Features
Supporting Conservation Education: the story of March for Conservation: Part I
By Ryhana Raheem
This article was prompted by a recent reference to March for Conservation (MfC) by Dr Rohan Pethiyagoda in his absorbing lecture entitled ‘Serendipity: The Discovery of Sri Lanka’s Biodiversity Heritage. The lecture focused on the pioneers who awakened our interest in the rich natural heritage of this island and ended with references to those who continued this work. Among those singled out for mention at the end was March for Conservation (MfC), and Dr Pethiyagoda made a glowing reference to the work MfC had carried out with the young people of Sri Lanka. This unexpected and flattering tribute, decades after MfC had been disbanded, seems to be a favourable opportunity to recall the work that this small but highly committed organization had managed to achieve particularly in Environmental Education (EE).
The beginning – the Marches and the Programmes for Schools
From the start, conservation education was the centre of focus for MfC. The organization which was based at the Department of Zoology, (now the Department of Zoology and Environment Sciences) University of Colombo, was founded in 1980 by Dr R Rudran of the Smithsonian Institution who had received a grant from the New York Zoological Society to fund environmental activities in Sri Lanka. A number of friends and colleagues were invited to Dr Rudran’s house in Colombo to discuss what should be done with the grant. The consensus of everyone at that meeting which included among others, Laki Senanayake, Irangani Serasinghe, Nihal Fernando, Ismeth Raheem, Sarath Kotagama, other naturalists and young academics from the University of Colombo was that knowledge and education had to be harnessed to preserve the natural heritage of the country.
And given the hiatus in environmental activities at that time, it was felt that the target audience should be young adults who would carry the message into the future. To draw young people into the fold, two major suggestions were made – a publicity event which involved a march through the streets of Colombo by school children who would carry posters and banners stressing the need for conservation, and an educational programme- a series of lectures for young adults in the Colombo educational zone. The decision to start with a march led to Sarath Kotagama’s suggestion that we call our organization the March for Conservation. Within days, Laki Senanayake had produced his masterpiece of a logo for MfC incorporating indigenous symbols that captured the centuries old tradition of nature protection and conservation in Sri Lanka .
The first march was a resounding success. Led by two baby elephants, the procession started out at the Dehiwela Zoo and as it wound its way along Galle Road and then Havelock Road, almost every school along the route joined in, carrying posters and banners that reiterated the message of the march. An attractive feature was that many of the schools came along with their school bands. Members of the public too fell in to stride along with the school children and it was an enormous throng of adults and children, accompanied by the sound of exuberant music that gathered finally on Galle Face Green.
In subsequent years, equally successful marches were organized in Colombo, in Polonnaruwa and a most eventful one- from Colombo to Kandy. This last march took place over five days with schools on the Colombo-Kandy road joining the march and marchers staying overnight at temples along the road .The march would halt in the afternoon at a temple, and in the evening, lectures on conservation issues would be held for the local community at the temple premises. The spectacular end was in the centre of Kandy town, which like Galle Face Green in 1980, was filled to capacity with adults and schoolchildren. A most unfortunate incident during this Kandy March was the attack at Kadugannawa on the veteran conservationist Irangani Serasinghe by a monkey who bit her on her eyebrow, narrowly missing her eye.
What the marches had proved was that the young people of the island were more than ready to heed the message of conservation. As one of MfC’s strengths was the availability of members who were academics, the organization was able to nurture this interest by supporting it with carefully thought out educational programmes that provided scientific knowledge on the geography of the island, the fauna, the flora and other topics related to the preservation of Sri Lanka’s biodiversity. At weekends, classrooms in the Faculty of Science at the University of Colombo were filled to capacity with school children from GCE A level classes from 40 schools all over the Colombo district.
This lecture series ended with an Environmental Quiz for which prizes were awarded: hundreds of children attended the Award Ceremony held at the university. This programme was repeated wherever marches were held and different competitions were organized. In Polonnaruwa, for example, the lectures ended with an Art Competition and the organizers were swamped with posters and art work on the theme of environmental conservation.
Unfortunately however the momentum of this effort was disrupted firstly by the ethnic riots of 1983 and more seriously by the JVP uprising of the late 1980s. However the seeds of interest, and more importantly, of relevant scientific information, had been sown and this perhaps contributed to the establishment of young people’s environmental organizations throughout the island in the late 1990s and thereafter.
The Sinharaja Project-Research and Education
While the Schools Programmes were going on, in December 1980, MfC embarked on another area of interest-research in wilderness areas. This too was initiated by a grant received by Dr Rudran, this time from the World Wildlife Fund. The focus of the project was the Sinharaja Reserve which had been subject to controversial logging in the 1970s. MfC’s initiative was to study the effects of deforestation on the small mammals of the forest. Research was the main activity of this project but as so little was known of this forest, MfC took the opportunity to include the Sinharaja Project into its educational efforts and share the knowledge that it had gathered with the general public. In January 1982, the organization disseminated the results of the study at the first-ever Sinharaja Symposium which brought together all the government institutions, universities and other institutions working in the Sinharaja.
