Features
Take-over of Sterling Company Estates
by Leelananda de Silva
From the time of independence, there has been agitation against sterling company estates. There were complaints that they were a colonial imposition, and that they were not well managed. The plantation owners themselves had begun to lose interest in some of their properties, as the profits could not be sent abroad, due to exchange control restrictions.
The estates were being managed by agency houses, and Dr. Colvin R. de Silva, the Minister of Plantation Industry, had set up a Commission on Agency Houses and Brokering Firms. This Commission had reported, but had not recommended the takeover of sterling company estates. It had recommended the control of agency houses.
Prior to that, in 1971, the Seers mission which looked into land reform issues, had proposed land reforms, but had exempted the sterling companies, as they felt that they were too important for Sri Lankan exports, to be disrupted in any way. In the meantime, there had been land reforms, to take over private land holdings of Sri Lankans, allowing only 50 acres per family.
This was the background to a sudden decision taken by the Cabinet to take over sterling companies in 1974. One Wednesday, H.A.de.S (Gunasekera) was summoned to the cabinet meeting by the Prime Minister, and he phoned me from the cabinet office and asked me what I think are the implications of a takeover of sterling companies. I had a discussion with him on the phone. He asked me to prepare a short note to be given to the Prime Minister.
Anyway, the Cabinet went ahead and made the decision to take over sterling company estates. There was no cabinet paper on this subject. It was a totally political decision. A week or two later, the Cabinet decided to take over the rupee companies, which had been left alone by the earlier decision.
The Prime Minister decided that the whole matter of the takeover of sterling companies and rupee companies should be dealt with by the Planning Ministry at this stage.
The Cabinet was not in a hurry to settle the issue of compensation relating to rupee companies. But they were eager to settle issues of compensation for the sterling companies. They were aware of the implications of this subject for Sri Lanka- British relations. From now on I was fully involved in handling this issue, along with H.A.de.S.
The Cabinet decided to appoint a committee to negotiate with the British on the matter of compensation, and H.A.de.S was appointed its chairman, and I was a member and secretary of the committee. Others in the committee included the exchange controller, a representative of the attorney general’s department (Elanga Wikramanayake), the chief valuer and one or two others.
There were many actions prior to the final settlement of compensation for sterling company estates. The British government had to be informed. The Prime Minister was visiting the UK and was meeting the British Prime Minister, Harold Wilson. He told her that the British government was neutral on the question of the takeover of estates, but that if estates were taken over, fair, equitable and prompt compensation should be paid to these companies.
The Prime minister appreciated this and promised early compensation. British aid to Sri Lanka at the time was about four million pounds annually, and this was an important consideration. At this time, there was a suggestion that Sri Lanka should obtain a credit line from the British government so that compensation could be paid promptly.
We had informed the local sterling company interests and the British High Cmmission to this effect. At this time, Hector Kobbekaduwa, the Minister of Agriculture, was visiting the UK to attend a meeting of the Commonwealth Ministers of Food Production, in London. Mahinda Silva, Secretary to the Ministry of Agriculture and I accompanied the Minister to London. Judith Hart was the Minister for Overseas Development and she was responsible for British aid. She was also chairing the Meeting of Commonwealth Ministers and we saw her daily.
We sought a separate meeting with her at her ministry to discuss the subject of compensation for sterling companies. We went to her office to meet her and was greeted by her private secretary, Tony Banks (later a Member of Parliament and Minister of State). Tony Banks was a left wing radical with a great facility for words, for which he became famous in the House of Commons later. He told us that rather than ask for credit lines, we could consider delaying compensation payments, or not paying at all. It was clear that his views were not that of the government, as Judith Hart told us more or less the same thing that Harold Wilson had told the Prime Minister.
We had to decide on the modalities of compensation payment negotiations. H.A.de.S and I informed the Prime Minister and the Cabinet that the best way to proceed was to negotiate with the British owners as one group, instead of negotiating with individual companies. There were some objections to this approach, as it was felt that we could get a better deal by negotiating with estate companies individually.
