Connect with us

Features

Putting up a fight for appointment as Cabinet Secretary

Published

on

Excerpted from the memoirs of B.P. Peiris

T. D. Perera, Deputy Secretary to the Treasury, was appointed the first Secretary to the Cabinet in addition to his other duties. He was a mild man and rarely interfered with my work. He used to arrive at the Cabinet office at about 11 a.m. and, having seen the tappal and my orders thereon, leave about 10 minutes later. I was left more or less to act on my own responsibility.

But, in Cabinet, he was sometimes too talkative as Secretary and was snubbed on two occasions by the Ministers. Once, when he was arguing a point with E. A. P. Wijeratne, who was always polite, he was told by the Minister that the conversation would be carried on in that manner when the Secretary became a Minister. On the other occasion, G. G. Ponnambalam, in his usual bluntness, turned round to Prime Minister D.S. and said, “Sir, I am not prepared to carry on this conversation at this level”.

When I submitted a minute to T. D. that the Treasury connection in the Cabinet was undesirable, he disagreed and said it was most useful. It did not seem to strike him that in the Cabinet he was arguing the Treasury point of view and that he had already made an order against which the Minister was appealing. When the Minister started arguing, T. D. forgot that he was there in a dual capacity.

T. D. was succeeded by A. G. Ranasinha, who also held in addition, the office of Secretary to the Treasury. It was he, I heard, who expressed his amazement at the disrespect in the Legal Draftsman’s Department where assistants smoked in the presence of their Heads. I must confess I was a little nervous when his appointment was announced. I had not met him before and did not know him. Would he, I thought, object to my smoking in his presence when the Prime Minister had no objection to my smoking during a Cabinet meeting?

On the day of his appointment, he walked into my room and said, “I am Ranasinha. How do you run this office?” I told him that I attended to the work and seldom referred a paper to T. D. Perera. He said “Run it as before” and left. He was a charming man; my nervousness vanished. Here was a man, I thought, who has understanding and under whom I could work without friction. I am a very sensitive person and the slightest rudeness on another’s part upsets me.

Remember Mervyn Fonseka’s grilling. It has been my good fortune, during the period of my public service of 27 years, to have been stationed in Colombo in two departments and have had as my Heads five great gentlemen: J. Mervyn Fonseka, P. C. Villavarayan, H. N. G. Fernando, T. D. Perera and A. G. Ranasinha.

I mentioned to Ranasinha the slight friction which T. D. had with the Ministers after which he refused, as Secretary to the Cabinet, to be drawn into a discussion of Treasury matters. He used to say, and in my opinion quite rightly, that if any information was required, he would get his officials to come with the relevant files. Ranasinha did not come to office except on Cabinet days. He gave me complete administrative discretion.

I did not know that Ranasinha was a brother-in-law of Clement de Alwis of the Postal department, an old friend of mine. When the Government, in recognition of his services, conferred on him the titular rank of Mudaliyar, I received a special invitation from him to be present in the evening at his house at Kadawata. On my arrival, the Mudaliyar took me to the bar and, after a few ‘warmers’, I asked him whether a closed piano, which I saw, worked. The piano was so placed that a person playing could not see who was entering or leaving the house. When I had finished playing a piece, I heard Ranasinha’s familiar voice from behind saying “Play the Blue Danube”. The Mudaliyar kept filling my glass. It was past midnight.

My. boss probably thought I was ‘tops’. There was to be a Cabinet meeting the next morning and Ranasinha, on leaving, was gentlemanly enough to tell me not to bother to attend the meeting as he would “take it himself”. I do not remember at what time I left the party, but I did not want to take advantage of a man’s kindness. I was in attendance at the meeting.

In October 1954, the Post of Governor of the Central Bank fell vacant. Sir John Kotelawala was Prime Minister. At a Cabinet meeting he turned round to Ranasinha, and asked him immediately to resign his posts of Treasury Head and Cabinet Secretary as he was to be appointed as the Governor of the Bank. The Prime Minister also asked him to have L. J. Seneviratne appointed as his successor at both ends. I protested.

I said I had previously acted as Secretary, that I was on my maximum salary as Assistant and that I appeared to have no prospects if, every time the Cabinet post fell vacant, a Treasury official was to fill the vacancy. I heard Ranasinha’s voice in Cabinet, a rare occurrence. He said that since 1947 I had been doing all the work of the Cabinet Office without being paid for it, whereas T. D. Perera and he had been doing very little and been drawing the emoluments of the office.

