Connect with us

Features

THE CENTRAL BANK

Published

on

CHAPTER 13

(Excerpted from N.U. JAYAWARDENA The first five decades)

NU’s Rise to the Top

The peak of NU’s career in the public service – and what he considered the most gratifying period in his professional life – was his rise to become Deputy Governor, and then Governor, of the newly created Central Bank of Ceylon. While his period in the bank lasted four years, his term as Governor, which was cut short, lasted just sixteen months. However, his legacy is such that the creation of the Central Bank is inextricably linked with his name, as NU had been closely associated with the Bank even in its embryonic stages and had set up exchange control operations, which became the largest department of the Central Bank during its early years. The experience accumulated during his period in government service, along with his economic and business administration training, made him one of the few government officials who grasped the theoretical dimensions of the role of a central bank. As Controller of Exchange he also had experience in some of the functions of central banking.

Many countries of Asia and Africa in the post-colonial phase regarded the creation of a central bank as both an economic necessity and a symbol of political prestige, marking the shift from colonial rule to national independence. The well-known writer on central banking, R.S. Sayers, of the London School of Economics, notes that: “Colonies which have become politically independent have regarded a central bank as an outward and visible sign of independence, and the lack of one as signifying continued subjection,” adding that this has been “an important aspect in Ceylon and Burma, where central banks have been established since the [Second World] War” (Sayers 1982, p.114, emphasis added).

In contrast to the public interest evoked by the Banking Commission of 1934, the importance of a central bank at this time had hardly become an issue of public discussion, since the role and operations of a central bank were a far more extensive and complex subject, requiring a higher level of understanding of monetary and banking matters and their connection with the long-run development of the economy.

Central banks are essentially “bankers’ banks,” because they have powers of note issue, of setting reserve levels as well as interest and exchange rates, overseeing monetary matters and supervising the activities of commercial banks. Sayers argued that, “the essence of central banking is discretionary control of the monetary system”:

We must have central bankers to exercise… influence on the monetary system … there is no code of eternal rules for them to follow. They have to adapt their ways to the shape of the community’s constantly changing financial habits. (ibid, p.7)

NU taking a rare break

John Exter’s Arrival

In July 1948, J.R. Jayewardene sought the assistance of the United States to help set up a central bank, submitting his request via the US Embassy in Colombo. There was some speculation in Sri Lanka about why the government preferred an American to a British expert. JR argued that the government preferred a non-British person, “because of the supervisory influence which the British people had over us for about 150 years” (quoted in Gunasekera, 1962, p.261).As a result of this request, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York offered the services of John Exter, who was the economist covering the Far Eastern region in the Division of Research and Statistics in the New York Federal Reserve Bank.

Born in 1910, Exter was two years younger than NU. After obtaining his undergraduate and further degrees from Worcester College (1928-32) and the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy – both in Massachusetts – he had gone on to do his postgraduate studies in Economics at Harvard in 1939, “determined to discover what had caused the devastating Great Depression” (interview in The Money Changer, June 1991). He joined the Reserve Bank after a stint at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) during World War II. John Exter would rise quickly through the ranks, becoming a Vice-President of the Federal Reserve, a year after his return from Sri Lanka in 1954. Like NU, Exter was to eventually join the private sector, becoming in 1959 Vice-President of First National Bank – better known today as Citibank – which was at that time, the world’s second-largest bank.

Cousins

Initially, the Federal Reserve Board agreed to send John Exter to Sri Lanka for six months. Exter arrived, along with his wife Marion, at the beginning of 1949, after completing an assignment advising the Philippine government on the establishment of a central bank. In Sri Lanka, Exter was provided with the services, in a “consultative capacity,” of NU, who was then Controller of Exchange, and of D.C. (Douglas) Gunasekera, Senior Assistant-Controller of Exchange (Exter Report, p.iii). The latter served as Exter’s secretary. Exter worked from the premises of the Exchange Control Department, which was at that time located in the Simes Building in the Fort. In addition, he was assisted by H.N.G. Fernando, who was the Legal Draftsman, and T.A.P. Ariyaratne, who served as his stenographer.