There were about 125 companies, owning over 150,000 acres, who were willing to be represented as a group. There were few others who were not part of this group. The Prime Minister felt that we must show a degree of goodwill towards the British and allow them to negotiate as a group. We informed Alec Ward, the acting British High Commissioner in Colombo and Trevor Moy who was Chairman of George Steuarts, who was negotiating for the British companies of this decision and they were pleased.
Alec Ward and Trevor Moy were my counterparts in all the discussions I had, many of them in private during this period. H.A.de.S allowed me to handle these details. In all these discussions between the government and the British, we worked through the British High Commission in Colombo and I cannot remember ever contacting our High Commissioner in London for any assistance.
There was one other important decision made by the Cabinet during this period, and that is regarding the level of compensation. Prior to that decision, we had to do a lot of home work in the Ministry of Planning. Fortunately for us, at that time, there was Derek Robinson, a Fellow of Magdalen College, Oxford, and an expert on statistics (Derek was later to be chairman of the Social Science Research Council of the UK) assisting the ministry through a UN project on the question of labour wages on the estates.
We requested Derek to suspend his work and do some research into the share prices of sterling company estates on the London Stock Exchange. He was to come up with a figure of about £20 sterling per acre. This was a very low figure, as prices of estates were being kept artificially low, due to exchange controls in Sri Lanka.
There were also two other instances of recent estate transaction on the London Stock Market. Pelmadulla Holdings, with about 15.000 acres, had been sold to Middle East investors at about £20 per acre. Grand Central Estates, with about 20,000 acres in Sri Lanka had been bought by a Sri Lankan entrepreneur (Upali Wiyawardane) for about the same price on the London stock exchange.
There were also a few transactions by the State Plantations Corporation, which was under the Ministry of Plantation Industry of which the Minister was Dr. Colvin R. de Silva. Four or five estates had been bought at about £60 per acre. Based on all this information, the Cabinet decided that the British should be offered £45 per acre as compensation. This was the price which was recommended by the Planning Ministry.
Compensation was to be paid over a period of time which would be negotiated. This figure of £45 was known, outside the Cabinet, only to H.A.de.S and to me. The other members of the committee were not told of this figure or that there was a decision of the Cabinet on the level of compensation. Those days, this kind of secrecy did work.
Alec Ward and Trevor Moy informed H.A.de.S and me that they would like their delegation for compensation talks to be led by Sir Michael Walker, former British High Commissioner to Sri Lanka who was now living in retirement in England. We agreed to this and their delegation consisted of Sir Michael Walker, Alec Ward, Trevor Moy and two or three others. We met a few times at the Planning Ministry in H.A.de. S’s room on the eighth floor of the Central Bank building, over three days. It was very amicable. H.A.de. S was a superb negotiator and he did it with a great sense of humour and respect for the other side.
At this point, let me record an engaging story. Eric Lubbock, former British parliamentarian and Liberal M P for Orpington now reincarnated as Lord Avebury, a member of the British House of Lords was in Colombo, on holiday. I had met him briefly through a friend and I got to know his views about the sterling companies. I then alerted a Lake House journalist, through Mervin de Silva, the Ministry Director of Information, on this matter.
Lord Avebury’s view, very colourfully expressed, was that the estate owners should not be given any compensation whatever. One or two days before the British delegation met us for compensation talks, there was a news item in the local newspapers that Lord Avebury had suggested that the British had exploited the Sri Lankans for long enough and that they should not pay any compensation for the estates.
After the preliminary greetings, the compensation talks started with an opening statement by Sir Michael Walker. He said that he was at his London club a few days before, where he met Sir Percival Griffiths, authority and historian of Indian tea and he had asked for his views regarding the value of tea estates. Sir Percival had suggested £300 per acre.