He said that he did not agree with T. D. Perera that there should be a connection between the Cabinet and the Treasury (Lord! What a grand fellow, I thought). Sir John was a man of quick decision. He ordered that L. J. be appointed to the Treasury post and that the Cabinet post should not be filled until he returned from a 10 day visit to Jaffna which he was making the next day. This gave me plenty of time to think and, with my inability to bend my knee, I decided to put my case down in writing. I made the following minute to the Prime Minister:

“I respectfully ask that my name be considered for the post of Secretary to the Cabinet which is now vacant. Next March, I shall be 47 years of age. I am an advocate of 23 years standing with 18 years of public service. In the public service, I am junior by one year to Justice H. N. G. Fernando and senior by four months to Mr T. S. Fernando, Q.C., Solicitor-General.

The late Prime Minister selected me in 1946, out of all the draftsmen, to draft the Constitution and Elections Orders in Council. I am unaware of the reasons for his choice. When the Orders in Council became law, the late Prime Minister ordered me, on the telephone, to take charge of the Cabinet Office. Since then, that is October 1947, there have been 385 cabinet meetings, and I have attended and done the work of all these meetings except one which I missed because I had to attend court on summons.

I have done this work throughout unaided and on my own responsibility, because Mr T. D. Perera and Sir Arthur Ranasinha gave me a completely free hand. Neither of them has had occasion to find fault with my work. In fact, during these seven years, not more than 15 or 20 papers have been referred by me to the Secretary for orders. It will be seen therefore that during the last six or seven years, I have been de facto Secretary without the emoluments of office. I have acted as Secretary to the Cabinet on three occasions.

I am not aware of any other Dominion where the Cabinet Secretary holds office in another Ministry. In the early days, the late Prime Minister asked me to ascertain whether there was a Treasury connection in the United Kingdom. The following is the telegram I received from Sir Norman Brook, Secretary to the United Kingdom Cabinet:

“Chancellor of the Exchequer as Minister responsible for Treasury is member of Cabinet and puts forward Treasury considerations stop very exceptional for treasury officials to be present stop.”

Sir Norman told me that in the United Kingdom, they made it a principle that the Cabinet Secretary should be independent of all Ministers because no Minister should feel that any other had any special pull in the Cabinet by reason of the fact that one of his officers was also Cabinet Secretary. You are aware that in previous cabinets, Ministers have said that they found it embarrassing to express themselves freely while a Treasury official was present as Cabinet Secretary, as it was the same officer who had overruled their proposals in the Treasury. Cabinet practice requires that when an officer is wanted on any matter, he should be summoned to be in attendance on that matter only.

May I therefore ask that the position be now regularized with my appointment. I have no other avenue of promotion and have been stagnating on my maximum salary since 1952.

At Sir John’s first Cabinet meeting after his Jaffna tour, he told the Ministers that there was an urgent item which was not on the Agenda, namely, that the Cabinet was without a Secretary and that an appointment had to be made. He asked me to leave the room for a few minutes. He had read to the Cabinet my minute reproduced above. I was recalled in about ten minutes and informed that it was the unanimous wish of the Ministers that I should be the Secretary and I was appointed on October 14,1954. On my appointment as Secretary, my ex-officio appointment as a Justice of the Peace for the Judicial District of Colombo while holding the office of Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet lapsed and a fresh appointment was made.

The Press now complimented me:

The appointment of a fairly senior lawyer, who gathered his experience in the drafting department, as Secretary to the Cabinet, is a step in the right direction, for such a post should be held by one with some legal experience.”

Another newspaper commented:

The separation of the posts of Secretary to the Cabinet and Permanent Secretary to the Ministry of Finance had to come some time, and the appointment of Sir Arthur Ranasinha as the Governor of the Central Bank, has evidently provided the opportunity to make the change. The position now conforms to that in Britain, where the Secretary to the Cabinet is also head of a department—the Cabinet Secretariat or the Cabinet Office as it is known.

It is this office that is responsible for the coordination of policy at the highest level, besides keeping records of the Committees of the Cabinet and the Cabinet itself, and for providing information and advice to Ministers and for issuing directions and promulgating decisions of the Cabinet or the Prime Minister to the Departments concerned.

Our Cabinet Office has yet to acquire a similar character. This it will no doubt develop henceforward, now that it is in full charge of the officer who has been in immediate control of it since the new constitution came into operation. Mr B. P Peiris, the new Secretary to the Cabinet, has also the advantage of having been associated with the drafting of the Constitution, which in fact was the reason for his being appointed Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet on its first formation. He is thus in the best position to organize the Cabinet Office as a clearing house for the Ministers.