Economics of NU and John Exter

Exter may have been pleasantly surprised to find in NU not only an able and experienced economist but also a likeminded believer in the free market. NU would have appreciated an economic system that encouraged and rewarded personal initiative and enterprise, rather than one catering to the political and electoral concerns of politicians. Furthermore, he had made his way up the system through his own merit and hard work – without the benefit of personal connections. NU by this point had gathered vast experience on many aspects of the economy, financial institutions, commerce and industry, and had seen at first hand the consequences of government interference and political expediency. As Controller of Exchange, he had witnessed how government interference created “distortions in

the market.”( NU had disagreements with senior bureaucrats and politicians, including Oliver Goonetilleke, on the issue of food subsidies and, as we have seen, on state-run industries. NU was horrified when OEG did not gradually reduce food subsidies after the war, as these were meant to be temporary wartime measures. As Controller of Exchange, he expressed reservations about exchange control being the best means to solving the economic dilemmas facing Sri Lanka (see Chapter 12).

While coming from an entirely different background and set of experiences from NU, John Exter had arrived at a set of similar conclusions. Exter had entered Harvard for his graduate studies in 1939 – one year after NU completed his postgraduate studies at LSE, and three years after Keynes had published his classic work The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. According to Exter:

The principal professors of economics at Harvard had just grabbed Keynesianism and run away with it. It was like a new religion… I should not say that I rejected Keynesianism right away. I had it pumped into me in those early years and actually taught it in the entry level economics course at Harvard.

Exter recalls, however, that he had “his serious doubts” and “became more and more skeptical” of the interventionist prescriptions of Keynesian economics (Exter, quoted in The Money Changer, June 1991).

The Exter Report

The terms of reference for Exter’s assignment were mainly twofold to report on the organization and functions of a central bank and to frame proposals for its draft constitution (Exter Report, 1949, p.v). Initially, Exter submitted an interim report to the Minister of Finance in June 1949, with “specific preliminary recommendations regarding the monetary system, the organization of the Central Bank, the principles of monetary administration and instruments of central bank action” (ibid, p.iii). Exter’s final report, published as a Sessional Paper, was subtitled Report on the Establishment of a Central Bank for Ceylon. The report – popularly referred to as “The Exter Report” – outlined the proposals for the establishment of an independent monetary authority with “broad powers to administer and regulate the entire money, banking and credit system,” and to enable it to effectively “administer and regulate a new currency system for Sri Lanka.”

The first part of the report gave a general overview of central banking as it stood at the time, as well as an analysis of the weaknesses of the monetary system prevailing in Sri Lanka in the context of the post-colonial and post–Bretton Woods world. The second part contained the draft bill, which set out the provisions for a new monetary system for Sri Lanka, including the creation of a Central Bank for Sri Lanka and a delineation of its powers and authority. This part was interspersed with comments on some of the technical clauses to help make them more intelligible to non-specialists. In the acknowledgements section of the report, Exter expressed his appreciation for NU’s assistance, stating that he had “drawn heavily”

upon NU’s “unrivalled understanding” of the Sri Lankan economy (Exter, p.56). (Exter also thanked several other persons, including D.C. Gunasekera, his Secretary, who was “my first and most tactful critic and saved me from many pitfalls”; H.N.G. Fernando, the Legal Draftsman, to whom he was “especially grateful” in the drafting and the revising of the bill; his stenographer T.A.P. Ariyaratne; D.S. Appathurai and D. Perera, who assisted him in preparing the statistics and research material; as well as J. Tyagaraja, C. Loganathan, V. Sanmugam and P. Sangarapillai, who had submitted memoranda in response to Exter’s invitation advertised in the press to the public, to present evidence and views on the proposed creation of a Central Bank.

