Features
The Commonwealth
Unlike UN bodies, the Commonwealth and its Secretariat do not have the same high profile in Sri Lanka or in any other country. That should not mean that the Commonwealth is an unimportant organization. The Commonwealth has its value in many fields, specially in promoting informal negotiations and contacts and in technical assistance. There are many similarities and connections among Commonwealth countries, largely in the fields of administration and governance and in education, and therefore important opportunities for closer interaction.
I have always thought of the Commonwealth as a useful institution and that Sri Lanka has the opportunity to make use of it more. Until the early 1970s, Commonwealth affairs were largely dealt with by the Foreign Ministry, and its technical assistance work was handled by the External Resources Division of the Planning Ministry. In the 1970s, however, there was an increasingly economic dimension to the work of the Commonwealth Secretariat and as a result I was drawn to it as Director of Economic Affairs of the Ministry of Planning.
My main engagement with the Commonwealth came through my participation at two Commonwealth Heads of Government Meetings (CHOGMs), the first one at Kingston Jamaica in May 1975 and the next one in London in June 1977. The CHOGM is a very unusual inter-governmental meeting. There were about 40 members of the Commonwealth at the time, and unlike other international gatherings, it is largely informal. The meeting is conducted in one language, English, and there are no translations and interpretations. That alone leads to a sense of informality.
The host country chairs the meeting, and although the meetings can be tense, there is no acrimony. The Heads of Governments meet round a table (at least those days), and only two officials were allowed at any one time to sit behind each Head of Government. There was opportunity for frank exchanges and across the table interventions and set piece speeches were rare. At the two CHOGMs I attended there were crowded agendas.
The Kingston meeting I attended with the Prime Minister Mrs. Bandaranaike, was fascinating. The Sri Lankan delegation consisted of, apart from the Prime Minister, Tissa Wijayaratna, Additional Secretary to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, N. Balasubramaniam, a Director at the Foreign Office, Dhanapala Samarasekara of the Foreign Ministry, Sunethra Bandaranaike, the PM’s Coordinating Secretary, Dr. Mackie Ratwatte, the PM’s Private Secretary and myself We stayed at the Sheraton Hotel in Kingston.
When we got to the hotel, we found that only four members, apart from the Prime Minister could stay as guests of the Jamaican Government. Other members of the delegation had to pay. Mrs. Bandaranaike was particular about the expenses of her visits abroad. She had a great sense of financial rectitude and accountability to Parliament. She told me and Balasubramaniam to share a room at the Sheraton so that the expenses will be low. I told the PM that I would prefer to go to another hotel close by which was cheaper. She said that it was not satisfactory as we have to be close to her. So I had to share a room with Balasubramaniam. I relate this story to illustrate Mrs. Bandaranaike’s frugality with public money. This is unimaginable nowadays.
As I said before, only two members of the delegation could sit behind the Prime Minister at any one time. I was the only one dealing with economic affairs, and as economic issues took up a lot of the time, I was inside the meeting room for most of the time. We were there for ten days, and during that time, the informality was such that you get to know other heads of government, during tea breaks and at other times. Talking of informality let me relate a few stories.
Pierre Trudeau Prime Minister of Canada was at the meeting, and he was in his prime. He had married a beauty, and they had come with their little child, and they were the great attraction in Kingston. That little child was Justin, now the Prime Minister of Canada. I met Trudeau many times during the Conference and became a nodding acquaintance. He was one of the most charming of Prime Ministers. He was friendly with Mrs. Bandaranaike, as he had visited Sri Lanka in 1973 and had been her guest.
I remember him in Colombo on that visit as I had to be present when Prime Minister Trudeau addressed a press conference at Temple Trees. Trudeau had told Mrs. Bandaranaike that he wished to meet a Sri Lankan astrologer and Mrs. Bandaranaike recommended one of them. Trudeau at that time was aged 49 and was not married. The astrologer told Trudeau that he will be married within the year and that prediction had come true. So when Trudeau met Mrs. Bandaranaike in Kingston, this matter of Sri Lankan astrology was referred to.
There was Mrs. Indira Gandhi, staying at the same Hotel Sheraton and we met many times informally. She left the Conference early, as her friend, Sarojini Naidu’s daughter had passed away. The others who were there were Lee Kuan Yew, Prime Minister of Singapore, Tanzania’s Julius Nyerere, Kenneth Kaunda of Zambia, General Gowon of Nigeria, Gough Whitlam of Australia, Wallace Rowling of New Zealand, and others.
There was also Mujibur Rahman from newly created Bangladesh. He was nurturing a strong grievance against Sri Lanka and Mrs. Bandaranaike, and he was not at all friendly. Sri Lanka had provided landing facilities to Pakistani aircraft on their way to East Bengal during the uprising and breakup from Pakistan. He was there with his young son of ten years, both to be assassinated within the next three or four months in a Bangladeshi coup.
