Features

My first visit to China and finding the Chinese people

Published

3 years ago

2023/09/10

Excerpted from Memories that linger: My journey in the world of disability by Padmani Mendis)

“Today I found China,” is what I wrote to Nalin on Friday, three days after I arrived in Guangzhou, which at school I had known as the city of Canton. Let me explain why I wrote this. I arrived in Guangzhou, a port city at the mouth of the Pearl River on Tuesday and had been met at the airport by Mr. Hu. He turned out to be my constant guide and my interpreter throughout the 24 days that I spent on this my first visit to China in July 1986.

Mr. Hu loaded my luggage and me into a black limousine, sat with me in the back seat and had me driven to the Garden Hotel to check in. The first part of the route from the airport was all tree-lined highways. Turning off the highway, the second part leading to the hotel was roadways lined all the way with colourful flowerbeds. The whole forming a post-card pretty landscape. A couple of black limousines, rather like the one I was riding in, were to be seen on the highways and on the roadways, a few cyclists on the pathways for cycles but hardly any pedestrians on the pavements.

Over the next few weeks, Mr. Hu came to the hotel every morning at an appointed time and took me to the Sun Yat Sen University for Medical Sciences, the location of my assignment. He came for me at an appointed time to take me back to the hotel. Every day I saw the same kind of scenery on the routes we took. Lots of trees and flowers but few people. I was bewildered. It would be rude to ask Mr. Hu about where the people were.

Mr. Hu had indicated to me that it would be best if I did not go out on my own. He had told me just to let him know and he would take me in the limousine. But on the third day my curiosity got the better of me. I decided to do a little investigating on my own. I said to myself, what does it matter? I am only going for a walk. On an old map that I had seen, I could tell roughly in which direction the Pearl River lay in relation to the Garden Hotel. So I set out in that direction. I knew that where the river was, so would the people be.

I thought I would keep to the straight road. As I walked the architecture and scenery changed somewhat. After a particular junction, not far away new buildings gave way to the old; still trees to provide shade, but no flower beds. Large buildings for housing that had seen better days. Clothes hanging out to dry. People on the small crowded balconies. Children playing on the streets. Safe, no vehicles.

And then, not much later, after crossing another junction and may be about half an hour since starting off from the hotel, there it was and there they were. Narrow streets and narrower byways. Crowded apartment blocks. The Chinese people. In their thousands. Seemingly hundreds of thousands. Rushing hither and thither as Chinese people would do. Rather like ants,speeding on their way, but always time to greet one another. Always politely, often with time for a brief conversation. There they were, all the way down to the river.

This was the China I was expecting to see and was looking for. I had found that China and its people. Thereafter, an evening walk down to the river was on my itinerary. The Chinese people left me and my saree alone. No stares, no remarks. They had their lives to lead. The children had their games to play. I was just someone else moving among them.

The Sun Yat Sen University of Medical Sciences and Prof. Zhou Dahong

My counterpart on this assignment in China was Prof. Zhou Dahong, Head of the Department of Rehabilitation. As I arrived at the main entrance to the university on the first morning of my assignment, Prof. Zhou, pronounced Jo, and his senior staff were waiting for me at the top of the steps. Someone was there to open the car door for me.

I still recall the special saree that I wore that morning. It was a printed Kashmiri silk in a light purplish colour, a gift from my mother-in-law. I wore also an amethyst pendant which had belonged to my mother. It is remarkable how little things like this come flooding back to one’s memory when writing about one’s journey. As I climbed up the steps Prof. Zhou reached down to welcome me.

He kind of helped me up with a warm gesture and introduced me to his senior staff. Everything was very formal. I was then led to the Department of Rehabilitation and introduced to the other staff. Prof. Zhou, now warm and friendly, did all the talking. He spoke English like an Englishman – with hardly a Chinese accent.

I had two tasks to complete with Prof. Zhou during the next three weeks. The first was to plan two CBR development projects, one rural and one urban. The second was to prepare a work plan and teaching material for a National Workshop on CBR to be held in October that year. I would be back for the workshop. It was to be held here at this university. It would be a significant occasion for Prof. Zhou. That the Chinese government had selected Prof. Zhou to initiate collaboration in rehabilitation with WHO was itself an indication of the high regard that Prof. Zhou was held in by the Government in Beijing. It increased Prof. Zhou’s standing in the university.