Debate in Parliament

The draft legislation for the establishment of the Central Bank – which when enacted became known as the Monetary Law Act No. 58 of 1949 – was presented in the House of Representatives by J.R. Jayewardene at the end of October 1949. Shortly afterwards, the Exter Report was also made available. While tribute was paid by both sides of the House to both the report and the bill, the debate was lively and dominated by opposition members, including Colvin R. de Silva, N.M. Perera, and C. Sunderalingam, as well as S.A. Pakeman, Professor of History at the University of Colombo, who was an Appointed Member of Parliament. Colvin R. de Silva praised the report: “it is… admirable in its clarity and directness, its succinctness and sustained relevance to the matter at hand.” Underlining the complexity of the subject, he further added that:

Anybody who reads through the Report will note a certain undercurrent of anxiety flowing from a consciousness of the immaturity and inexperience of us in this country in relation to the abstruse subject, not only of banking in particular, but of financing in general. (Hansard, 24 Nov. 1949, p.827)

While the creation of a Central Bank for Sri Lanka was uncharted territory, many members of parliament had studied the bill carefully. One issue that arose was the question of a suitable Governor for the Central Bank. Some members, including Colvin R. de Silva, N.M.

Perera and T.G. Jayewardene, argued that there were no Sri Lankans with the proper qualifications. N.M. Perera pointed out that the job was a “peculiarly technical job,” and that the Governor would need to be cognizant of: all complicated open market operations in Ceylon, understanding the correct moment to sell… or buy… securities,… to raise… discount rates,… the correct moment to control, raise or reduce the reserve ratio (of banks)… [and] the international financial implications… (Hansard, 22 Nov. 1949, pp.732-33)

J.R. Jayewardene and C. Suntharalingam, however, were the only two members who supported a Sri Lankan governor. As J.R. said:

It might be well to mention that in no central bank anywhere in the world is a non-national in charge. I do trust Ceylon will not be the only exception. (Hansard, 25 Nov. 1949, p.935) C. Suntharalingam argued the case for appointing a Sri Lankan even more ardently, and suggested that one of the prime candidates should be NU:Am I to believe that in this country we have no persons with a knowledge of currency, of finance and banking? I know some of them intimately. There is mention of their names in the [Exter] Report. Look, Mr. Speaker, here is one of our best men who is called upon to function in a consultative capacity. (ibid, p.894, emphasis added)

(The person functioning in a “consultative capacity” was NU (see The Exter Report, p.iii).

On 25 November 1949, the Monetary Law Act (No. 58 of 1949) was passed in parliament. During the debate J.R. Jayewardene stated that:With the establishment of the Central Bank we are taking… ultimately into the hands of the Government one of the most important institutions that the British ruler has left in Ceylon, the commercial banking system. (ibid, p.723)

The event was hailed by many members of parliament. N.M. Perera called it “perhaps the most important Bill that has been placed before this house”; and Thomas Amarasuriya dubbed it “the Magna Carta of economic independence” (ibid, pp.718 & 725). It was also referred to as “a landmark in the progress of the people of Ceylon to economic freedom” (Central Bank, c.1975, p.9). The Central Bank was inaugurated on 28 August 1950. The government appointed John Exter to be the first Governor of the Bank, with N.U. Jayawardena as Deputy Governor.

The Independence of the Bank

The Exter Report made reference to the dilemma of creating the proper balance between coordination with the government and the independence of the Central Bank, stating that “this problem has vexed law-makers for many years,” and that “in most countries the exact relationship has not been precisely defined” (Exter Report, p.12). It was equally important to protect its officers from political meddling. The Monetary Law Act was framed in careful terms and set out in such a way as to bring this about. The Bank was an independent government institution with wide powers.