The Foreign Minister, Kamal Hossain, whom we knew was also unfriendly, although he was to be friendly with me later on when he ran a development institute at Oxford. He and his wife visited us in Geneva years later. Michael Manley, the Prime Minister of Jamaica chaired the Conference with great panache and skill.
At the meeting itself, the main agenda item was the proposal for a new scheme for stabilization of primary commodity prices submitted by Harold Wilson, the British Prime Minister. This was at the time of North South tensions, and Harold Wilson was offering an alternative scheme to that of UNCTAD. In presenting this proposal, Harold Wilson took some time over it.
The CHOGM was meeting just the same week that the Vietnam war was ending and US forces were fleeing Vietnam. This had rattled the Singapore Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew and he made a long and rambling presentation (unlike his usual precise self) on the dangers of what is happening in South East Asia. When Harold Wilson made his proposal, Lee Kuan Yew at the end of Wilson’s speech, shouted at Wilson and said that if this kind of presentation from a prepared text was to be the pattern that will be the end of informal discussions at CHOGMs.
Wilson hit back and said that he had listened to a rambling, illogical speech from Harry (meaning Lee Kuan Yew) and that was tolerated. I saw them later shaking hands at the tea interval. The Vietnam war was a subject of discussion at the meeting, and there was a sharp exhange of views between Lee Kuan Yew and Mrs. Gandhi.
Sri Lanka had one matter of substantive interest at the meeting. We had presented a paper on the Brain Drain, following on our own report In Sri Lanka on the subject. We proposed that there can be reciprocal arrangements among Commonwealth countries. Briefly what we said was that the developed countries could contribute to the building of technical educational capacities in those countries which are losing skills, so that there are extra capacities to allow for an outflow. This triggered a valuable discussion on the brain drain but there were no firm decisions.
There was another issue where Mrs. Bandaranaike wanted me to brief her in Kingston. Harold Wilson had proposed that the subject of machinery of government be taken up for discussion at the traditional weekend retreat for heads of government. No officials are present on these occasions. Mrs. Bandaranaike wanted to take up the subject of Cabinet proceedings and cabinet agendas, where relatively minor issues are discussed, and large long term issues are neglected. She wanted to open up a discussion on the framing of cabinet agendas and cabinet committees. I briefed her and she told me later that there was a lively discussion.
An important issue at the CHOGM was the election of a new Secretary General for the Commonwealth. Arnold Smith of Canada was the first and the only SG so far, and he was there in Kingston for his last meeting. He had done a great job in building up the Secretariat. The new candidate was Sridath Ramphal from Guyana. He was the Attorney General and Foreign Minister of Guyana. The Caribbean countries were pushing for him. There was no contest and he was selected to be the SG which he held for the next 15 years.
This was far too long, and later, the CHOGM decided to restrict the tenure of an SG to two terms totalling eight years. Shridath Ramphal, unlike Arnold Smith, was a politician and a flamboyant personality whose view of the Secretariat was in contrast to his predecessor. He was a more activist Secretary General and saw his role as an equal to other heads of government.
Another matter was the appointment of a Committee of Experts to examine the current state of international economic relations from a North South perspective. This arose directly from the discussions on Harold Wilson’s paper on international trade in commodities. The Commonwealth had both developing and developed countries and it was felt that a consensual position could be developed within it, so that the North-South tensions in UN forums could be reduced.
Aliste McIntyre, Head of the Caricom Secretariat and an academic was appointed to head the Committee. They produced a very useful report. Alister was later to be deputy secretary general of UNCTAD during the days of Gamani Corea, and after his retirement he was knighted. When we were in Geneva, he was also there and we became family friends, also working together in UNCTAD.
When I lost my job in Colombo in late 1977, Alister had recommended me to Sridath Ramphal to be the Director of Economic Affairs at the Commonwealth Secretariat, but that could not materialize, as the Government of Sri Lanka was not in favour of my appointment.
Daniel Arap Moi, Vice President Kenya was there acting for Jomo Kenyatta. At that time, Sri Lanka had made a proposal, within the framework of tea negotiations, to establish an Organization of Tea Exporting Countries (OTEC). This was a proposal I had suggested to the Prime Minister and she was glad to pursue it. The objective was to take the tea negotiations out of FAO’s control, so that tea exporters can generate more goodwill and better and more innovative ideas.
Kenya had not been helpful with regard to this proposal. So I thought that an intervention by Mrs. Bandaranaike might help. At a tea break, during the conference, I suggested to Mrs. Bandaranaike that she has a word with Arap Moi. It was all very cordial and he promised to see what he can do. The next thing I heard about it was when our high commissioner in Nairobi, Kenya (W.T Wijekulasuriya, former Mayor of Galle) sent us a press cutting of a speech by Arap Moi in the Kenyan highlands where tea was grown. Arap Moi had said that the Sri Lankan Prime Minister had wanted to control the expansion of tea production in Kenya!