I was privileged, on my appointment, to receive the following letter from the Chief Justice, the Hon. Hema Basnayake. I take the liberty of reproducing it in full:

“My dear Peiris,

“I am glad to hear that you have been appointed Secretary to the Cabinet. Let me congratulate you. Your office is one of great trust and responsibility. You have to keep your eyes and ears open and your mouth shut. I have no doubt that you will maintain the high traditions of your office and in due time become our Hankey.

“I think your office demands very hard work from you. Although you are not as a rule required to contribute to the discussions of the Cabinet, you should know all the Cabinet papers sufficiently well, so that, if members turn to you for guidance or help, you will be able to make some contribution to the solution of the problems before them. You should therefore keep in touch with the law, and I do not think you should give up your compilation of the Law Weekly Digest. You should not only know the judge-made law but you should also be conversant with the statute law.

“As you are the first holder of this office since its separation from the office of Secretary to the Treasury, the responsibility for creating the traditions of your office fall on you. You should set a very high standard to be emulated by your successors. I know that you are conscious of your responsibilities and I am confident that you will discharge those responsibilities with acceptance.”

I was fortunate to have the assistance and cooperation of a clerical staff consisting of honest, efficient and hard-working men who had been appointed by personal selection for their integrity and their loyalty to any Government for the time being, irrespective of its political colour, men who, as public servants took no part in politics except to register their votes at an election, men who were at the hub of Government, men who came to know all the secrets and who had no contact with the Press. Nothing leaked out from my office; and the newspapers called me the oyster in the public service.

I was unknown, unseen at public and diplomatic parties and unphotographed. I have been told by several Ministers that I have been a very efficient secretary. If that is so, a very large share of that tribute must go to my staff. I could not run the office unaided. When there was work to be done, they gladly did it, sometimes working till three in the morning. When there was no work, I did not bother if they disregarded the Government rule which demanded their punctual attendance in office at 9 a.m. They understood me and I understood my men. I should like to place on record my deep appreciation of the unfailing help I received at all times from every member of my staff.

Now, after many years in retirement, I ponder ‘Why was I liked, almost loved, by my men? Why was I respected? Why was I obeyed and my orders carried out loyally? Why were my punishments accepted without question?’ I could not answer these questions myself. But I put them to some of my men who still call on me sometimes in my retirement. They have all had but one answer: “Sir, your were human.”

The relationship between me and my staff was cordial. They were my friends and I always treated them as such.But Government requires a Head, in certain circumstances, to act according to prescribed regulations, and on such occasions, I have acted firmly with a sense of justice and fair play. I was never vindictive in any punishment I was compelled to impose and my officers knew and appreciated this.

I cannot close this Chapter without a reference to my friends, loyal servants of the Government, who are insultingly called “minor employees”. There was a great gentleman at their head, Arachchi Dissanayake. He was a rare type of gentleman, brought up in the ways of the bad old Colonial days. He was all courtesy. I have not come across another man like him. He was a podian in the Secretariat when my father was a clerk. When my father came to the Cabinet Office to see me, the Arachchi bowed low and greeted him, and my father remembered old times.

Mr Dissanayake retired from the public service after 43 years of loyal and honourable work. He had served a long line of distinguished Civil Servants including Sir Murchison Fletcher, Sir Bernard Bourdillon, Sir Graeme Tyrell, W. E. Wait, Sir Maxwell Wedderbum, W. L. Murphy, G. S. Wodeman, Sir Robert Drayton, Sir Charles Collins, T. D. Perera and Sir Arthur Ranasinha. Prime Minister Dahanayake made the following minute in his personal file:

Mr M. D. J. Perera Dissanayake, Arachchi in the Cabinet office, has had a most remarkable career. He had earned the trust and confidence of several superiors, who bear distinguished names, and his entire record is one of which anybody can be truly proud. His diligence, devotion to duty, loyalty and his general outlook towards work and responsibility is such as may be retold to all subordinate officers of the present and future as an example to be followed by one and all. I have great pleasure in recording my own high appreciation of his unique work.