The main governing body of the bank was the Monetary Board, which was composed of three members – the Governor of the Bank, an Appointed Member, and the Secretary of the Ministry of Finance.The authority to appoint the Bank Governor and the Appointed Member rested with the Governor-General and was to be made on the recommendation of the Prime Minister, effectively limiting any parliamentary interference. Furthermore, the legislation strictly barred members of parliament from holding the post of Governor. Restricting the board to three members was intentional, since “a small board was likely to be more effective than a large one.” It was also felt that the Secretary of the Ministry of Finance was needed on the Board, “to ideally achieve continuous and constructive cooperation between the Monetary Board and the Government” (ibid,p.13).

As further safeguards against political interference, the Governor, Deputy Governor and the Appointed Member posts were set for a fixed and renewable term of six years. The Bank exercised sweeping powers over the monetary system and monetary policy as well as over banks, both commercial and state owned. Significantly, the Exter Report argued for omitting any clauses that would give discretion to the government to issue directions to the Central Bank, even though legislation in England and Australia provided such provisionsin their laws. (The Exter Report (p.12), provided the following reasoning: Such formula may be called for, as it was in England, in order to clarify the relationship between a central bank and a government at the termination of a long period of private ownership and control of the central bank.

It does not seem to be necessary in the case of Ceylon where a central bank is being established which from the very beginning is to be entirely under Government auspices. Such formulas come very close to making central banks departments of finance ministries. J.R. Jayewardene had tried to prevent the inclusion of such provisions in the draft bill, but had been unsuccessful. Specific clauses in the legislation protected officers and other employees of the Bank from political interference.

Section 45(1), not only stringently ensured the confidentiality of records of individuals and institutions, but was framed in such a way as to circumvent attempts by politically motivated persons or parties within and outside of the Bank to victimize any person or party; and Section 45(2) offered protection for Bank employees as well. (Sec. 45 (1) states: “Every officer… of the Central Bank shall preserve and aid in preserving secrecy with regard to all matters relating to the affairs of any banking institution, or of any client of any banking institution… and any such officer…who communicates any such matter… or permits any unauthorized person to have access to any… records relating to any banking institution shall be guilty of an offence (emphasis added). Sec. 45 (2) states: “No officer… of the Central Bank shall be required to produce in court any book or document or to divulge or communicate to any court any matter… coming under his notice in the performance of his duties.”)

By Kumari Jayawardena and Jennifer Moragoda ✍️
In studying Ceylon’s economic and financial problems,
I have drawn
heavily upon Mr. N.U. Jayawardena’s unrivalled understanding of the operations of the Ceylon economy.

(John Exter, 1949, The Exter Report, p.56)



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

NASA’s Epic Flight, Trump’s Epic Fumble and Asian Dilemmas

Published

on

Epic Crew (L-R): Jeremy Hansen, Victor Glover, Reid Wiseman Christina and Christina Koch

Three hours after the spectacular Artemis II flight launch in Florida, US President Donald Trump delivered a forlorn speech from Washington. Thirty three days after starting the war against Iran as Epic Fury, the President demonstrated on national and global televisions the Epic Fumble he has made out of his Middle East ‘excursion’. It was an April Fool’s Day speech, 20 minutes of incoherent rambling with the President looking bored, confused, disengaged and dispirited. He left no one wiser about what will come next, let alone what he might do next.

There was more to April Fool’s Day this year in that it brought out the nation’s good, bad and the ugly, all in a day’s swoop. The good was the Artemis II flight carrying astronauts farther from the Earth’s orbit and closer to the moon for the first time in over 50 years. The mission is a precursor for future flights and will test the performance of a new spacecraft, gather new understanding of human conditioning, and extend the boundaries of lunar science. It is a testament to humankind being able to make steady progress in science and technology at one end of a hopelessly uneven world, while poverty, bigotry and belligerence simmer violently at the other end.

Terrible Trump

The four Artemis II astronauts, three Americans, Reid Wiseman, Victor Glover, and Christina Koch, and one Canadian, Jeremy Hansen, are also symptomatic of the endurance of America’s inclusive goodness in spite of efforts by the Trump Administration to snuff the nation’s fledgling DEI (Diversity, Equity and Inclusion) ethos. To wit, of the four astronauts, Victor Glover, a Caribbean American, is the first person of colour, Christina Koch the first woman, and Jeremy Hansen of Canada the first non-American – to fly this far beyond the earth’s orbit. All in spite of Trump’s watch.