But first things first. Before we settled down to work, Prof. Zhou told me he was taking me out to lunch with the staff of his department. We could all meet informally and get to know each other. Which we did. There were about ten of us seated round the table.

The food was served in small bowls, each round as a separate course with rice served last. Waiters served each course. This was one way a meal was served in a restaurant, and the number of courses varied. Today there were twenty courses. Later when we were entertained in Xian our meal with the choicest food of the North-Western area of the country was served as 36 courses.

When I returned to Guangzhou in October the food was served as a banquet. In Xian too it was served as a banquet.

The meal was called a banquet because everyone served themselves from common dishes placed on a rotating tray in the centre of the table. The tray was called a “Lazy Susan” in other countries. I sat next to Prof. Zhou and he kept serving food on to my dish. As the chief guest, it was customary for me to wait until he did so. The banquet was enjoyable, the food was interesting.

On the first occasion in July Prof. Zhou told me that Cantonese food was special, different from the rest of China. He said to me, “In Canton we eat everything that crawls except their tails, and everything that flies except the planes.” In other words, he told me that in Canton they eat everything, That Was Everything. I learned this from the specialty restaurants I saw after that. From bats and rats to snakes and well, you name it. I ate it that day. And, determined not to know what I was eating, enjoyed it too.

I learned that Cantonese cuisine retains the natural flavours of the food by using mild seasoning and marinades in modest quantities. The methods they use the most are steaming, braising and boiling, sometimes for a very long time. Also stir-frying. Even though food is sometimes deep fried, it is never greasy.

Being at the mouth of the Pearl River, both sea fish and river fish was popular – lots of my favourite shrimp and prawns. I realised how special Cantonese food was only after I had been to Beijing. There I tasted the hot and spicy food from the northern Szechuan province more suited to the Sri Lanka palate. In Canton the staple was rice as in other parts of southern China. In the north people consume wheat products like noodles.

Information about Rehabilitation in Guangzhou

Prof. Zhou had arranged for me to visit a few rehabilitation institutions. Also for certain people to meet us at the university to explain to me what services were available for disabled people. Besides these, I had an extensive meeting with the Deputy Chief in the City’s Bureau of Civil Administration and his staff. What he told me was interesting. Attractive tax incentives approved in Beijing encourage industries to employ disabled people.

He told me that in Guangzhou 86% of adults who can work are gainfully employed. In the rural areas however, the employment of disabled people remained a problem. He also described to me the social development programmes the Bureau was putting in place with the participation of the street communities. He was telling me how these would be useful in urban CBR.

I was impressed with the tax incentives he described and often held these up as an example in other countries. China’s tax incentives included – any enterprise which had more than 35% disabled people in the workforce was free of profit tax; proportion 10 – 35% allowed profit tax to be halved; proportion of disabled people exceeding 50% was free of all taxes including municipal taxes etc.

He went on to explain that the basis of the incentives was not charity. They were designed to enable authorities to compensate for the lower productivity of certain disabled people and compete effectively in the market. Later, many an employer in Sri Lanka told me that disabled employees, particular those with hearing impairment showed higher productivity than non-disabled workers.

Prof. Zhou also took me to see a Rehabilitation Hospital that was being built in Guangzhou. Only the lower floors were as yet complete. Most patients had paraplegia and hemiplegia with a few who had tetraplegia. There were also a few children with cerebral palsy. The hospital was quite unusual. Treatment was by Traditional Chinese Medicine. Patients apparently took full responsibility for their rehabilitation.

As well as in the treatment areas, I saw them training by themselves by their bedside and in the corridors. In some instances, relatives were acting as helpers. One could see simple technical aids being used. I was told that the hospital was aiming at keeping the cost of rehabilitation per head low so that they could reach more people. One wondered whether a staff shortage was also a possibility. Or what was this about?

The Rural CBR Project

The Rural CBR project was to be managed by the WHO Collaborating Centre for Primary Health Care located in Conghua County, Guangdong Province. Sun Yat Sen University’s Rehabilitation Department, two hours away, would provide required technical support. This project would give the province and the country experience in integrating CBR within Primary Health Care. The country already had such a PHC system in the villages and community participation was part of that system.

Villages will be encouraged to participate in a similar way in CBR. The project will start with discussions in the villages. Village doctors within health stations would include CBR as one of their tasks. With time the Public Health Assistants of the collaborating centre will be trained to provide mid-level support for CBR enabling project expansion and sustainability.