When Mr Dissanayake retired, Sirimavo Bandaranaike’s Cabinet honoured him by posing for a photograph at Temple Trees, all standing. This was the first time that the Cabinet had posed for a photograph as a farewell to a public officer. The Ministers presented that Arachchi with a purse of one thousand rupees, a spontaneous gesture.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

The State of the Union and the Spectacle of Trump

Published

on

A Grim Handshake: The President and the Chief Justice at the State of the Union

President Donald J. Trump, as the American President often calls himself, is a global spectacle. And so are his tariffs. On Friday, February 20, the US Supreme Court led by Chief Justice John Roberts and a 6-3 majority, struck down the most ballyhooed tariff scheme of all times. Upholding the earlier decisions of the lower federal courts, the Supreme Court held that Trump’s use of ‘emergency powers’ to impose the so called Liberation Day tariffs on 2 April 2025, is not legal. The Liberation Day tariffs, which were comically announced on a poster board at the White House Rose Garden, is a system of reciprocal tariffs applied to every country that exported goods and services to America. The court ruling has pulled off the legal fig leaf with which Trump had justified his universal tariff scheme.

Trump was livid after the ruling on Friday and invectively insulted the six judges who ruled against Trump’s tariffs. There was nothing personal about it, but for Trump, the ever petulant man-boy, there isn’t anything that is not personal. On Tuesday night in Washington, Trump delivered his first State of the Union address of his second presidency. The Chief Justice, who once called the State of the Union, “a political pep rally,” attended the pomp and exchanged a grim handshake with the President.

Tuesday’s State of the Union was the longest speech ever in what is a long standing American tradition that is also a constitutional requirement. The Trump showmanship was in full display for the millions of Americans who watched him and millions of others in the rest of world, especially mandarins of foreign governments, who were waiting to parse his words to detect any sign for his next move on tariffs or his next move in Iran. There was nothing much to parse, however, only theatre for Trump’s Republican followers and taunts for opposing Democrats. He was in his usual elements as the Divider in Chief. There was truly little on offer for overseas viewers.

On tariffs, he is bulldozing ahead, he boasted, notwithstanding the Supreme Court ruling last Friday. But the short lived days of unchecked executive tariff powers are over even though Trump wouldn’t let go of his obsessive illusions. On the Middle East, Trump praised himself for getting the release of Israeli hostages, dead or alive, out of Gaza, but had no word for the Palestinians who are still being battered on that wretched strip of land. On Ukraine, he bemoaned the continuing killings in their thousands every month but had no concept or plan for ending the war while insisting that it would not have started if he were president four years ago.

He gave no indication of what he might do in Iran. He prefers diplomacy, he said, but it would be the most costly diplomatic solution given the scale of deployment of America’s fighting assets in the region under his orders. In Trump’s mind, this could be one way of paying for a Nobel Prize for peace. More seriously, Trump is also caught in the horns of a dilemma of his own making. He wanted an external diversion from his growing domestic distractions. If he were thinking using Iran as a diversion, he also cannot not ignore the warnings from his own military professionals that going into Iran would not be a walk in the park like taking over Venezuela. His state of mind may explain his reticence on Iran in the State of the Union speech.

Even on the domestic front, there was hardly anything of substance or any new idea. One lone new idea Trump touted is about asking AI businesses to develop their own energy sources for their data centres without tapping into existing grids, raising demand and causing high prices and supply shortages. That was a political announcement to quell the rising consumer alarms, especially in states such as Michigan where energy guzzling data centres are becoming hot button issue for the midterm Congress and Senate elections in November. Trump can see the writing on the wall and used much of his speech to enthuse his base and use patriotism to persuade the others.

Political Pep Rally: Chief Justice John G. Roberts sits stoically with Justices Elena Kagan, Bret Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett, as Republicans are on their feet applauding.

Although a new idea, asking AI forces to produce their own energy comes against a background of a year-long assault on established programs for expanding renewable energy sources. Fortunately, the courts have nullified Trump’s executive orders stopping renewable energy programs. But there is no indication if the AI sector will be asked to use renewable energy sources or revert to the polluting sources of coal or oil. Nor is it clear if AI will be asked to generate surplus energy to add to the community supply or limit itself to feeding its own needs. As with all of Trump’s initiatives the devil is in the details and is left to be figured out later.

The Supreme Court Ruling

The backdrop to Tuesday’s State of the Union had been rendered by Friday’s Supreme Court ruling. Chief Justice Roberts who wrote the majority ruling was both unassuming and assertive in his conclusion: “We claim no special competence in matters of economics or foreign affairs. We claim only, as we must, the limited role assigned to us by Article III of the Constitution. Fulfilling that role, we hold that IEEPA (International Emergency Economic Powers Act) does not authorize the President to impose tariffs.”

