Features
Wimala Wijewardene enchanted by my piano playing at ‘Temple Trees’
SWRD plagued by troubles in the port
(Excerpted from the Memoirs of a Cabinet Secretary by BP Peiris)
A dispute had arisen with regard to an attendance bonus, the rates of pay for shore workers and the special cost of living allowance for lightermen. The Government again gave way and directed the Commissioner of Labour to secure from the employers the following concessions: if a worker had been in continuous employment and had worked under the same employer for 288 days or more during the year ended November 30, 1956, he should be paid an attendance bonus of Rs 30 before Christmas day 1956. This bonus should be reduced by one rupee for every four days’ absence up to a minimum 232 day attendance which would give a minimum of Rs 16.
The Government promised that steps would be taken to ensure that the legitimate demands of the worker would be satisfied, but felt compelled, in the interests of the public at large, and particularly in view of the intransigent attitude adopted by a section of trade union leaders, to take measures to ensure continuity of work in the Port.
The decision to declare the Port work an industry essential to the life of the community under the Industrial Disputes Act served the dual purpose of providing labour and employers with an efficient machinery for the speedy settlement of industrial disputes and of protecting the community against the effect of capricious strikes. It became illegal to resort to strike action without giving at least twenty-one days’ notice of the matters in dispute and the intention to strike. It also gave the Government an opportunity of negotiating a settlement.
The workers in the Port were now proposing to have a mass rally and strike in defiance of the law. They had appointed an action committee, with ring leaders inside the Port, who were secretly inciting the workers to strike. Their names were known to the Criminal Investigation Department. The Government decided that they should take no action in anticipation of a strike, that in the event of a strike, permanent labour should he given three or four hours’ notice to resume work, and, on the failure to do so, the armed forces should be ordered to work the Port.
The disturbances in and outside the Port continued. A hand grenade was thrown near the Khan Clock Tower injuring several persons. The current labour troubles were not isolated incidents but formed part of a planned programme on the part of certain persons and parties to throw the country into chaos. The Police were again given orders to protect those who were reporting for duty in the port.
Certain trade unions of public servants went on strike. The Cabinet decided that the strikers should not be paid for the days on which they did not work but that the amount to be deducted from their pay should be in such number of installments as the Minister of Finance may determine. It was also agreed that such deductions should not ultimately affect their pensions. The Government still had not learned the lesson of exercising some firmness in the interests of general discipline. They were oozing with the milk of human kindness.
When the strikes first occurred in 1956, the Prime Minister was out of the Island visiting the United Nations, the United States of America, Canada, the United Kingdom and Pakistan, and Ministers were a bit handicapped in taking important decisions. 1956 ended on this note of unrest in labour circles.
Towards the end of 1957, the situation became worse and the Cabinet was compelled to tender advice to the Governor-General for the issue of orders under the Army and Navy Acts, ordering members of the regular army to perform certain duties necessary for the maintenance of supplies and services essential to the life of the community, and ordering members of the Royal Navy to perform certain non-naval duties necessary in the public interest.
To add to the Government’s troubles, it became necessary to watch the financial situation carefully. The budget deficit had increased to Rs 250 million. The Ministers were therefore asked to limit supplementary appropriation to a minimum and a new loan of Rs. 40 million was raised. People were clamouring for houses, landlords were demanding exorbitant rents which were beyond the tenants’ means, and the Government authorized the raising of a further loan of Rs 75 million for housing purposes. In the next year’s budget, Ministers were asked to scrutinize carefully the creation of new posts and to make the most effective use of existing personnel. They were asked to abandon or slow down any continuing works where such action was expedient. Priorities were laid down for new projects.
S.W.R.D., while living at Rosmead Place, once asked me to summon the Cabinet to meet at Temple Trees at 9 p.m. I got there half an hour early to instruct the servants about this emergency meeting and to have the meeting room ready. The upper storey was in total darkness. I asked that the lights be put on and went up to while away my time at the grand piano. Coming down, a few minutes before the meeting, I met Minister Wimala Wijewardene at the bottom if the stairs.
She cooed “Oh, Mr Peiris, I heard some lovely music coming from upstairs. I’ve never been upstairs myself”. I said “Madam Minister, I was playing Strauss’ Blue Danube”, and she cooed again “Oh, Mr Peiris, I didn’t know you could do that also”. With my training in legal drafting, where no superfluous or unnecessary word must be used, I have been trying ever since, without success, to give some meaning to that last word.