The project would provide opportunities to assess personnel needs for CBR; assess the effectiveness of the project on disabled people, their families and the village; the effectiveness of the technology in the WHO Manual and changes necessary, and develop a monitoring and reporting system within that used in Primary Health Care. The Bureau also wished that costs of the project be determined to allow plans for expansion.

During my stay in Guangzhou, details of this process were worked out between the Collaborating Centre and the Rehabilitation Department, with my help. It struck me that the Chinese were very thorough about making detailed plans. This was really valuable. The development project was ready to take off when I left.

A CBR Development Project in an Urban Area

Because it was a stated assignment activity, an urban CBR project was also planned in as much detail as the rural project while I was at the university with Prof. Zhou. It was to be located in Jinhua Street within the municipality of Guangzhou. This time I will tell my story a little differently.

In 1988, that is two years later, I heard Prof. Zhou talk about this urban project at the 16th World Congress of Rehabilitation International held in Tokyo, Japan. I will share now how the project we planned was implemented as he described it.

The urban project has been ongoing since March 1986, pioneered under the guidance of the Department of Rehabilitation Medicine of the Sun Yat Sen University of Medical Sciences as a Resource Centre. The Jinhua Street community lives within an area of 0.44 sq. kms. with 146 short and narrow lanes spread irregularly like a maze.

The Street Community Administration set up a CBR Supervisory Committee. Members included local health workers, civil welfare workers, disabled people and Red Cross society members. This committee managed the project with technical support from the university. A local school physician was selected as a mid-level supervisor. It is interesting that he had participated in the National Workshop we held in 1986 to introduce CBR.

Thirty-two community workers were also selected. These were volunteers of the Street Red Cross Society. They were all given training by the university. A house-to-house survey was carried out among the street population of about 30,000. Three hundred and forty-four disabled individuals were located, amounting to 1.15% of the population.

Disabilities people had were in the areas of mobility, vision, communication, learning and mental and psychiatric disability. One hundred and five of these people had home training programmes. He listed features of the project as the following: use of traditional medicine for functional recovery, the setting up of a small community-run rehabilitation station to provide basic rehabilitation to those who could visit, 152 people with mobility disability included for employment in community-run factories, 22 individuals with mental handicap employed in a sheltered workshop, and inclusive recreational, sports and social activities organised by the street community.

China was developing her own urban CBR model using existing resources.

All News Advertisement

Related Topics:Chinese people Xian Zhou Dahong

Up Next

More on the Russian tea trade – bear traps and an Iron Lady

Don't Miss

Jonathan Forbes and the ‘Discovery’ of Sigiriya

Click to comment

Features

Coercive laws recipe for future misrule

Published

3 hours ago

2026/10/13

Sahan Weerasooriya

by Jehan Perera

The NPP government is going after powerful figures from the past and present who have engaged in corruption, fraud and criminal activity in a way that no previous government in Sri Lanka has done. Former ministers, politicians and senior state officials are among those facing investigations and legal proceedings. The government has placed before Parliament a document listing 50 cases involving corruption, fraud and other crimes. These include not only financial offences but also cases relating to the Easter Sunday attacks, the killings of Lasantha Wickrematunge and Wasim Thajudeen, the disappearance of Prageeth Ekneligoda and attacks on journalists Keith Noyahr and Upali Tennakoon.

The significance of this effort is that it can demonstrate that nobody is above the law, regardless of political connections or social standing, which will help restore public confidence in institutions that have long been distrusted. It could also recover public resources, improve the investment climate and strengthen the foundations for a more prosperous and just Sri Lanka. When criticised for focusing on the past and not the present, the government position is that these investigations were initiated under earlier governments, particularly between 2015 and 2019, and that it is now allowing investigators to proceed to deal with the backlog without political interference.

But there is an aspect of the government’s approach that is less justifiable. While pursuing past wrongdoing by powerful individuals, it is also advancing a triumvirate of draft laws that could give the state sweeping powers over citizens, organisations and dissent in the present and future. The draft Prevention of Terrorism legislation, the Prevention of Organised Crimes Bill and the NGO Registration and Supervision Bill raise serious questions about the over-centralisation of power. Each of these laws strengthens the powers of the state while weakening the rights and safeguards that protect people from their misuse and thus questions the basic rights of people in democracy where ‘the power of the people is vested in the government’. This is a recipe for future misrule rather than the rule of law. As the well-known saying goes, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Proposed Laws