IEEPA is a 1977 federal legislation that was enacted during the Carter presidency, to both clarify and restrict presidential powers to act during national emergency situations. The immediate context for the restrictive element was the experience of the Nixon presidency. One of the implied restrictions in IEEPA is in regard to tariffs which are not specifically mentioned in the legislation. On the other hand, Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution establishes taxes and tariffs as an exclusively legislative function whether they are imposed within the country or implemented to regulate trade and commerce with other countries. In his first term, Trump tried to impose tariffs on imports through the Congress but was rebuffed even by Republicans. In the second term, he took the IEEA route, bypassing Congress and expecting the conservative majority in the Supreme Court to bail him out of legal challenges. The Court said, No. Thus far, but no farther.

The main thrust of the ruling is that it marks a victory for the separation of powers against a president’s executive overreach. Three of the Court’s conservative judges (CJ Roberts, Neil Gorsuch, and Amy Coney Barrett) joined the three liberal judges (all women – Sonia Sotomayor, Elana Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson) to chart a majority ruling against the president’s tariffs. The three dissenters were Brett Kavanugh, who wrote the dissenting opinion, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett were appointed by Trump. Trump took out Gorsuch and Barrett for special treatment after their majority ruling, while heaping praise on Kavanaugh who ruled in favour of the tariffs. Barrett and Kavanaugh attended the State of the Union along with Roberts and Kagan, while the other five stayed away from the pep rally (see picture).

The Economics of the Ruling

In what was a splintered ruling, different judges split legal hairs between themselves while claiming no special competence in economics and ruling on a matter that was all about trade and economics. Yale university’s Stephen Roach has provided an insightful commentary on the economics of the court ruling, while “claiming no special competence in legal matters.” Roach takes out every one of Trump’s pseudo-arguments supporting tariffs and provides an economist’s take on the matter.

First, he debunks Trump’s claim that trade deficits are an American emergency. The real emergency, Roach notes, is the low level of American savings, falling to 0.2% of the national income in 2025, even as trade deficit in goods reached a new record $1.2 trillion. America’s need for foreign capital to compensate for its low savings, and its thirst for cheap imported goods keep the balance of payments and trade deficits at high levels.

Second, by imposing tariffs Trump is not helping but burdening US consumers. The Americans are the ones who are paying tariffs contrary to Trump’s own false beliefs and claims that foreign countries are paying them. 90% of the tariffs have been paid by American consumers, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Small businesses have paid the rest. Foreign countries pay nothing but they have been making deals with Trump to keep their exports flowing.

According to published statistics, the average U.S. applied tariff rate increased from 1.6% before Trump’s tariff’s to 17%, the highest level since World War II. The removal of reciprocal tariffs after the ruling would have lowered it to 9.1%, but it will rise to 13% after Trump’s 15% tariffs. The registered tariff revenue is about $175 billion, 0.6% of U.S. gross domestic product. The tariff monies collected are legally refundable. The Supreme Court did not get into the modalities for repayment and there would be multiple lawsuits before the lower courts if the Administration does not set up a refunding mechanism.

Lastly, in railing against globalization and the loss of American industries, Trump is cutting off America’s traditional allies and trading partners in Europe, Canada and Mexico who account for 54% of all US trade flows in manufactured goods. Cutting them off has only led these countries to look for other alternatives, especially China and India. All of this is not helping the US or its trade deficit. The American manufacturers (except for sectoral beneficiaries in steel, aluminum and auto industries), workers and consumers are paying the price for Trump’s economic idiosyncrasies. As Roach notes, the Court stayed away from the economic considerations, but by declaring Trump’s IEEPA tariffs unconstitutional, the Court has sent an important message to the American people and the rest of the world that “US policies may not be personalized by the whims of a vindictive and uninformed wannabe autocrat.”

by Rajan Philips

Continue Reading

Features

The Victor Melder odyssey: from engine driver CGR to Melbourne library founder

Published

on

Victor Melder in Library

He celebrated his 90th birthday recently, never returned to his homeland because he’s a bad traveler

(Continued from last week)

THE GARRAT LOCOS, were monstrous machines that were able to haul trains on the incline, that normally two locos did. Whilst a normal loco hauled five carriages on its own, a Garrat loco could haul nine. When passenger traffic warranted it and trains had over nine carriages or had a large number of freight wagons, then a Garret loco hauled the train assisted by a loco from behind.

When a train was worked by two normal locos (one pulling, the other pushing) and they reached the summit level at Pattipola (in either direction), the loco pushing (piloting) would travel around to the front the train and be coupled in front of the loco already in front and the two locos took the train down the incline. With a Garraat loco this could not be done as the bridges could not take the combined weight. The pilot loco therefore ran down single, following THE TRAIN.