H.A.de.S, following on Sir Michael, brought to his notice, the remarks of Lord Avebury, and as H.A.de.S said, a noble lord in the British upper house. H.A.de.S asked whose views we should take seriously- Sir Percival’s who was a relative nonentity in Britain or Lord Avebury’s. This was the only time during the negotiations that I saw Sir Michael losing his temper, calling Avebury a maverick and a chap who is not taken seriously in his own country.
Anyway this set the tone for the negotiations on the price. A couple of hours later, Sir Michael had come down to f 100 an acre. After two days regarding prices, modes of payment, time periods and so on, the main issue came to a head. H.A.de.S offered a final £42 per acre. Sir Michael stuck to £45. At this point, Alec Ward came round to me and suggested that we offer 50 pence more, that is £42.50 and that we can finalize the deal.
I told H.A.de.S what Alec had told me and we decided to make that offer, which ended the negotiations regarding the price level. That 50 pence was worth £75 000 in total, but the price was well within what the Cabinet had decided to offer. Then there were the negotiations on the methods of payment. It was decided that payment will be made over a period of four years. The price offered was to remain fixed in terms of sterling, and not in rupees in the event of devaluation. Hector Kobbekaduwa, the Minister made a statement to Parliament, about the decisions of the compensation committee, which I drafted, with a schedule of sterling company estates.
The takeover of sterling company estates was taking place within the overall framework of land reform. Mrs. Bandaranaike was anxious that her coalition partner, the LSSP, was kept away from the management of these properties. Hence, when the rupee companies were taken over at about the same time, the legislation for that purpose was described as Land Reform Act No. 2 ((1 assisted Nalin Abeysekara, the assistant legal draftsman, in drafting this legislation).
The original Land Reform Act was the responsibility of the Ministry of Agriculture and sterling and rupee companies were also to be the responsibility of that Ministry at this stage. It is my impression that the LSSP was not in favour of the takeover of either rupee or sterling companies. If the LSSP had wanted these estates to be taken over, they could have easily made use of the opportunity of the Agency Houses Commission to make recommendations on those lines. That was not done.
Later on, I was involved in the distribution of the estates between the two corporations- the State Plantations Corporation (SPC) and the Janavasama (JEDB). The SPC was with the Ministry of Plantation industries and the Janawasama was with the Ministry of Agriculture. By the time the properties were to be assigned to the two corporations, the political coalition had broken down and the two ministers were both from the same party.
There was not much acrimony about the division of assets as a result. K.H.J Wijeyadasa from the Ministry of Agriculture was the other official engaged in the decisions to divide the assets. Wije was an old friend of mine from university days, and a public servant of great integrity. What happened then was political, but it turned out to be rational.
The Minister of Agriculture was from Kandy, and the up country plantations, went to the Janavasama. The Minister of Plantation Industries, Ratnasiri Wickramanayake, was from the low country and most of the low country estates went to the SPC. This meant that most of the tea estates were with Janavasama, and most of the rubber and coconut properties went to the SPC. This was a logical outcome in terms of efficient plantation management.
One other related matter that I wish to record was my membership of the Committee on Land Ceilings, which was appointed by the Cabinet. It was chaired by R.T. Ratnatunga, former Settlement Officer and its membership included the Chief Valuer, W.M. Tilakaratna, Deputy Governor of the Central Bank, R.K.W. (Raja) Goonesekara, Principal of the Law College and several others.
This committee was established prior to the legislation on land reform. We met three or four times and we had some papers prepared by the Ministry of Planning, examining the implications of alternative land ceiling limits. I discussed this subject of land ceilings with the Prime Minister and my impression was that while she might have favoured a higher limit, she had no clear directions to offer me. The two main alternatives being discussed at the time was 25 acres and 50 acres for a family. There were two or three on the committee who wanted the lower limit and I went along with the higher one, as I felt that would be more fair and more feasible to manage as a viable economic unit. The majority of the committee opted for the higher limit of 50 acres, which ultimately became the policy of the government.
(Excerpted from the author’s memoirs)
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
