Features

Bamboo for land restoration and income generation

Published

5 years ago

2022/02/13

by Shantha Ramanayake

Bamboo is identified as a high priority crop for fast re-vegetating of bare lands because of its ability to grow in degraded soils and steep slopes where other plants do not successfully grow. It grows rapidly with minimum inputs and is endowed with an extensive underground network of rhizomes and roots that bind soil and store water. In addition to reclamation of degraded land, there is an added benefit as a commodity with high potential for income generation as the global bamboo market stands at over US $ 72 million and is expected to rise further.

Land degradation: Land degradation is an issue faced by many countries all over the world and has serious adverse effects on the environment and food security. It is a result of loss of biodiversity, soil erosion and depletion, soil pollution, water shortage and other factors. Land degradation is mainly induced by human activities apart from natural causes more prevalent now due to climate change. Agricultural and plantation soils have been continuously cultivated over many years focusing on increasing harvests without much concern on soil conservation and health. This has led to soil infertility and loss of production threatening food security. In addition, extensive areas of forests have been cleared with no regard to the environment. Such practices that bring about short term benefits have long term costs. According to the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) latest review (May 2021), 169 countries are affected by land degradation or drought and the average loss in production is reported to be about nine percent of the GDP. The worst affected are the central African countries where the total loss of production is estimated as a staggering 40 percent of the GDP. It would cost over 4.5 trillion dollars to take action now to halt this alarming trend. Thus there is much concern globally to rehabilitate degraded soils.

Sri Lanka is no exception. Although the country is endowed with natural resources which have sustained its people over a long period, these resources have deteriorated at an exponential rate over the last century. About 0.5% of forest land was converted to other land use types from 2000 to date. The plantation sector is affected considerably and some plantations have been abandoned. The productivity of 34% of the land area of the island is either declining or under stress and has led to increased poverty. The Government of Sri Lanka is a signatory to the UNCCD commitment to sustainable development goals and thus has a responsibility in preventing further land deterioration and is committed to restore degraded land.

Bamboo for land restoration: Among many other trees and crops identified for land restoration, a recently identified high priority crop is bamboo. Although the uses of bamboo are now well-known, information about success or failure in using bamboo for landscape restoration is limited. However, case studies in many countries show its feasibility.

Bamboo has been selected for fast re-vegetating bare land because of its ability with minimum inputs to grow in degraded soils and steep slopes where other plants fail to grow; it is also endowed with an extensive underground network of rhizomes and roots that bind soil and store water. This underground network is reported to extend up to 100 km per hectare in a bamboo plantation and grow to a depth of 60 cm and last many years. Even if the above ground biomass is destroyed the rhizome is able to regenerate fast.

Bamboo is the fastest growing plant on earth and a new culm emerging from the rhizome may grow up to one meter a day! For this reason bamboo can remove toxins and excess nitrogen from polluted soils and water ways fast. Bamboo sheds leaves during dry weather to conserve water and the leaf litter adds to soil carbon. Once a bamboo stand is established, surface run off during rains is minimized and water is stored in the soil and within the plant. Thus bamboo is able to re-vegetate and restore the productivity of unproductive land over a short period of time. Depending on the species, harvesting bamboo poles is possible three to six years after establishment and annually thereafter. Sustainable harvesting encourages fast growth in the following years. Most importantly the bamboo thus generated has an additional benefit as a commodity of high economic value.

Some case studies of land restoration by bamboo and recommendation to local situations: Bamboo planting programs need to be planned scientifically with due consideration for site – species matching, planting density, planting season etc. and management practices. Although much data is not available covering all these aspects, past experiences elsewhere could be considered.

A “Policy synthesis report, ‘Bamboo for Land Restoration’, FAO, INBAR, 2018” reported a few cases. A severely degraded land abandoned after brickmaking in Allahabad India, recovered remarkably after planting with bamboo. After 20 years the water table rose by 10 meters and it was possible to incorporate trees and other crops into this land as soil was enriched with 6-8 inches of humus by bamboo each year. Thus the farmers’ income increased. An added benefit was that they were able to get an additional income by selling bamboo poles to new industries that emerged in the vicinity. As a result of this success the project was scaled up to cover 100,000 hectares of degraded land in 600 villages in India.

In Chishui China bamboo plantations had 25 percent less water run off than an adjacent sweet potato farm and the bamboo plantation reduced soil erosion by 80%. A study in Ghana showed that Bambusa balcoa did not survive in an area with very low rainfall whereas Oxytenanthera abyssinica, a local species did better. In Colombia, planting Guadua bamboo reduced the compactness of soil making it more porous and improved water regulation and nutrient recycling. The farmers were able to increase their income by exploiting bamboo. In Nepal bamboo planting helped to reduce soil erosion and flood damage.

Considering our tea lands, over 150 years of tea cultivation has heavily degraded the soils and there is serious concern about a continuous decline of tea yields. Much of these lands will have to undergo long term rehabilitation with planting of perennial trees. Bamboo is ideal in this regard. There are many more abandoned and degraded lands as well as river and stream banks, boundaries of garbage dumps etc. which can be used to plant bamboo.

In order to succeed, the Government must take an interest and elevate the status of bamboo to a plantation crop with environmental, social and economic returns. Subsidies and supportive regulations will influence local participation to take the bamboo sector forward.