The real test of system change, for which the government obtained an overwhelming mandate, requires not only a government willing to hold others accountable, but one prepared to subject itself to the same principles of legality, transparency and restraint. The three proposed laws that are particularly important in this regard are the Protection of the State from Terrorism Bill, the Prevention of Organised Crimes Bill and the NGO Registration and Supervision Bill. Each of these draft laws has been presented as serving a legitimate purpose. Preventing terrorism, combating organised crime and ensuring that NGOs do not facilitate money laundering or terrorist financing are proper responsibilities of the state. Sri Lanka has international obligations in these areas, and no responsible government can disregard them. However, the existence of a legitimate objective does not justify every means adopted to achieve it.

The proposed Protection of the State from Terrorism Bill illustrates the problem. Although its definition of terrorism draws on a model developed by a former United Nations Special Rapporteur, the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka has warned that the definition of terrorism extends beyond the model and could bring legitimate political protest, trade union action and civil disobedience within the scope of counter-terrorism legislation. Its concerns also include prolonged detention, inadequate judicial oversight and restrictions on access to legal counsel. These are objections that go to the heart of the relationship between the citizen and the state. The government cannot credibly promise to protect democratic freedoms while creating powers that could be used to restrict them. It is necessary for the government to reassess the draft through transparent consultation and revise provisions that could criminalise legitimate dissent.

The Prevention of Organised Crimes Bill raises similar concerns. It is presented as giving effect to the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organised Crime, which Sri Lanka ratified in 2006. The Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) has argued that the convention does not require many of the bill’s provisions. The proposed law extends to a broad range of offences, permits detention orders lasting up to a year, makes confessions to police admissible for purposes of legal evidence, and introduces extensive surveillance powers. A law intended to dismantle criminal networks should not create a parallel system of exceptional powers that could be applied far beyond organised crime. Nor should safeguards developed through years of experience with abuses under the Prevention of Terrorism Act be weakened through legislation bearing a different name. The government should review whether or not existing laws could be used effectively to control these crimes or whether each exceptional power is necessary.

Civil Society

The proposed NGO Registration and Supervision Bill presents another test of the government’s intentions. The government may reasonably seek transparency in the finances of organisations receiving public or foreign funds, including measures to prevent money laundering and terrorist financing. It seeks to justify its overreach on the grounds of meeting the internationally mandated requirements of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) for the Asia-Pacific region. But these objectives do not justify placing civil society and NGOs under excessive administrative control when even the FATF ranks them as low to medium risks. The draft bill would require registration and renewal, impose extensive obligations on organisations and empower authorities to suspend or deregister them on broadly framed grounds. It is important to redraft provisions that confer excessive discretion over registration, renewal, suspension and deregistration of NGOs.

Among the concerns raised by United Nations human rights special rapporteurs with regard to the draft NGO law are provisions requiring organisations to align with government policies and restrictions that could affect advocacy, dissent and freedom of association. The implications extend well beyond organisations that engage directly with the government. Community groups, human rights organisations, independent researchers and organisations working on reconciliation or accountability could find their activities constrained by uncertainty over how these provisions might be interpreted. Organisations that criticise government policies are not thereby working against the country. Their freedom to do so is part of what distinguishes a democracy from a system in which the government determines which opinions and activities are acceptable.

The government has generated considerable public goodwill through its pursuit of corruption and criminality. It should not assume that this goodwill gives it an unlimited mandate to strengthen the coercive powers of the state. The NPP knows from its own history that governments can treat dissent as a threat and use the machinery of the state against their opponents. There is still time to correct the drafts through transparent public consultation, narrow definitions of offences, meaningful judicial control over detention and surveillance, and effective remedies against arbitrary decisions. A government that pursues corruption while weakening safeguards against state abuse risks undermining its own achievements. Besides bringing to light the abuse of power by previous governments, the NPP government needs to build a system in which no future government can abuse power in the belief they can get away with it.

Features

Quality assurance without quality enhancement: The irony of university QA

Published

3 hours ago

2026/10/13

Sahan Weerasooriya

By Ramya Kumar

According to the Quality Assurance Council (QAC) of the University Grants Commission (UGC), quality assurance (QA) refers to “the means (i.e. the policies, attitudes, actions, procedures, etc.), by which an institution can guarantee with confidence and certainty, that the standards and quality of its educational provision are being maintained and enhanced”.

