Features
Experience as an Advisor to the Government on Productivity Promotion
LESSONS FROM MY CAREER: SYNTHESISING MANAGEMENT THEORY WITH PRACTICE – PART 26
History of Productivity Promotion in Sri Lanka
Several events and activities converged, prompting the Ministry of Industrial Development to launch a productivity promotion drive named the National Productivity Year. One was the visit of a team from the Asian Productivity Organisation (APO), who were concerned that productivity promotion was not being actively pursued. They were unhappy that the National Institute of Business Management (NIBM), which was created to qualify for Sri Lanka’s membership in the Asian Productivity Organisation (APO), was no longer productivity-focused. The APO is an inter-governmental body established to reduce the productivity gap between Western countries and the Asia Pacific region countries, led by Japan.
The other event was a pronouncement by the industry/banking veteran, Mr Maxi Prelis, who highlighted that Sri Lanka’s productivity was very low compared with developed and middle-income countries. This was extensively reported in the media.
The NIBM, which was initially known as the Management Development and Productivity Centre (MDPC), was expected to promote productivity nationwide. Very soon, after it changed its name to the National Institute of Management (NIM), it shifted its focus to computer and marketing education, and productivity was largely forgotten. It still remained as the representative of the APO and handled the nominations for APO training programmes. Later, the institution became known as the National Institute of Business Management (NIBM) after an amendment to its Act.
This name change prompted some hilarious comments. One said that as NIM, they hardly had work and were called “Nikang Inna Minissu” (idle people). After the name change to NIBM, they could no longer be idle and were now called “Nikang Inna Beri Minissu. NIBM could not be blamed for focusing on computer and marketing courses, which were the needs of the time and money spinners. They found that this is the best way to meet the new rule of the Finance Ministry, which requires them to earn their own upkeep.
It was natural for them to forget productivity promotion, which was not a money spinner though essential for the country. This is a good example of a penny-wise pound-foolish decision by the government. In many countries in Asia, their National Productivity Organisations (NPOs) are funded by the government and carried out useful work. In fact Singapore at that time claimed that a significant part of GDP growth came from productivity improvement.
Challenging the Ministry’s Productivity Programme
I was continuing my productivity seminars and consultancy and was quite happy with the flexibility I had. Noting the contents of the programme enunciated by the Ministry, and realising that the Ministry was on the wrong track regarding the activities of the National Productivity Year 1996, I wrote an article tracing the history of the productivity movement in Sri Lanka, how it had derailed, and what needed to be done. It was critical of the programme that was formulated. This was published in the Ceylon Daily News.
Early that morning, the Secretary of the Ministry of Industrial Development called me. It was around 6:30 in the morning, after he had read my article. When he introduced himself, I was a little startled. I thought he was going to sue me for the contents of my article. It was far from that. He said, “Why don’t you join us and help us with the National Productivity Year programme without being on the side and criticising our efforts. I met him later in the day, and he offered me LKR 10,000/- a month for three half days a week. I knew this would ruin my own consultancy practice and reduce my earning capacity. Still, I agreed, as it was a national effort. Later on, it became almost a full-time assignment, although I was paid only for three half days.
Later, I was asked to have a chat with the Minister, Hon. C.V. Gooneratne, a very charming and genial personality. I had a long chat and showed him the details of seminars I was conducting under my company, Productivity Techniques (Pvt) Ltd. He showed great interest. My appointment had to be approved by the cabinet. Later, the Minister informed me that some cabinet ministers opposed my appointment because they held the view that I was a UNP man, simply because I had held the Chairmanship of the ETF Board during the UNP era. Apparently, the Minister had defended me, saying that he would take full responsibility. My appointment was approved. This marked the beginning of my journey in promoting productivity across the nation.
Life at the Ministry of Industrial Development
I was asked to report for work on a particular day, only to be told that they had yet to find a place for me in the office and find a table. I worked from home for a week or two using my personal resources. Later, I was given an office and a huge table shaped like a cashew nut. It was the table that Minister G. G. Ponnambalam used when he was the Minister.