My father was stationed at Nawalapitiya as a senior driver at the time, and it wasn’t a picnic working with him. He believed in the practical side of things and always had the apprentices carrying out some extra duties or the other to acquaint themselves with the loco. I had more than my fair share.

After the four months upcountry, we were back at Dematagoda on the K. V. steam locos. From the sublime to the ridiculous, I would say after the Garret locos upcountry. Here the work was much easier and at a slower pace, as the trains did not run at speed like their mainline counterparts. The last two months of the third year saw us on the two types of diesel locos on the K.V. line, the Hunslett and Krupp diesels, which worked the passenger trains. For once this was a ‘cushy, sit-down’ job, doing nothing exciting, but keeping a sharp lookout and exchanging tablets on the run. The third year had come to an end and ‘the light at the end of tunnel was getting closer’.

Victor M’s Sri Lanka Ranjana medal

The fourth year saw us all at the Diesel loco shed at Maradana, which was cheek by jowl with the Maradana railway station. The first three months we worked with the diesel mechanical fitters and the following three months with the electrical fitters. Heavy emphasis was placed on a working knowledge of the electrical circuits of the different diesel locos in service, to ensure the drivers were able to attend to electrical faults en-route and bring the train home. This was again a period of lectures and demonstrations

We also spent three months at the Ratmalana workshops, where the diesels were stripped down to the core and refitted after major repairs, to ensure we had a look at what went on inside the many closed and sealed working parts. This was again a 7.00am to 4.00pm day job. Back again at the Diesel shed, Maradana, saw us riding as assistants for the next three months on all the diesel locos in service – The Brush Bragnal (M1), General Electrical (M2), Hunslett locos (G2) and Diesel Rail Cars.

After the final written test on Diesel locos, we began our fifth and final year, which was that of shunting engine driver. The first six months were spent at Maligawatte Yard on steam shunting locos and the next three months shunting drivers on the diesel shunting locos at Colombo goods yard. The final three months were spent as assistants on the M1 and M2 locos working all the fast passenger and mail trains.

Cartoon to celebrate Victor’s 60th wedding anniversary

I was finally appointed Engine Driver Class III on July 6, 1962, as mentioned earlier I lost eight months of my apprenticeship due to being ill and had to make up the time. This appointment was on three years’ probation, on the initial salary of the scale Rs 1,680 – 72 – Rs 2,184, per annum.

Little did the general traveling public realize that they had well trained and qualified engine drivers working their trains to time Victor was stationed in Galle until December 1967, when he resigned from the railway to migrate to Melbourne, Australia to join the rest of his family. He was the last of 11 siblings to leave Ceylon. Their two elder children were born in Galle. Victor and Esther had three more children in Australia. The children, three boys and two girls) were brought up with love and devotion. They have seven grandchildren and two great grandchildren. They meet often as a family.

He worked for the Victorian State Public Service and retired in 1993 after 25 years’ service. At the time of retirement, he worked for the Ministry for Conservation & Environment. He held the position of Project Officer in charge of the Ministry’s Procedural Documents.

He worked part-time for the Victorian Electoral Office and the Australian Electoral Office, covering State and Federal Elections, from 1972 to 2010. From 1972 to 1982 and was a Clerical Officer and then in 1983 was appointed Officer-in-Charge, Lychfield Avenue Polling Booth, Jacana which is my (the writer’s) electorate.

As part of serving the community Victor participated in a number of ways, quite often unremunerated. He worked part-time for the Department of Census & Statistics, and worked as a Census Collector for the Census of 1972, 1976, 1980 and then Group Leader of 16 Collectors in his area for the 1984, 1988, 1992, 1996, 2000, 2004, 2008 and 2012.

In 1970, Victor began this library, now known as the ‘Victor Melder Sri Lanka Library’, for the purpose of making Sri Lanka better known in Australia. On looking back he has this to say: “Forty-five years later, I can say that it is serving its purpose. In 1993 President Ranasinghe Premadasa of Sri Lanka bestowed on me a national honor – ‘Sri Lanka Ranjana’ for my then 25 years’ service to Sri Lanka in Australia. I feel very privileged to be honored by my motherland, which I feel is the highest accolade one can ever get.”

There were many more accolades over the years:

15.10. 2004, Serendib News, 2004 Business and Community Award.

4.2.2008, Award for Services to the SL Community by The Consulate of Sri Lanka in Victoria (by R. Arambewela)

2024 – SL Consul General’s Award

In 2025 , Victor was one of the ten outstanding Sri Lankans in Australia at the Lankan Fest.

