Features
President’s Energy Directive ignored by the Power Ministry – II
A reply to Dr Tilak Siyambalapitiya
Dr Janaka Ratnasiri
The piece written by Dr Tilak Siyambalapitiya (Dr TS) appearing in The Island of 24.02.2021, in response to my letter on 19.02.2021 is wide of the mark. The Power Ministry officials responsible for not taking any action on the President’s directive for over five months are fortunate that they are living in Sri Lanka where there is still some sort of democracy prevails. In a country like China or North Korea, they would have been probably summarily executed.
PRESIDENT’S DIRECTIVE ON ENHANCING RE SHARE
The President wanted his target of 70% of electricity generation from renewable energy (RE) sources achieved by 2030, that is in 10 years’ time. While this is not something impossible, it can be achieved provided the relevant authorities make a concerted effort beginning today (see writer’s pieces in the Island on 28th and 29th December 2020). In this exercise, it is not possible to make even a loss of 4-5% of time. That was why the President summoned a second meeting on 15.12.2020 when he found that no action was taken by the Ministries and their officials since his first meeting, he had with them 3 months before on 14.09.2020.
He categorically stressed at the second meeting that officials should be honest in their attitudes and expedite the exercise. Soon after, he appointed a former Army Official as the Vice Chairman of the Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB) to expedite CEB working on this matter. He even invited the Board of Investment Chairman to the second meeting and directed the CEB officials to work in collaboration with BOI to expedite granting approval for Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) proposals submitted by investors.
RELUCTANCE OF OFFICERS TO FOLLOW PRESIDENT’ VERBAL DIRECTIVES
Though the President has said at a number of meetings he had at village level and also in his Independence Day speech that the public officers should act within the authority vested on them, without referring them to higher authorities, and that they should treat his announcements as circulars, there have been instances recently when officers who were attempting to do so being pulled up by their seniors. The case of the Deputy Conservator of Forests in Gampaha District who stopped felling a rare species of a tree is one such instance.
Another is a report appearing in the Island of 26.02.2021 that “Senior officers of the Department of Wildlife Conservation and Forest Department yesterday expressed concern over a directive that they should seek the State Ministry Secretary’s approval prior to taking legal actions against those who harm protected areas”. Hence, the President’s word will alone not move officers into action because they could fall into trouble after the present regime changes.
NEED TO AMEND THE GUIDELINES FOR ELECTRICITY INDUSTRY
Therefore, the President’s verbal directive has to be translated into a written memorandum drafted by the Power Ministry Secretary and presented to the Cabinet under the signature of the Power Minister enabling amending the current Guidelines to Electricity Industry by raining its present RE share to be achieved by 2030 from 50% to 70%. The Public Utilities Commission (PUCSL) will then be able to direct the CEB to prepare its Long-Term Generation Expansion (LTGE) Plan accordingly. This is the first step to be taken in planning for achieving the President’s target.
The question I raised in my piece in the Island of 19th was why hasn’t the Power Ministry done anything about it over the last 5 months. Was there any unseen hand holding back either the Secretary or the Minister from attending to this simple assignment? Was it the CEB management or its trade unions? Without addressing my question, Dr TS now talks about cost escalation if renewables are adopted in the future based on archaic PUCSL tariff. Isn’t this a “Yanne Koheda? Malle Pol” response?
NEW SOURCES OF FUNDNG FOR RENEWABLE PROJECTS
Everyone knows that electricity from clean RE sources, other than major hydro, costs more than from dirty fossil sources, despite the fact that RE projects do not burn any costly fuel and their average specific capital costs today are of the same order of magnitude as those of thermal power plants. This is because the average plant factor or the percentage time the plant operates during the day for RE plants such as solar and wind, is in the range 20-30% while for thermal power plants, it is in the range 70-90%. The low PF for RE plants is beyond our control as it depends on the geography and location of the country.
Solar power plants generate electricity only when sun shines on them and wind power plants generate electricity only when wind blows turning their turbines which could be internment both diurnally and seasonally. There is no such limitation in the case of thermal power plants. In working out the levelized cost of electricity (LCE), the power industry including experts like Dr. TS still uses the formula that LCE is the sum of the amortized capital cost, fuel cost and operation & maintenance (O&M) costs and divided by the total generation. So even if the fuel cost is zero with RE projects, the fact that their generation is low make them non-competitive compared to thermal power plants.
Now, if a third party meets the capital cost with no interest or any other pay back, the host country will have to meet only the O&M costs which will make RE projects financially viable. Dr TS regrettably appears to be not aware of this latest development in funding of renewable energy projects available today for developing countries, particularly after adoption of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change in 2015.
KYOTO PROTOCOL ON
CLIMATE CHANGE
The 15th Conference of Parties (COP15) of the UN Convention on Climate Change (UNCCC), met in Copenhagen in November 2009 to decide on the future of the Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change (KPCC) adopted in 1997 which made it mandatory for the developed countries to mitigate their emissions of Green-house Gases (GHGs) by specified amounts ranging up to 5% relative to their 1990 emission levels, within the five-year period 2008-12. The developing countries on the other hand were exempted from such a requirement except that they are required to adopt social and economic policies leading to GHG mitigation.