I began to understand how government offices worked when I needed some sheets of paper to create drafts. I even signed the requisition form, but the papers were not forthcoming. The peon informed me that my requisition would be fulfilled on the following Thursday, as stationery is issued only on Thursdays to prevent misuse. I didn’t understand the logic. I had no alternative but to go home and bring papers for me to work on.
The next day, I visited the accounts department and reviewed the figures. The electricity cost was enormous, while the cost of stationery was minimal. Still, their system focus was on saving paper and keeping the air-conditioned room doors ajar thereby guzzling kilowatt hours of electricity. None had created a Pareto chart to identify the significant costs; instead, they focused on trivial ones.
I was assigned one staff member, and then another, and we collectively referred to our unit as the National Productivity Secretariat (NPS). This is how the NPS was formed, which now has a staff of over 600. There was a Productivity Steering Committee, which met periodically to provide us with guidance. We commenced a three-pronged approach to promoting productivity. One was a national campaign on mass media with talks on productivity. This was aimed at the general public and followed the method Singapore used so that the concept of getting more with less effort would catch on.
Fortunately, during this time, I learned that the BOI was also preparing a productivity campaign. I insisted that I must see the contents of their campaign so that it would be aligned with our campaign message. I was horrified when the first poster was presented by the advertising agency. It said something like Let’s improve productivity and let us shed one more drop of sweat. This was entirely against what we were promoting, which is that productivity yields more output with less effort. I asked the union member of our Steering Committee, and he totally agreed with my views. BOI decided to drop the campaign.
The second objective was to hold discussions and brief explanatory seminars for CEOs and senior executives of companies, as well as trade unions. We found several misconceptions among the private sector executives. The unions too had misconceptions and a fundamentally flawed view of productivity. The Ministry also took the unions on visits to BOI factories to demonstrate the good working conditions and facilities for the workers. The third strategy was to convince professional organisations, clubs and other non-commercial organisations to promote some activities related to productivity based on their profession.
All these were very successful. An example of the change of attitude of labour unions was seen when they held a conference on productivity. One union even went to the extent of saying that in the current globalised economy, the enemy is not management, but rather the external competitor. They promoted better labour-management relations. Despite this, there was one labour leader who said, “Productivity is bullshit, and labour-management relations should never be encouraged”. He went on to say that the labour must always be against management. There was no way he could be convinced to change his attitude.
The CEOs were taken on a field visit to Ceylon Tobacco Company, which had totally changed its attitude and had become an organisation with industrial harmony. The labour union also made a presentation. They admitted that the management had “opened their eyes” and now all were better off. Even at the end of the visit, there were die-hard CEOs who were sceptical and openly stated that labour could never be trusted.
The programmes for the general public were also well received. There were stories of how even shopkeepers rearranged their shops according to the 5S principles after listening to our radio programmes. I had a personal experience when a retired domestic aide visited us and stayed with us. When I came home after work and opened the fridge, I was surprised to see that everything was neatly arranged. I was informed that this lady came to Colombo from Matara, and the bus had the radio on, playing one of our weekly talks on productivity. The talk focused on the second step of the 5S method. This inspired her to try her hand at arranging based on the 5S method. I was surprised that the bus driver had such a talk on the sound system instead of a deafening blaring noise in the guise of music.
There were also some negative issues that I recall. One day, after a radio talk that went on the air, I was at home when the phone rang, and it was a complaint. “Mr Wijesinha, what you said makes sense, but the Ministry does not practice what you preach, because the large toilet on the Minister’s floor is used as a dump for old and discarded furniture”. I had no answer. I was only an advisor and had no authority to change. The incident occurred after my first monthly staff meeting, chaired by the Minister, when I pointed out that the first thing people see when they enter the Ministry from the Duplication road side is the broken chair of the security guard, with the rattan half removed.