Yet Trump managed to showcase his commitment to America’s ugliness, on the same day, by presenting himself at the Supreme Court hearing on the constitutionality of his most abominable Executive Order – to stop the American tradition of birthright citizenship. He keeps posting that America is Stupid in being the only country in the world that grants citizenship at birth to everyone born in America, regardless of the status of their parents, except the children of foreign diplomats or members of an occupying enemy force. In fact, there are 32 other countries in the world that grant birthright citizenship, a majority of them in the Americas indicating the continent’s history as a magnet for migrants ever since Christopher Columbus discovered it for the rest of the world.

And birthright citizenship in the US is enshrined in the constitution by the 14th Amendment, supplemented by subsequent legislation and reinforced by a century and a half of case law. Trump wants to reverse that. Thus far and no further was the message from the court at the hearing. A decision is expected in June and the legal betting is whether it would be a 7-2 or 8-1 rebuke for Trump. In a telling exchange during the hearing, when the government’s Solicitor General John Sauer quite sillily dramatized that “we’re in new world now … where eight billion people are one plane ride way from having a child who’s a US citizen,” Chief Justice John Roberts quietly dismissed him: “Well, it’s a new world. It’s the same Constitution!”

Trump’s terrible ‘bad’ is of course the war that he started in the Middle East and doesn’t know how to end it. Margaret MacMillan, acclaimed World War I historian and a great grand daughter of World War I British Prime Minister Lloyd George from Wales, has compared Trump’s current war to the origins of the First World War. Just as in 1914, small Serbia had pulled the bigger Russia into a war that was not in Russia’s interest, so too have Netanyahu and Israel have pulled Trump and America into the current war against Iran. World War I that started in August, 2014 was expected to be over before Christmas, but it went on till November, 2018. Weak leaders start wars, says MacMillan, but “they don’t have a clear idea of how they are going to end.”

There are also geopolitical and national-political differences between the 1910s and 2020s. America’s traditional allies have steadfastly refused to join Trump’s war. And Trump is under immense pressure at home not to extend the war. This is one American war that has been unpopular from day one. The cost of military operations at as high as two billion dollars a day is anathema to the people who are aggravated by rising prices directly because of the war. Trump’s own mental acuity and the abilities of his cabinet Secretaries are openly under question. There are swirling allegations of military contract profiteering and selective defense investments – one involving Secretary of War Pete Hegseth.

Trump’s Administration is coming apart with sharp internal divisions over the war and government paralysis on domestic matters. There are growing signs of disarray – with Trump firing his Attorney General for not being effective prosecuting his political enemies and Secretary Hegseth ordering early retirement for Army Chief of Staff Randy George. In America’s non-parliamentary presidential system, Trump is allowed to run his own forum where he lies daily without instant challenger or contradiction, and it is impossible to get rid of his government by that simple device called no confidence motion.

Asian Dilemmas

Howsoever the current will last or end, what is clear is that its economic consequences are not going to disappear soon. Iran’s choke on the Strait of Hormuz has affected not only the supply and prices of oil and natural gas but a family of other products from fertilizers to medicines to semiconductors. The barrel price of oil has risen from $70 before the war to over $100 now. After Trump’s speech on April 1, oil prices rose and stock prices fell. The higher prices have come to stay and even if they start going down they are not likely to go down to prewar levels.

There are warnings that with high prices, low growth and unemployment, the global economy is believed to be in for a stagflation shock like in the 1970s. Even if the war were to end sooner than a lot later, the economic setbacks will not be reversed easily or quickly. Supplies alone will take time to get back into routine, and it will even take longer time for production in the Gulf countries to get back to speed. Not only imports, but even export trading and exports to Middle East countries will be impacted. The future of South Asians employed in the Middle East is also at stake.