Several Parties including USA, Japan, Canada and Russia later withdrew from the KPCC on the grounds that industrialized developing countries like China and India who emit the major share of GHGs are exempted from any commitments to mitigate. However, at every COP meeting, both China and India vehemently objected to any attempt to draw them into KPCC commitments, saying that on per capita basis, both China and India rank at the bottom. At one COP meeting, the Indian delegate said their emissions are emissions of survival rather than emissions of affluence as in developed countries.
At the COP15, there were several resolutions submitted by various Parties proposing the extents by which developed country Parties should be made to mitigate their emissions and the time frames. As is done in similar instances, the Chair appointed a small group comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (BRICS) to study the proposals and make recommendations to the Plenary for adoption by it, after debate. After lengthy negotiations, the Group came to an agreement that EU Parties will enhance their commitments, but all developing countries will remain uncommitted.
PARIS AGREEMENT ON CLIMATE CHANGE
When the meeting which was held behind closed doors was about to close towards mid-night of the last day of COP15, an unprecedented event took place. America’s President Barack Obama barged into the room unannounced (which only President Obama could have done), where he did not even have a chair to sit. He intervened to say that he was willing to mobilize USD 100 billion annually up to 2020 from developed countries, both public and private sector, for assisting developing countries to undertake RE projects, provided they agree to make voluntary commitments both in amounts and time frames.
He further told others that even the developed countries need not undertake mandatory commitments but only undertake voluntary commitments. Both China and India who were members of the BRICS Committee fell for this carrot, who were hitherto vehemently protesting making any mitigation commitments, gave their consent to Obama’s offer. That event gave birth to the Paris Agreement on Climate Change (PACC). However, it took 6 more years for the text of the Paris Agreement to get adopted by Nations at COP21 held in Paris. The motive for President Obama making his proposal came out during his speech he made at the Plenary of COP21 when he said that America would undertake emission reductions the way they wanted to and not the way others wanted to.
GREEN CLIMATE FUND
During the COP21 itself, many heads of states pledged for providing finances during 2016-2020, totaling USD 48 billion. Among the key contributors were Japan (USD 10B), EU (USD 11B), UK (USD 8.7B), France (USD 6.6B), Italy (USD 4 B) and USA (USD 4B) (UNFCCC website). It is noteworthy that USA which spearhead the abolition of mandatory emission reductions by developed countries and getting developing countries on board with them, made only a paltry USD 4 billion contributions up to 2020. Though USA withdrew from the PACC during President Donald Trump’s tenure, President Joe Biden has assured USA’s commitment to PACC.
The UNFCCC established the Green Climate Fund (GCF) in 2010 to collect funds from developed countries and disburse them among developing countries on the basis of proposals submitted by them for adaptation and mitigation projects, following their guidelines. The GCF has disbursed funds among 150 projects up to end of 2020 for both adaptation and mitigation projects. Some of the recent disbursements for mitigation projects are given in Table 1.
Table 1. Some recent disbursements made by GCF for mitigation
CountryProjectGrant
USDGHG saved
MtCO2Approved DateIndia250 MW R/T solar 250 M5.2March 2018Zambia200 MW Solar PV154 M4.0March 2018Congo300 MW Solar PV with storage89 M0.51Oct 2018Nigeria400 MW solar PV467 M9.5Feb 2019Six in Africa214 MW solar PV150 M4.82019BangladeshEnergy efficiency in apparel industries340 M14.5Nov 2020
In addition, several multilateral banks operating in Asia, Africa and globally pledged finances up to USD 160 billion by 2020. Only a few projects are listed to save space. An interested reader may visit GCF website for a complete list at .
SRI LANKA’S SITUATION
To date, Sri Lanka has received funding from the GCF only for two adaptation projects described in Table 2.
Table 2. Adaptation Projects approved by GCF for Sri Lanka
Implementing AgencyProjectGrant
USDAffected CommunityApproved DateUNDPImproving resiliency of small holder dry zone farmers cultivating under village irrigation schemes52 M2.0 MJune 2016IUCNImproving resiliency of subsistence farmers in Knuckes Mountain Range49 M1.3 MMarch 2020
As for mitigation projects, Sri Lanka has not even prepared a country programme identifying projects to be submitted seeking funding even though discussions were being held during past few years. It is indeed a sad situation, which the President should look into, as this directly affects implementation of RE projects necessary to achieve his target. The responsibility for submitting project proposals to the GCF seeking funding lies with the Ministry of Environment which serves as the national focal point for UNFCCC.
It is a pity while least developed countries in Africa have managed to secure hundreds of million Dollars funding for implementing RE projects from international sources, Sri Lanka has not even identified suitable projects to seek funding. One reason could be that the country has too many organizations handling RE projects and sourcing funding and there isn’t any coordination among them. These include the Power Ministry, Renewable Energy Ministry, Environment Ministry, CEB, SLSEA, PUCSL and AG Department. The writer has written extensively on their conflicts both in the Island and other media and do not wish to repeat them here.
CONCLUSION
Dr TS has totally misunderstood the problem I posed in my letter to the Island of 19.02.2021 and writes a nonsensical response. He seems to turn a blind eye to the happenings at the Power Ministry and CEB for reasons best known to him. He should also be aware of the sources of funding available for implanting RE projects before making such statements that with losses incurred in selling electricity below cost for 10 years will surpass the money required to purchase COVID vaccines.
Since sourcing of funds for RE projects is critical for achieving the President’s target, he should look into the affairs of these organizations to streamline their activities with a view to expediting sourcing of funds. He should offer golden hand-shake to those who decline to cooperate.
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
