard Phillips and had been at the English Bar for a year. Richard’s period off reading with me was uneventful, save for one interesting incident. He would keep calling me “Nimal” as in “Malcolm’: I kept telling him that my name was “Nimull” as in “Mull” of Kintyre. I told him that “Nimal” a was Sanskrit word, and that Sanskrit was the mother of most European languages, coming from Mohenjo Daro in Central Asia over 5,000 years ago.
Richard looked at me, grinned and told me that I did not look 5,000 years old. Sadly, Richard Phillips died last year in the prime of his life. I expected my reader to bury me; I did not expect to have to bury him.
In September 1986, my second young man, Grant Holley, came to read with me. Life with my new reader was uneventful, save that when I moved rooms early in 1987, he moved all my law books by carrying about fifteen books at a time in his arms. He was and still is a delightful gent.
Racism at the Victorian Bar
Racism is an interesting topic and is usually spoken about in this country in hushed tones. However it has suddenly reared its ugly head in this wonderful country of ours. And thank God for that.According to some Queensland senators in the National Party, it would appear to be non-existent in Australia. Some Australians will never admit that they are racist, and racism is unfortunately swept under the carpet. In 2004, a neighbour of mine on the ninth floor of Owen Dixon Chambers West told me that he finds it quite distressing when he goes to see his parents-in-law. They are both bigoted and racist, and often talk in disparaging tones about migrants, whether black, brown, yellow or white.
A human being’s unusual physical features, be it a man or a woman, can always be the subject of derision. A fat man, a shortsighted woman, a boss-eyed person, a hunchback are all the subject of twisted humour by their more fortunate peers. Colour has always been brought into this equation. Does the fact that one person has peculiar physical features make the other person without these characteristics a better or superior person? Is a person with dark skin inferior to a person with white skin?
John Howard said Australians are not racist. I beg to disagree. A fair number of Australians are racist although a large number aren’t. It reminds me of an incident that occurred in the late 1940s in Ceylon. We had all gone to see and hear the famous Methodist preacher, Dr Leslie Weatherhead, speaking. After he finished his talk he called for questions. A friend of mine who fancied himself a humourist got up and asked Dr Weatherhead, “Can Christians dance?” It was a poorly phrased question and Dr Weatherhead came back quickly with this answer: “Some can, some can’t:’ My friend disappeared from the hall quite sheepishly, followed by loud applause.
The Australian male often delights in denigrating a man or woman with a darker complexion. His humour is both callous and insensitive, and he may not be aware of the hurt he is causing because he thinks his remarks are funny. Some white members of parliament who have not been the subject of racial innuendo want to amend the Racial Discrimination Act so that I can be called a “nig-nog” without any adverse repercussions. Fortunately I have had only a few bad experiences of racism at the Victorian Bar during a career of over 40 years, but these experiences are more than enough.
My friend Tony Lopes, who unfortunately has now left the Bar, had a room on the seventh floor of Owen Dixon Chambers in the 1970s. I would often go up to his room to talk to him or he would come down to my room on the third floor to visit me. On the seventh floor there was a barrister who was known as “Fascist Bob” because of his foul mouth. Whenever I went up to see Tony Lopes, Fascist Bob would say, “Hello, blackie!” This was the normal way in which he greeted me. I could never fathom why he greeted me like this. I did not pay much attention to it as it was just a fleeting greeting and I rarely saw him.
However, in 1982 Fascist Bob got a room on the third floor where I had my chambers. Shortly after he arrived on my floor, I was coming out of the lavatory when I met Fascist Bob. He said, “Hello, blackie’
I was angry and I knew that I had to nip this behaviour in the bud. I said, “Good God, if you are the epitome of the white Anglo-Saxon race, God help your race, because you are an ugly-looking bastard. In fact, I am much better looking than you,” and I walked away.
A few days later we met again in the lavatory and Fascist Bob opened the batting by repeating, “Hello, blackie.”