Benefits in planting bamboo: Woody bamboos are a valuable resource that can yield high socio-economic returns and environmental benefits. This is evident considering the global bamboo market which was valued at US$ 72 billion in 2019 and expected to rise at the rate of 5.5%. Bamboo has diverse applications but the rapid rise in bamboo industry was with the rediscovery of bamboo as a timber substitute minimizing the demand for valuable timber and pressure on forest resources. The bamboo industry is expected to rise continuously as the demand for sustainable green products are high.

Bamboo is utilized diversely ranging from high to medium and low technology applications. It is used in making timber substitutes such as bamboo paneling, mat board, plywood, veneer, strand woven bamboo, MDF board etc. These are used in making furniture and in buildings as flooring, paneling and even roofing. Manufacture of bamboo paper pulp can be carried out at a high tech industrial level and also as a cottage industry as happens in China. This is the oldest industrial application of bamboo which was started in India and China. Bamboo fibre in textile manufacture is a high tech industry. Canning of edible bamboo shoots has potential. Medium level industrial applications include manufacture of activated charcoal, biochar, bamboo mats, blinds, incense stick etc. while low level technologies include making handicrafts, charcoal and wood chips for use as fuel.

The situation in Sri Lanka: The first viable concept paper for establishing a bamboo industry in Sri Lanka was approved in 1992 and this was formulated after the tissue culture technique of mass propagating giant bamboo (Dendrocalamus giganteus) was developed by original research in the Institute of Fundamental Studies in Kandy. Its downstream application was the outcome of the Riverine Bamboo Project. This is presently under the purview of the Mahaweli Authority. The activities of the project were to initially establish a tissue culture laboratory and mass produce giant bamboo to be planted along the Mahweli and its tributaries with the objective of stabilizing the river bank and later to use the bamboo resource in industrial applications especially to make paper pulp.

The Mahaweli Authority claims that they have planted one million bamboo plants in riverbanks and catchment areas. It is reported that about 5,000 Ha of bamboo exist in Mahaweli catchment areas and forest reserves. Private sector has also established some bamboo but its extent not known. The tissue culture lab can mass produce planting stocks of valuable species of bamboo including Dendrocalamus hookeri, D. giganteus, D. asper, Bambusa vulgaris, B. ventricosa and others to supply palnting programmes.

The Industrial Technology Institute has carried out studies and developed the process of canning edible bamboo shoots and producing bamboo charcoal. This is the organization representing Sri Lanka in the International Network of Bamboo and Rattan (INBAR).

The UNIDO also had a bamboo project locally to promote the bamboo industry in making timber substitutes and identification of land for bamboo cultivation together with the Ministry of Industrial Development. They have established a Training Centre now under the Industrial Development Board.

The National Crafts Council promotes handicrafts and cottage industry has a training centre in Kuruwita.

Local market from available resources is limited to the following:

a. Blinds -for local and export markets

b. Handicraft – ships, pencil holders, vases, lamp sheds, tablemats

c. Incense sticks – machine made

d. Basket-ware, mats, furniture

e. Fresh edible shoots

f. Ornamental bamboo plants nurseries

g. Raw material: bamboo pole for construction/agriculture/ fisheries

h. Charcoal

Overall, the value of bamboo related product imports to Sri Lanka, grew by 40% from USD 0.5 Mn. in 2011 to USD 2 Mn. in 2015. Bamboo flooring accounted for nearly 60% of the total trade value of bamboo related imports in 2015.

The imported bamboo material/products are:

a. Flooring – imported, as a substitute for wood flooring

b. Yarn – imported from China for textile industry

c. Wood based panels – plywood, particle boards

d. Charcoal – export market is being developed

e. Canned edible shoots

f. Incense sticks – imported mostly from India, now banned

g. Bamboo sticks from China and Vietnam, importations, banned and relaxed

h. Many other home utility items – furniture, bamboo straws, ornaments,

Most of the imports could be produced in Sri Lanka, if the raw material and technology is available. The bamboo plantations should obtain Forest Stewardship Council certification (FSC) if they intend to export. With many countries establishing bamboo plantations, there is a demand to export bamboo tissue culture plants of ornamental or utility value. We have the potential of turning out bamboo charcoal on a sustainable basis to replace wood consumption and prevent deforestation.

Bamboo still remains an untapped avenue for economic growth in Sri Lanka although there are entrepreneurs showing interest. It is regretted that this country unlike many of her neighbors has hitherto hardly devoted attention to exploit the vast potential of bamboo. Government support is essential.

The Lanka Network of Bamboo and Rattan (SRINBAR) initiated in 2005 is now in the process of promoting cultivation of bamboo to cater to developing new industries and to network entrepreneurs involved or hoping to get involved in various aspects of bamboo. We are committed to taking the bamboo sector forward and hope many more will join us in this endeavor.

(The writer is a scientist who did research on many aspects of bamboo while working as a senior scientist in the National Institute of Fundamental Studies, Kandy, as the project leader of the Plant Biotechnology Project. Now retired she is involved as a consultant in plant tissue culture including bamboo. She’s also on the Advisory Committee of the Lanka Network of Bamboo and Rattan (SRINBAR) of which she’s a founder member.)

All News Advertisement

Features

Coercive laws recipe for future misrule

Published

7 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

7 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

7 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.