In December 1982, MfC brought the forest to the city by organizing a highly acclaimed exhibition on the Sinharaja at the Lionel Wendt Centre in Colombo which drew large crowds of adults and children. The photographic panels that were created for this exhibition were absorbed into MfC’s educational programme as they could be dismantled and provided as a mobile exhibition on Sinharaja to schools all over the island.
The Sinharaja Reserve became a focal point of MfC’s educational efforts and a number of lecture programmes were carried out in situ at the reserve. The research area also became a location for workshops on ecology and conservation. In addition, pains were taken to include those who lived in the Sinharaja area in these educational efforts. In 1984, the young people of the Kudawa village, the western entry point into the Sinharaja , inspired by all that was going on around them, got together to form their own active conservation society.
In 1987, supported by the Natural Resources, Energy and Science Authority (NARESA), MfC produced a publication on this rain forest. In 1990, the authors revised the manuscript of ‘Sinharaja-a Rain Forest in Sri Lanka’ and developed it into what still remains as one of the seminal publications on the island’s best known rainforest reserve. The book was translated into Sinhala and in keeping with MfC’s emphasis on education, given free of charge to schools and sold at a nominal price to members of the public.All this work helped disseminate information and would have fueled public interest in and concern for the Sinhara forest.
The Environmental Education Project -Teacher Training and Pedagogical Support
By 1990, MfC had a great deal of experience in EE garnered by working consistently with schools on a systematic programme of learning enrichment. However, the organization had also come to realize that although there was no dearth of interest in the environment, teacher knowledge and skills were at a low, almost minimal level. In 1989, MfC had in fact, begun an inquiry into the factors affecting the teaching of EE at secondary level in Sri Lankan schools. This inquiry which was carried out in collaboration with NARESA and in consultation with the National Institute of Education (NIE) chose to survey schools in three regions, each representative of a distinct geographical/ecological area.
Activity Cards, games and booklets created forthe EE Project
The three regions chosen were the Western Province (industrialized/urban, Wet Zone), the Uva Province (montane/rural) and the Southern Province (coastal Wet Zone). The inquiry included a questionnaire survey which was followed up by consultative workshops with the teachers. By 1991, three very successful workshops had been held-one at the NARESA Auditorium in Colombo, the second at St Aloysius College, Galle and the third at Dharmadutha College in Badulla. One of the most satisfying results of the inquiry was the very active participation of the teachers who had definite ideas on their wants and needs vis-à-vis EE. Among the problems listed was the dearth of appropriate teaching/learning materials and teacher aids, the lack of audio-visual equipment and inadequate numbers of motivated, knowledgeable personnel.
Another interesting and unexpected finding was that the teachers emphasized that the links between environmental NGOs and the teachers should be strengthened. They felt that this would enable them to be better informed on controversial topics which impinged on their own communities such as the siting of industries in rural areas and the use of pesticides in agriculture and daily life. Furthermore the teachers also believed that the motivation and commitment of NGO volunteers was far more inspiring, and that the training imparted by conservation NGOs was more valuable than those of teacher educators.
This exchange of ideas thus provided useful insights as to how issues in EE could be remedied and in the next stage of this project, MfC decided to address itself to one of the central concerns- the lack of appropriate pedagogic material.
This EE project had as its objectives not merely the creation of educational aids but also the improvement of teaching methodologies and was designed to wean teachers away from teaching only from the book. The teaching aids designed were carefully prepared in accord with the syllabus being used at the time for Grades six, seven and eight and included different types of teaching/learning activities ranging from scholastic/ academic to fun-filled creative exercises.
All the lessons centred on resources that a teacher or child could find in a Sri Lankan school wherever it was located. Training workshops were held to introduce the teachers to the new material and provide guidance as to how to use them. In January 1993, the teaching packages were introduced into classrooms in Colombo, Galle and Badulla. In May 1993, evaluative workshops were held to gauge the effectiveness of the packages and gather information on teacher reactions with a view to improving the teaching aids.
Teacher reaction to the project was overwhelmingly enthusiastic, and paid tribute to many aspects of the project. These reactions are summed up by one participant who stated
“In my 23 years of teaching, including eight as a Master Teacher, I have attended numerous workshops conducted by many agencies. But, in my opinion, these workshops by March for Conservation have been the most enjoyable and useful – and the ones that I gained most from, professionally speaking.”
Other means of teacher enhancement were also established by MfC which included field workshops at the Peradeniya Botanical Gardens, the Sinharaja Reserve and the Horton Plains National Park. These workshops supported teacher knowledge of the wealth of natural resources in the country and also provided training in basic field techniques used to assess biological diversity. It was hoped that the workshops would instill greater enthusiasm amongst the teachers and motivate them to pass on this enthusiasm and newly gained knowledge to their students.[To be continued}
(Ryhana Raheem , Emeritus Professor, Open University of Sri Lanka is a Founder member of MfC and co-author of “Sinharaja- A Rain Forest in Sri Lanka”. She was the Chief Coordinator, MfC (1980 – 1983), Project Coordinator, MfC- Naresa EE project (1989 – 1993) and Project Director, BSEP (1994- 1998)
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