I replied, “You’re the sort of skunk who, if he saw a hunchback, boss-eyed girl, would say, ‘Jesus Christ, what an ugly-looking bitch you are:”
Fascist Bob said, “What’s that got to do with the price of fish?” I retorted, “What has my colour got to do with the price of fish?” and walked off.
A few days later we again met in the lavatory. This would appear to be our only meeting place. And he began by saying, “Hello blackie:’
I was very angry and told him I was getting pretty fed up with this and to stop it at once. All this occurred, I believe, in the year 1984 when Owen Dixon Chambers West had just been completed.
Early in 1984 a room had been advertised for viewing by members of the Bar who wished to take rooms in Owen Dixon Chambers West. A number of us on the third floor decided to go over and have a look at these rooms.
They were Maurice Phipps, now a Federal Court magistrate, John Coleman of counsel and his secretary Judy as well as another secretary, and a lady barrister, Rose Weinberg, the wife of Justice Weinberg, formerly of the Court of Appeal. I also went up to see this room. There was insufficient bookshelf space and I remarked to the person who was showing us around, “There aren’t many bookshelves in this room”
Just then Fascist Bob walked in and said, “A black bastard like you with no brains, what do you need bookshelves for?”
I was livid and just exploded. Maurice Phipps and John Coleman had to escort me out of the room. I wonder whether Phipps and Coleman remember this incident as it happened over 35 years ago. Unfortunately, Robert Johnstone is dead and cannot contradict my version of the events.
After this encounter, whenever Fascist Bob tried to talk to me I would stop, look him up and down, insult him and walk away. Maurice Phipps should remember this because he was in the room opposite me and spent a considerable amount of time trying to pacify me and get me to make up with Fascist Bob. I steadfastly refused to do this for over a year. Instead, I would make it a point to insult him. He never called me “blackie” again. I remember John Coleman also trying to patch up this quarrel.
I experienced several nasty incidents of racism with ‘ABC” He came to the Bar in the early 1970s and considered himself to be eccentric. I met him one day near the lift in Owen Dixon Chambers and he suddenly blurted out, “Hello Sambo, down from your tree?” I was completely shattered by this unnecessary and unseemly remark. I quickly left the foyer. I met him a few days later again in chambers, and we were walking towards each other when he repeated his remark: “Hello Sambo, down from your tree?”
I said, “ABC, I came down from my tree 5,000 years before you did. For if you remember your history, Mohenjo Daro in Central Asia is the cradle of civilisation.” I walked away in disgust.A few days later I went up to the coffee bar on the 13th floor to get myself a cup of coffee. There was a long table adjacent to the coffee bar and seated at it were a number of barristers. I remember three of them – Robert Richter, Boris Kayser and, of course, our young hero, ABC. ABC shouted out, “Hello Sambo!”
I had had enough and walked up to him. “What did you say?” He began to reply when Robert Richter told him, “ABC, look, you had no business talking to Nimal like that’
This incident happened over 40 years ago; I wonder whether either Robert or Boris remembers it. I pulled a chair up to their table and sat down, looked ABC in the eye and asked, “How old are you?”I believe he replied “Twenty-four.” I then proceeded to dress him down in language which cannot be repeated here. The incident cannot be denied.
As I was putting these incidents with ABC in writing, I decided to investigate this matter further. I telephoned Robert Richter and discussed this incident. Robert had a clear recollection of the incident. However he told me that unfortunate as this incident was, ABC had a warped sense of humour and a bad mouth. This was ABC at his worst. He thought he was being funny. Robert told me that he had cautioned him on numerous occasions about his bad mouth. He told me that ABC did not have a racist bone in his body. He was a strong supporter of Aboriginal rights and had been for many, many years. Why then did he have to hurt me?
I was invited to an exhibition of paintings on the thirteenth floor in 1982. I took my wife, Anna Maria, along with me and we walked into the exhibition. Who do you think we saw? It was our hero wearing a Singapore rickshaw coolie’s long blue shirt. I burst out laughing when I saw him and I told Anna Maria, “Look who’s here? It’s that racist shit, ABC.”
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