An expansive structure has been in place since 2005 to govern and implement QA processes within the state university system. The QAC is the focal point at the UGC that implements external reviews of state universities and institutes. Each university has its own Centre for Quality Assurance (CQA) tasked with performing QA in line with QAC directives. Faculties, in turn, have Internal Quality Assurance Cells (IQAC) performing their own QA; they are answerable to the CQA.

The big question is whether this all-encompassing top-down QA system, that in many ways undermines the internal dynamics of university governance, actually supports universities to enhance the quality of education. This article highlights some concerns.

Top-down check-box activities

The QAC conducts external reviews of universities and degree programmes. A review team appointed by the UGC (who may or may not have experience in the institution/programme in question) examines the self-evaluation report submitted by the said institution/programme. The team then conducts a site visit to verify the claims made in the university’s self-evaluation report, clarify issues identified during the desk review, and examine how QA procedures operate in practice. The team holds meetings with the university administration, members of the Council and Senate, Deans, Heads of Departments, academic and non-academic staff, students, and others. Following the visit, a draft report is submitted to the relevant institution/programme for comment before final publication. The reviewed institution/programme then prepares and publishes an action plan addressing the recommendations, with subsequent monitoring of progress.

There are some worthy QA initiatives under implementation, such as improving facilities for students with disabilities and strengthening mechanisms to address sexual- and gender-based violence. However, for the most part, QA activities have little to do with improving the quality of education. They are mostly preoccupied with monitoring faculty and department websites, digital transformation, student feedback, subject evaluation, course evaluation, peer evaluation, and, more recently, staff appraisal. These activities, which consume an inordinate amount of time—so precious at understaffed universities—have become check-box activities completed to generate evidence for the next review. Below is an excerpt of a conversation between two academics (1 and 2) that conveys how QA plays out at universities (reproduced with permission).

1: … .it’s like social media you know, like posting things on Facebook or twitter or Instagram. When people do a lot of social media, everything they do, they do thinking, “okay I’m going to post it in this way… this I have to put on my Instagram.” QA is a little like that… everything is considered in light of, “ah we can use this for the review, as evidence… for example very recently we were encouraged to have all the things that we do in our department in the faculty newsletter so then they can put in the review. Every little thing has to be noted down….

2: And with pictures and all…

1: At the very least it has to be written so that you have written evidence .. you can’t be doing something for the sake of doing something or because it is good for the department … and sometimes people tell me “oh yea that’s a good idea we can fit that under this x, y section of the review..”

2: Yea, and nobody really thinks about the actual outcome… whether it’s actually helping anyone..

1: I also find that a lot of the words that we used in different ways have now been co-opted to the QA discourse ..including quality.. I can’t actually say what I want as an “outcome”, for example, that the outcome of this workshop is that my students “think about” … then I am told “ah but no that’s not one of the Bloom’s taxonomy words, “think about”.…

2: And the worst part is these medical and agriculture people, these types of people go around spreading it like some kind of gospel!

1: Yea, this cookie cutter way of doing things, they think is the height of innovativeness or creativity, when actually it is so mundane … for me the most awful thing about it is like some fungus of mundanity has taken over through QA reviews.

2: yea, when you say QA, my mind closes off immediately and I stop listening…

Auditing everything but power

QA leaves out crucial aspects of university governance. For instance, there is no review or assessment of the “quality” of university administrations under Criterion 1 or the integrity of procedures governing the promotion of academic staff under Criterion 6 of the institutional reviews.

The majority in the Council—the university’s executive and governing body, which is responsible for selecting the Vice-Chancellor (VC)—are appointed in ad hoc fashion. Apart from the Ex-Officio members in the Council (VC, Deans, etc.), and the two members elected by the Senate, the remainder are appointed by the UGC with no formal consultation or vetting procedure. The VC appointment process described in UGC Circular No. 03/2023 exemplifies how an ostensibly technical process can become entangled in political sycophancy. The Registrar invites applications for the position of VC through advertisement. Applicants must submit a curriculum vitae, a statement of vision for the university and supporting documents. The University Council appoints a three-member Search Committee of senior academics to encourage “eminent persons” to apply, while the UGC appoints a former VC from another university to “observe” the selection process.

A Special Meeting of the University Council is convened. Candidates are interviewed and must make a presentation to the Council Members, followed by questions. Each Council member “gives marks” for seven prescribed criteria: strategic focus (20%), effective leadership (20%), holistic thinking/conceptual skills (10%), academic and research excellence (15%), personal integrity (10%), professional communication (10%) and managerial competence (15%). Marks are averaged, and the Council recommends three candidates to the UGC in rank order. The UGC-appointed observer separately submits a confidential report on the selection process.