In 1980, President Carter floated the Carter Doctrine that the US would use military force to ensure the free flow of oil through the Strait of Hormuz. Trump is now upending that doctrine – first by misusing America’s military force against Iran and provoking the strait’s closure, and then claiming that keeping the strait open is not America’s business. Ever selfish and transactional, Trump’s argument is that America is now a net exporter of oil and is no longer dependent on Middle East oil.

To fill in the void, and perhaps responding to Trump’s call to “build up some delayed courage,” UK has hosted a virtual meeting of about 40 countries to discuss modalities for reopening the Strait of Hormuz. US was not one of them. While Downing Street has not released a full list of attendees, European countries, some Gulf countries, Canada, Australia, Japan and India reportedly attended the meeting. Which other Asian countries attended the meeting is not known.

British Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper has blamed Iran for “hijacking” an international shipping route to “hold the global economy hostage,” while insisting that the British initiative is “not based on any other country’s priority or anything in terms of the US or other countries”. French President Emmanuel Macron now visiting South Korea has emphasized any resolution “can only be done in concert with Iran. So, first and foremost, there must be a ceasefire and a resumption of negotiations.”

Prior to the British initiative focussed on the Strait of Hormuz, Egypt, Pakistan and Türkiye have been playing a backdoor intermediary role to facilitate communications between the US and Iran. Trump as usual magnified this backroom channel as serious talks initiated by Iran’s ‘new regime’, and Trump’s claims were promptly rejected by Iran. There were speculations that Pakistan would host a direct meeting between US Vice President JD Vance and an Iranian representative in Islamabad. So far, only the foreign ministers of Egypt, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Türkiye have met in Islamabad, and Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar flew to Beijing to brief his Chinese counterpart, Wang Yi, of Pakistan’s diplomatic efforts.

The Beijing visit produced a five-point initiative calling for a ceasefire, the opening of the Strait of Hormuz and diplomacy instead of escalation. The five-point pathway seems a follow up to the 15-point demand that the US sent to Iran through the three Samaritan intermediaries which Iran rejected as they did not include any of Iran’s priorities. The state of these mediating efforts are now unclear after President Trump’s April Fool’s Day rambling. In fairness, Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has announced that his country intends to keep ‘nudging’ the US and Iran towards resuming negotiations and ending the war.

While these efforts are welcome and deserve everyone’s best wishes, they have also led to what BBC has called the “chatter in Delhi” – “is India being sidelined” by Pakistan’s intermediary efforts? Indian Foreign Minister Jaishankar’s rather undiplomatic characterization of Pakistan’s role as “dalali” (brokerage) provoked immediate denunciation in Islamabad, while Indian opposition parties are blaming the Modi Government’s foreign policy stances as an “embarrassment” to India’s stature.

The larger view is that while it is Asia that is most impacted by the closure of Hormuz, with Singapore’s Foreign Affairs Minister Vivian Balakrishnan calling it an “Asian crisis”, Asia has no leverage in the matter and Asian countries have to make special arrangements with Iran to let their ships navigate through the Strait of Hormuz. There is no pathway for co-ordinated action. China is still significant but not consequentially effective. India’s all-alignment foreign policy has made it less significant and more vulnerable in the current crisis. And Pakistan has opened a third dimension to Asia’s dilemmas.

In the circumstances, it is fair to say that Sri Lanka is the most politically stable country among its South Asian neighbours. Put another way, Sri Lanka has a remarkably consensual and uncontentious government in comparison to the old governments in India and Pakistan, and even the new government in Bangladesh. But that may not be saying much unless the NPP government proves itself to be sufficiently competent, and uses the political stability and the general goodwill it is still enjoying, to put the country’s economic department in order. More on that later.

by Rajan Philips

Continue Reading

Features

Ranjith Siyambalapitiya turns custodian of a rare living collection

Published

on

Siyambalapitiya’s ancsetral house built on 1923 at Vendala

From Parliament to Fruit Grove:

After more than two decades in politics, rising to the positions of Cabinet Minister and Deputy Speaker of Parliament, Ranjith Siyambalapitiya has turned his attention to a markedly different arena — one far removed from parliamentary debate and political intrigue.