I also pointed out the untidy wires, which were all loosely spread at the front of the building, giving it a very untidy appearance. The Chief Security Officer’s response was that the broken chair was deliberately placed at the gate because if a good chair is used, the security guard will sit on it comfortably and fall asleep. This was accepted, and the broken chair continued for months. That is why I decided to keep my mouth shut.
The Minister became the Productivity Promotion Champion
The Minister quickly learned all the productivity concepts and became familiar with the 5S methodology’s five steps. We had many seminars to promote productivity techniques, and he would always listen to my lecture and take notes. Gradually, he would, in his opening remarks, give my full lecture, leaving my lecture redundant. At least we had one person committed to productivity. Once, he called me to his office and told me, “We are lecturing others on productivity techniques, but why not implement them in the ministry too?”.
Thereafter, we initiated quality circles and 5S initiatives within the Ministry. There was excitement when we announced the inter-department 5S competition. On the day of the 5S audit with external auditors, the Minister also decided to join. He entered the room of an assistant secretary and found the place very disorganised and untidy. The Minister looked at me and said, “Sunil, what do you say in your seminars – is it that a cluttered mind creates a cluttered workplace or the other way round?”.
I didn’t open my mouth, but my popularity in the Ministry was going down a steep slope. Not everyone was enamoured by this new buzz of productivity. The Minister continued to other departments, asking them to open their drawers and looked into cupboards. Some had not taken notice of the competition at all and had not expected the Minister to visit and conduct an audit. A few other departments had performed very well. I recall that the Accounts Department won the contest the first time.
On the Minister’s instructions, we organised a full-day workshop on the progress of all SOEs under the Ministry. While some had implemented productivity techniques to some extent, others were grumbling that they were too busy. In fact, they were busy putting out fires and wasting effort because of low productivity. Some chairmen directly told me that they had enough matters on their plates without having to focus on productivity as well. I disagreed, having experienced the benefits of productivity first-hand, particularly during my tenure as Chairman of the ETF Board.
How the JASTECA 5S award started
The professional associations took the idea up very well. The Institute of Supply Management held its conference on the theme of productivity. The Institute of Dental Specialists also held its conference with a productivity theme, prompting many amused contacts of mine, who inquired about what dental productivity meant. Some even asked whether it represents a ratio of the number of teeth pulled out per hour. The accounting institutes and the Institution of Engineers also implemented some activities.
At that time, I was the Senior Vice President of the Japan Sri Lanka Technical and Cultural Association (JASTECA). At the Ministry, we decided to request that JASTECA hold a 5S competition. I brought this to the next committee meeting of JASTECA, and it was agreed. A great well-wisher and a regular resource person, Mr Taiki Akimoto, who introduced us to 5S in a short one-hour session during one of his seminars on behaviour modelling, had suddenly passed away, the committee decided to organise the competition as the Taiki Akimoto 5S Award. Initially, the award ceremony was organised jointly with the Ministry of Industrial Development.
The next episode will contain other stories I experienced as the advisor on productivity.
by Sunil G Wijesinha
(Consultant on Productivity and Japanese Management Techniques
Retired Chairman/Director of several Listed and Unlisted companies.
Awardee of the APO Regional Award for promoting Productivity in the Asia Pacific Region
Recipient of the “Order of the Rising Sun, Gold and Silver Rays” from the Government of Japan.
He can be contacted through email at bizex.seminarsandconsulting@gmail.com)
Features
I just wanted to get it stamped: A seven-hour stamp at DIE
There is a short story by Gabriel García Márquez, Nobel laureate, master of the human comedy and its agonies, called “I Just Want to Use the Telephone.” A woman breaks down on a Spanish highway, hitches a lift to the nearest town, and simply wants to make a telephone call to tell her husband she will be late. What follows is a Kafkaesque nightmare of misunderstanding, and catastrophic bureaucratic misinterpretation that swallows her whole life. She ends up committed to an asylum. She never makes the call.