An annual Victor Melder Appreciation award was established to honour an outstanding member by the SriLankan Consulate.

The following appreciation by the late Gamini Dissanayake is very appropriate.

Comment by the late Minister Gamini Dissanayake, in the comment book of the VMSL library.

A man is attached to many things. Attachments though leading to sorrow in the end

are the living reality of life. Amongst these many attachments, the most noble are the attachments to one’s family and to one’s country. You have left Sri Lanka long ago but “she” is within you yet and every nerve and sinew of your body, mind and soul seem to belong there. In your love for the country of your birth you seem to have no racial or religious connotations – you simply love “HER” – the pure, clear, simple, abstract and glowing Sri Lanka of our imagination and vision. You are an example of what all Sri Lankan’s should be. May you live long with your vision and may Sri Lanka evolve to deserve sons like you.

With my best Wishes.

Gamini Dissanayake, Minister from Sri Lanka.

15 February 1987.

The Victor Melder Lecture

The Monash council established the Victor Melder Lecture which is presented every February. It is now an annual event looked forward to by Melbournians. A guest lecturer is carefully chosen each year for this special event.

Victor and his library has featured on many publications such as the Sunday Times in 2008 and LMD International in 2026.

“Although having been a railway man, I am a poor traveler and get travel sickness, hence I have not travelled much. I have never been back to Sri Lanka, never travelled in Australia, not even to Geelong. I am happiest doing what I like best, either at Church or in this library. My younger daughter has finally given up after months of trying to coax, cajole and coerce me into a trip to Sri Lanka to celebrate this (90th) birthday.

I am most fortunate that over the years I have made good friends, some from my school days. It is also a great privilege to grow old in the company of friends — like-minded individuals who have spent their childhood and youth in the same environment as oneself and shared similar life experiences.”

Victor’s love of books started from childhood. Since his young years he has been interested in reading. At St Mary’s College, Nawalapitiya, the library had over 300 books on Greek and Roman history and mythology and he read every one of them.

He read the newspapers daily, which his parents subscribed to, including the ‘Readers Digest’.His mother was an avid fan of Crossword Puzzles and encouraged all the children to follow her, a trait which he continues to this day.

At his workplace in Melbourne, Victor encountered many who asked questions about Ceylon. Often, he could not find an answer to these queries. This was long before the internet existed. He then started getting books on Ceylon/SriLanka and reading them. Very soon his collection expanded and he thought of the Vicor Melder SriLanka Library as source of reference. It is now a vast collection of over 7,000 books, magazines and periodicals.

Another driver of his service to fellow men is his deep Catholic faith in which he follows the footsteps of the Master.

Victor was baptized at St Anthony’s Cathedral, Kandy by Fr Galassi, OSB. Since the age of 10 he have been involved with Church activities both in Sri Lanka and Australia. He remains a devout Catholic and this underlies his spirit of service to fellowmen.

He began as an Altar Server at St Mary’s Church, Nawalapitiya, and continued even in his adult life. In Australia, Esther and Victor have been Parishioners at St Dominic’s Church, Broadmeadows, since 1970.He started as an Adult Server and have been an Altar Server Trainer, Reader and Special Minister He was a member of the ‘Counting Team’ for monies collected at Sunday Masses, for 35 years.

He has actively retired from this work since 2010, but is still ‘on call’, to help when required. To add in his own words

“My Catholic faith has always been important to me, and I can never imagine my having spent a day away from God. Faith is all that matters to Esther too. We attend daily Mass and busy ourselves with many activities in our Parish Church.

For nearly 25 years, we have also been members of a religious order ‘The Community of the Sons & Daughters of God’, it is contemplative and monastic in nature, we are veritable monks in the world. We do no good works, other than show Christ to the world, by our actions. Both Esther and I, after much prayer and discernment have become more deeply involved, taking vows of poverty, obedience and chastity, within the Community. Our spirituality gives us much peace, solace and comfort.”

“This is not my CV for beatification and canonization. My faith is in fact an antidote for overcoming evil, I too struggle like everyone else. I have to exorcise the demons within me by myself. I am a perfect candidate for “being a street angel and home devil” by my constant impatience, lack of tolerance and wanting instant perfection from everyone. “

The above exemplifies the humility of the man who admits to his foibles.

More than 25 years ago The Ceylon Society of Australia was formed in Sydney by a group of Ceylon lovers led by Hugh Karunanayake. Very soon the Melbourne chapter of the organization was formed, and Victor was a crucial part of this. At every Talk, Victor displayed books relevant to the topic. For many years he continued to do so carrying a big box of books and driving a fair distance to the meeting place. Eventually when he could no longer drive his car, he made certain that the books reached the venue through his close friend, Hemal Gurusinghe.