Today, Siyambalapitiya spends much of his time tending to a sprawling 15-acre home garden at Vendala in Karawanella, near Ruwanwella, nurturing what has gradually evolved into one of the most remarkable private fruit collections in the country.

Situated in Sri Lanka’s Wet Zone Low Country agro-ecological region (WL2), Ruwanwella lies at an elevation of roughly 100–200 metres above sea level. Deep red-yellow podzolic soils, annual rainfall exceeding 2,500 millimetres, and a warm humid tropical climate combine to create conditions that make the region one of the richest areas in the island for fruit tree diversity.

Within this favourable ecological setting, Siyambalapitiya has become what may best be described as a custodian of a living collection—a fruit grove that now contains around 554 fruit trees and vines, many of them rare or seldom seen in contemporary agriculture.

Of these, 448 varieties have already been properly identified and documented with the assistance of agriculturist Dr. Suba Heenkenda, a retired expert of the Department of Agriculture. Together they have undertaken the painstaking task of cataloguing the plants by their botanical names, common Sinhala names, and the names used in ancient Ayurvedic and indigenous medical texts, assigning each species a unique identification number.

According to Siyambalapitiya, the Vendala estate is possibly the only single location in Sri Lanka where such a large number of fruit varieties—particularly rare and underutilized species—are maintained within one property.

“This garden came down to me through my grandfather, grandmother, mother and father,” he says. “It is a place shaped by three generations.”

The estate, he explains, began as a traditional home garden where crops such as tea, coconut and rubber were cultivated alongside fruit trees planted by family members over decades. Over time, however, it evolved into something much larger: a carefully nurtured grove preserving both common and obscure fruit species.

Siyambalapitiya recalls with affection one of the oldest trees in the garden—a honey-jack tree known locally as “Lokumänike’s Rata Kos Gaha.”

The story behind it has become part of family lore. According to village elders, his grandmother had brought home the sapling after visiting the Colombo Grand Exhibition in 1952 many decades ago and planted it near the house.

The tree soon gained fame in the village. Its tender jackfruit proved ideal for curry and mallum, while the ripe fruit was renowned for its sweetness.

“Ripe jackfruit from this tree tastes like honey itself,” Siyambalapitiya says. “Even the seeds are full of flour and can be eaten throughout the year.”

Yet age has not spared the venerable tree. It now shows signs of disease, and Siyambalapitiya and his staff have had to treat old wounds and monitor unusual bark damage.

“Once lightning struck it,” he recalls. “The largest branch began to die. Saving the tree required what I would call a kind of surgical operation.”

Such care, he says, reflects the deep attachment he feels toward the collection.

His fascination with fruit trees began in childhood. While attending Royal College in Colombo and living in a boarding house he disliked, Siyambalapitiya would insist that the family procure new fruit saplings for him to plant during his weekend visits home.

“That was the only ‘price’ I demanded for going to school,” he laughs.

Over the years the collection expanded steadily as he encountered new plants in forests, nurseries, and rural landscapes across the island.

The result today is a grove that includes traditional Sri Lankan fruit species, underutilized native varieties, forest fruits, and plants introduced from overseas.

Some species originate in Arabian deserts, while others thrive naturally in cooler climates such as Europe. Certain plants require greenhouse-like conditions, while others are hardy forest trees.

Managing such diversity is no easy task.

“One plant asks for rain, another asks for cold, and yet another prefers heat,” Siyambalapitiya explains. “Too much rain makes some sick, too much sun troubles others. The older trees overshadow the younger ones. You cannot feed or medicate them all in the same way.”

He compares the task to caring for a household filled with people from many nations and ages—each with different needs.

Despite the challenges, he believes the effort is worthwhile, particularly because many of the trees are native species that have become increasingly rare.