Queen Elizabeth 11 as Head of the Commonwealth was present at Kingston, and threw a glittering party to the Commonwealth Heads of Government on board HMS Britannia, anchored in Kingston harbour. Some of us were able to have a look in at the party. I remember Tissa Wijeyaratna being recognized by the Queen’s private secretary, Michael Charteris, whom he had known in his London days and he never forgot to mention it to us repeatedly.
There was a small but active Sri Lankan community in Kingston who felicitated the Prime Minister. Tony and Charmalene (Perera) Bennet were there and Tony, who is a chartered accountant had been in Colombo working with the United Nations and for some time in the Planning Ministry. When discussing cricket, Tony told me that he could take me to meet George Headley, the great West Indian cricketer, known as the “Black Bradman”, who was living in reirement.
So we spent a delightful morning having breakfast with George Headley at his simple residence. George Headley showed me some cricketing artifacts associated with cricketers like Wally Hammond and Nawab of Pataudi, cricketers of his generation. Tony and Charmalene have remained our friends and now they live in England.
The second CHOGM I attended was in London in May 1977.1 was in Geneva, the previous six weeks working with UNCTAD on the non aligned proposal for a Third World Bank when I got a telephone call from Dharmasiri Pieris, Secretary to the Prime Minister, asking me to go to London and assist Felix Dias Bandaranaike who was to lead the Sri Lankan delegation at the CHOGM. Mrs. Bandaranaike, who was to have come to London cancelled her visit, due to the announcement of the General Election in Sri Lanka.
Felix was in London at a clinic recuperating from an eye infection. I met him there and he wanted a few things done.The CHOGM in London was not as interesting and informal as at Kingston. The Heads of Government were more preoccupied and they had other business to conduct in London. We did not stay in the same one or two hotels as in Kingston. James Callaghan, who was the British Prime Minister chaired the meeting and I remember listening to a wide ranging survey of the global economic situation from Denis Healey, the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
From Ghana had come the army general who was then the ruler of that country (if I remember right, it was General Acheampong), resplendent in his army uniform. When he returned to Accra from the Summit meeting, he was shot dead at the airport, in a military coup. At this meeting, I renewed my contacts with Moni Malhotra of the Commonwealth Secretariat, who had been Mrs. Gandhi’s private secretary, and who was now with the Commonwealth Secretariat.
Queen Elizabeth, invited the officials, accompanying Heads of Government for a Buckingham Palace party and it was informal. I had a two minute chat with the Queen, and I told her that I had seen her on her 28th birthday in 1954 in then Ceylon. This made her think about her Ceylon visit and she had many questions to ask me. She had confused memories and she was mixing up tea plantations and elephants and the Polonnaruwa rest house.
Apart from CHOGMs, I had other interactions with the Commonwealth. One meeting I remember clearly is the Commonwealth Ministers Meeting on Food Production held in London in 1974. 1 accompanied the Minister Hector Kobbekaduwa and Mahinda Silva, the secretary of the ministry to London. It was a very pleasant visit and working with the minister and his secretary were most enjoyable. It was a roundtable meeting chaired by Judith Hart, the then Minister of Overseas Development in the UK. She was a brilliant chairperson.
We listened to a superb exposition on the problems associated with food and hunger by Michael Liption, from the Institute of Development Studies, Sussex who was advising Judith Hart (Lipton had been a member of the Seers mission to Sri Lanka). The Commonwealth also organized sometime in 1973 a meeting on Tea in London. Most tea exporting countries were in the Commonwealth.
I met Anne Weston, then with the Overseas Development Institute in London who was advising the Kenyan delegation, for the first time. Since that time, Anne has worked with me in many projects in Geneva and London. Anne later became Vice President of the North South Institute in Ottawa.
My association with the Commonwealth over a period of seven years leads me to the conclusion that it can be a very useful body for countries like Sri Lanka, if the opportunities are appropriately identified.
Mrs. Bandaranaike found CHOGMs very useful to her. While officials and even Ministers attend large numbers of conferences and seminars, Heads of Government have very little opportunity to interact personally, and the Commonwealth meetings were in the nature of a seminar or workshop on foreign, political and economic issues for them. For this to happen, CHOGMs have to be informal occasions.
What happened in Colombo in 2014 was a travesty of what a CHOGM experience should be. It is my belief that if we wish to strengthen institutions like the Commonwealth, then we should be actively engaged with them continuously so that we in Sri Lanka can influence and shape events, There is a trend now for institutions (the United Nations, the Commonwealth) to dominate the shaping of agendas and programmes, with little regard to the interest of less influential countries. A few powerful countries have come to dominate these institutions. There is no reason why we cannot reverse this trend.
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