He also was the guest speaker at one of the meetings and he regaled the audience with railway stories.

Victor has dedicated his life on this mission, and we can be proud of his achievements. His vision is to find a permanent home for his library where future generations can use it and continue the service that he commenced. The plea is to get like-minded individuals in the quest to find a suitable and permanent home for the Victor Melder Srilankan Library.

by Dr. Srilal Fernando

Continue Reading

Features

Sri Lanka to Host First-Ever World Congress on Snakes in Landmark Scientific Milestone

Published

on

Dr. Anslem de Silva

Sri Lanka is set to make scientific history by hosting the world’s first global conference dedicated entirely to snake research, conservation and public health, with the World Congress on Snakes (WCS) 2026 scheduled to take place from October 1–4 at The Grand Kandyan Hotel in Kandy World Congress on Snakes.

The congress marks a major milestone not only for Sri Lanka’s biodiversity research community but also for global collaboration in herpetology, conservation science and snakebite management.

Congress Chairperson Dr. Anslem de Silva described the event as “a long-overdue global scientific platform that recognises the ecological, medical and cultural importance of snakes.”

“This will be the first international congress fully devoted to snakes — from their evolution and taxonomy to venom research and snakebite epidemiology,” Dr. de Silva said. “Sri Lanka, with its exceptional biodiversity and deep ecological relationship with snakes, is a fitting host for such a historic gathering.”

Global Scientific Collaboration

The congress has been established through an international scientific partnership, bringing together leading experts from Sri Lanka, India and Australia. It is expected to attract herpetologists, wildlife conservationists, toxinologists, veterinarians, genomic researchers, policymakers and environmental organisations from around the world.

The International Scientific Committee includes globally respected experts such as Prof. Aaron Bauer, Prof. Rick Shine, Prof. Indraneil Das and several other authorities in reptile research and conservation biology.

Dr. de Silva emphasised that the congress is designed to bridge biodiversity science, medicine and society.

“Our aim is not merely to present academic findings. We want to translate science into practical conservation action, improved public health strategies and informed policy decisions,” he explained.

Addressing a Neglected Public Health Crisis

A key pillar of the congress will be snakebite envenoming — widely recognised as a neglected tropical health problem affecting rural communities across Asia, Africa and Latin America.

“Snakebite is not just a medical issue; it is a socio-economic issue that disproportionately impacts farming communities,” Dr. de Silva noted. “By bringing clinicians, toxinologists and conservation scientists together, we can strengthen prevention strategies, improve treatment protocols and promote community education.”

Scientific sessions will explore venom biochemistry, clinical toxinology, antivenom sustainability and advances in genomic research, alongside broader themes such as ecological behaviour, species classification, conservation biology and environmental governance.

Dr. de Silva stressed that fear-driven persecution of snakes, habitat destruction and illegal wildlife trade continue to threaten snake populations globally.

“Snakes play an essential ecological role, particularly in controlling rodent populations and maintaining agricultural balance,” he said. “Conservation and public safety are not opposing goals — they are interconnected. Scientific understanding is the foundation for coexistence.”

The congress will also examine cultural perceptions of snakes, veterinary care, captive management, digital monitoring technologies and integrated conservation approaches linking biodiversity protection with human wellbeing.

Strategic Importance for Sri Lanka

Hosting the global event in the historic city of Kandy — a UNESCO World Heritage site — is expected to significantly enhance Sri Lanka’s standing as a hub for scientific and environmental collaboration.

Dr. de Silva pointed out that the benefits extend beyond the four-day meeting.

“This congress will open doors for Sri Lankan researchers and students to access world-class expertise, training and international partnerships,” he said. “It will strengthen our national research capacity in biodiversity and environmental health.”

He added that the event would also generate economic activity and position Sri Lanka as a destination for high-level scientific conferences, expanding the country’s international image beyond traditional tourism promotion.

The congress has received support from major international conservation bodies including the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), Save the Snakes, Cleveland Metroparks Zoo and the Amphibian and Reptile Research Organization of Sri Lanka (ARROS).

As preparations gather momentum, Dr. de Silva expressed optimism that the World Congress on Snakes 2026 would leave a lasting legacy.

“This is more than a conference,” he said. “It is the beginning of a global movement to promote science-based conservation, improve snakebite management and inspire the next generation of researchers. Sri Lanka is proud to lead that conversation.”

By Ifham Nizam

Continue Reading

Trending