It was now time to draft S.W.R.D.’s second Speech from the Throne. I took the draft to Rosmead Place; there was no mishap this time, he approved it without any amendment, a most unusual thing for him. The speech began:
“The last Session of Parliament was one in which My Government had to face many difficulties, both internal and external. Internally, the introduction of the Official Language Act, a certain amount of labour unrest, and grievance expressed by a certain section of the public service, caused difficulties. Externally, the situation arising from the dispute over the Suez Canal created problems of a political as well as an economic nature. Notwithstanding these difficulties, My Government has steadfastly pursued the policy outlined in my Speech at the opening of the last Session.”
Further trouble was threatened by the Federal Party by reason of the Sinhala Only Act, and the following paragraph was inserted in the Speech:
“My Government is much concerned at the threat to peace, law and order and communal amity in the country by the activities of the Federal Party and its proposed satyagraha movement in August. My Government is convinced that there is no justification whatever for these activities, particularly in view of the assurance given by My Prime Minister before Prorogation of Parliament. These problems can and should only be dealt with by friendly discussion. My Government, while being prepared to take all necessary steps to satisfy the reasonable grievances of minorities, is determined in the interests of the community as a whole to take all measures required for the preservation of law and order and the safeguarding of the State.”
Here was a veiled threat intended, probably, to frighten the Tamil community. The Prime Minister had forgotten a sentence he had inserted in his previous Speech: “My Government wishes to assure minorities, religious, racial and otherwise, that they need have no fear of injustice or discrimination in the carrying out of its policies and programmes.” He had also forgotten that there was no determination on his part to preserve law and order when the mob invaded the Legislative chamber and he told the police “Let the people come.” It was not necessary to consult an astrologer to know that troubles lay ahead.
With all the troubles he was carrying on his head at this time, the Prime Minister took on the additional task of being the Chairman of the Joint Select Committee of the Senate and the House of Representatives which had been appointed to consider the revision of the Constitution with particular reference to the establishment of a Republic and the guaranteeing of fundamental rights. The Prime Minister asked me, as a favour, to assist him in putting the Committee’s decisions into proper legal form. I had no alternative but to agree.
I asked that as I had ceased to be a Draftsman and would be present in a purely unofficial capacity, an officer of the Legal Draftsman’s Department be invited to attend the meetings. Namasivayam was the officer who came. As a matter of historical interest and as, in my opinion, nothing like a Republic will come into being for a long time if Parliament adopts this Select Committee procedure, I should like to set down here the decisions arrived at by that Select Committee.
It was an unwieldy committee and consisted of Philip Gunawardena, Edmund Cooray, Colvin R. de Silva, N. U. Jayawardene, Pieter Keuneman, S. Nadesan, N. M. Perera and R. S. V. Poulier, belonging to different political parties. With such a motley crowd, it was almost impossible to arrive at a unanimous report, but S.W.R.D. told me that he was determined to steer the proceedings in such a way as to have a report without a dissent.
He was prepared to compromise and succeeded in achieving unanimity on Chapter I, which was all that the Committee could do, before Parliament was prorogued and the Joint Select Committee was automatically dissolved. This Chapter dealt with Fundamental Rights and, as the Committee reached it decisions following the Indian Constitution, I prepared the draft.
Chapter I-Fundamental Rights 1, 2. (Enacting clauses. )
3. The State Shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of Ceylon.
4. (1) The State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth, or any of them.
(2) No citizen shall on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth, or any of them, be subject to any disability, liability, restriction or condition with regard to-
(a) access to shops, public restaurants, hotels and places of public entertainment; or
(b) the use of wells, tanks, bathing places, roads and places of public resort maintained wholly or partly out of state funds or dedicated to the use of the general public.
(3) Nothing in this section shall prevent the State from making any special provision for women and children.
(4) Nothing in this section or in subsection (2) of section II shall prevent the State from asking any special provision for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens.
(5) No person shall be deprived of his life of personal liberty except according to procedure established by law: Provided that, the preceding provisions of this section shall not be deemed to affect the operation of any existing law or to prevent the State from making any law modifying those provisions where the State considers it necessary so to do in the public interest or for the maintenance of public security, law and order or for the maintenance of services essential to the life of the community.
Features
The heart-friendly health minister
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.
Features
A LOVING TRIBUTE TO JESUIT FR. ALOYSIUS PIERIS ON HIS 90th BIRTHDAY
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.
Features
A fairy tale, success or debacle
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 . )