This procedure is expected to guarantee quality, but does it? Applications are submitted to the Council Members, who have been appointed on questionable bases, and who are expected to review the applications and give scores, based on objective assessments. But, in reality, most Council Members are manipulated by VC candidates, who often have personal ties with them. The UGC-appointed observer usually has no genuine interest in the outcome. And there is no way for anyone to actually question the Council’s decision once it is made. Although the highest-ranked candidate may ultimately be appointed, the selection remains a political decision made by the President, who retains the discretion to appoint any one of the three.

External reviews also do not look into the promotions of academic staff, except to scrutinise whether there are policies and procedures in place to govern promotion. Academic staff may apply for promotion to Professor once they satisfy the prescribed eligibility requirements, which typically include the period of service, academic qualifications, research and publication achievements, teaching experience, and contributions to the university and wider community. Applications are evaluated against specified criteria, with research output and academic contributions assessed through documentary evidence and expert evaluation. Under the UGC’s scheme for Professors, two experts from outside the applicant’s institution assess specified aspects of research and knowledge dissemination. Again, beneath this technical process, which is externally evaluated, lies a problematic points-based scheme that can be manipulated and abused with impunity.

Rethinking university QA

Like the VC election process and the schemes of promotion for academic staff, QA reviews are open to manipulation. Before a review, there is a chaotic rush to complete evidence gathering and reporting. Academics leave all other work aside, including at times their teaching, to focus on completing documentation and preparing reports. The standardised criteria in the review manuals and scoring sheets often do not reflect differences in disciplines and institutional contexts. But this does not really matter because any serious problems experienced by institutions or programmes are hastily brushed under the carpet to conceal any evidence that could taint the review. The goal is to obtain an A or at least a B grade at whatever cost.

QA may result in positive change if it moves beyond top-down check-box activities towards internally designed and owned processes encompassing all aspects of university governance, led by departments and faculties, and supported by adequate resources. The current QA system needs to be dismantled and replaced by procedures that are accountable, not to the UGC, but to our students and the communities we serve.

(Ramya Kumar is attached to the Department of Community and Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Jaffna)

. Kuppi is a politics and pedagogy happening on the margins of the lecture hall that parodies, subverts, and simultaneously reaffirms social hierarchies.

Features

Down Memory Lane — the Grand 20th Edition!

Published

3 hours ago

2026/10/13

Sahan Weerasooriya

Down Memory Lane: Ready to sing again

Yes, Down Memory Lane, the beloved Sing-Along concert series that first struck a chord, way back in 1997, returns for its landmark 20th edition this Saturday, 17th October, at the beautiful Bolgoda Grand Resort, Moratuwa town centre.

Having celebrated its glorious 25th anniversary with the show in 2023, this milestone 20th concert promises to be even more special.

The organisers, the ever-popular Moratuwa Arts Forum, are pulling out all the stops to present yet another unforgettable evening, brimming with camaraderie, fellowship, and pure nostalgia.

Get ready for two-and-a-half hours of non-stop singing as veteran vocalists, from the Moratuwa Arts Forum, will take the stage to lead and inspire the happy audience to sing, sing and sing to their hearts’ content.

The repertoire? Absolutely magical, according to the organisers.

Veteran Arun Dias Bandaranaike: Will handle the evening’s proceedings / Priya Peiris: Event Conceptor

Around 40 golden oldies — from timeless English vintage evergreens and hits from the 50s to the 90s, to toe-tapping calypsos, soulful American plantation melodies, rousing cowboy and Dixieland favourites, aa well as cherished Sinhala standards. All to be sung with much gusto!

This year’s dedicated organising committee comprises Brian Coorey (Chairman), Priya Peiris (Event Conceptor), Hiran Fernando, Suranga Fernando, Viranjan Perera, Hemka Fernando and Neelesh Silva. Guidance and support comes from Moratuwa Arts Forum President Sarana Guneratne and Secretary Chandani Silva.

Adding his signature charm to the evening, as Master of Ceremonies, will be the veteran Arun Dias Bandaranaike.

Don’t miss this landmark celebration of music and memories!

For further details, contact Hiran Fernando on 0772636446 or WhatsApp 0783636446.