“If things continue as they are, some of these plants may disappear from our lives,” he warns.

To preserve knowledge about them, Siyambalapitiya is preparing to launch a book titled “Mage Vendala Palathuru Arana” (My Vendala Fruit Grove), which serves as an introductory guide to the collection.

The book, scheduled for release on April 18 at the Vendala estate, will be attended by Ven. Dr. Kirinde Assaji Thera, Chief Incumbent of Gangaramaya Temple,

Uruwarige Wannila Aththo, the leader of the Indigenous Vedda Community,

a long-serving former employee who helped maintain the plantation, and Sunday Dhamma school students from the region, who will participate as guests of honour.

The publication will also mark Siyambalapitiya’s eighth book. Previously he authored seven works and wrote more than 500 weekly newspaper columns offering commentary on politics and current affairs.

While working on the fruit catalogue, he is simultaneously writing another volume reflecting on his 25-year political career, including his tenure as Deputy Finance Minister during Sri Lanka’s most severe economic crisis.

For Siyambalapitiya, however, the fruit grove represents more than a hobby or academic exercise.

“The fruit we enjoy is the result of a tree’s effort to reproduce,” he says. “Nature has given fruits their taste, fragrance and colour to attract us. All the tree asks in return is that its seeds be carried to new places.”

That simple cycle of life, he believes, has continued for tens of thousands of years.

“And those who love trees,” he adds, “are guardians of the world’s survival.”

by Saman Indrajith

Pix by Tharanga Ratnaweera

Continue Reading

Features

Smoke Free Sweden calls out to WHO not to suggest nicotine alternatives

Published

on

It has been reported by the international advocacy initiative, ‘Smoke Free Sweden’ (‘SFS’) that many International health experts have begun criticizing the World Health Organization (WHO) for presenting safer nicotine alternatives rather than recognizing its role in accelerating decline in smoking.

As the world’s premier technical health agency, the WHO is empowered to support strategies that reduce morbidity and mortality even if they do not eliminate the underlying behaviour. Furthermore, it should base its guidance on evolving scientific knowledge, which includes comparative-risk assessments. Equating smoke-free nicotine alternatives with combustible cigarettes, is essentially putting lives at risk, according to the health experts contacted by SFS.

The warning follows recent WHO comments suggesting that vaping and other non-combustible nicotine products are driving tobacco use in Europe. This narrative ignores real-world evidence from countries like Sweden where access to safer alternatives has coincided with record low smoking rates.

A “Smoke-Free” status is defined as an adult daily smoking prevalence below 5% and Sweden is on the brink of officially achieving this milestone. This is clear proof that pragmatic harm-reduction policies work. Sweden’s success has been driven by adult smokers switching to lower-risk alternatives such as oral tobacco pouches (Snus), oral nicotine pouches and other non-combustible products.

“Vapes and pouches are helping to reduce risk, and Sweden’s smoke-free transition proves this,” said Dr Delon Human, leader of Smoke Free Sweden. “We should be celebrating policies that help smokers quit combustible tobacco, not spreading fear about the very tools that are accelerating the decline of cigarettes.”

It is further reported by health experts that conflating cigarettes with non-combustible alternatives risks deterring smokers from switching and could slow progress toward reducing tobacco-related disease.

Dr Human emphasized that youth protection and harm reduction are not mutually exclusive.

“It is critically important to safeguard against underage use, but this should be done by targeted, risk-proportionate regulation and proper enforcement, not by sacrificing the right of adults to access products that might save their lives,” he said.

Smoke Free Sweden is calling on global health authorities to adopt evidence-based policies that distinguish clearly between combustible tobacco – the primary cause of tobacco-related death – and lower-risk nicotine alternatives.

“Public health policy must be grounded in science and real-world outcomes,” Dr Human added. “Sweden’s experience shows that when adult smokers are given legal access to safer nicotine alternatives, smoking rates fall faster than almost anywhere else in the world.”

Continue Reading

Trending