Another Nobel laureate, Milan Kundera’s The Joke, in which a Czech student writes a postcard with a harmless witticism, and the machinery of misinterpretation grinds his entire existence to dust. Two writers, two languages, two very different political contexts, and the same essential theme: the terrifying consequences of systems that refuse to think, administered by officials who refuse to listen, imposed on individuals who simply wanted something simple and ordinary.
I thought of both of them, sitting in Room 20 of the Department of Immigration and Emigration (DIE) in Battaramulla, on a perfectly ordinary morning, waiting. I just wanted to get it stamped.
The Stamp
The matter was, on its face, trivially simple. My passport carries an information page stating it is valid until 30 March 2028. It also carries, on the following page, an endorsement, a condition, restricting the passport’s validity to five years, expiring 30 March 2023. This restriction had been imposed, I was informed, because at the time of issuance I did not possess a National Identity Card (NIC) issued by the Department of Registration of Persons (DRP). Once I obtained the NIC, I was told, the condition could be cancelled by a simple further stamp. A straightforward administrative correction. A bureaucratic afterthought.
So, I arrived at the Department of Immigration and Emigration, the DIE, an acronym one cannot help but notice carries its own dark poetry, with the relevant form, the relevant fee, and my NIC. I submitted my application at approximately nine o’clock in the morning. The officer directed me to wait. I waited.
Modern technology is a mercy in such moments. The smartphone, that great time killer, allows us to read, to write, to attend to correspondence, to think. I attended to productive work. The waiting room filled and thinned and filled again around me. The morning gave way to afternoon.
The call came at around four o’clock in the afternoon, a full seven hours, hungry, thirsty, anxious waiting, for a stamp. My NIC had been referred for verification to the DRP which is located in the same building, different floor though, the verification had taken seven hours to travel vertically between floors and return. My passport was finally stamped. The restricting condition was cancelled. I was free to go. Seven hours. One building. Two floors. A stamp.
The Geography of Absurdity
Let us be precise about the geometry of this situation, because precision is what bureaucracy demands of citizens while refusing it for itself.
The information that one department needed from the other, confirmation that a national identity card bearing a specific number belonged to a specific person, is information that both departments already hold, in files, in databases, in the digital records that both institutions have been building for years.
That information was not retrieved electronically. It was not confirmed through an intranet query that would have taken thirty seconds. It was not verified through any of the digital systems that Sri Lanka’s Digital National Strategy 2030 promises to build, or that the World Bank’s $50 million Digital Transformation Project, approved in December 2025, is supposed to finance, or that President Dissanayake, who is himself the minister responsible for digitisation, has repeatedly pledged to accelerate. The information was physically transported, on paper or on foot or through some process that consumed seven hours, between two offices in the same building.
A Retired Banker’s Letter and a Nation’s Pattern
I am not alone in this observation, and I am not the first to make it in print. A well-known retired banker wrote to the letters pages of a national newspaper not long ago with a complaint that has since circulated widely among the professional and business community. His concern was the unnecessary duplication of bureaucratic processes in Sri Lanka’s government agencies, the requirement to submit the same information repeatedly to different departments that have no mechanism for sharing it with each other.
His example was instructive: a company that changes its registered address must deal separately with the Registrar of Companies (RC) and the Inland Revenue Department (IRD), resubmitting information that both institutions already hold. Two forms, two queues, two sets of fees, two sets of officials who will each process the same fact, that the company has moved, in complete ignorance of the other’s proceedings. He contrasted this with South Korea, where customs efficiency and trade facilitation have been systematically modernised, and where single-window processes allow firms to submit information once and have it flow automatically to all relevant authorities.
The contrast is not merely between administrative cultures. It is between two different philosophies of what government is for. In the South Korean conception, and in Singapore’s, and in Estonia’s, and in the many countries that have successfully digitised their public services, government exists to process the citizen’s legitimate needs with minimum friction. In the Sri Lankan conception, as it is actually practised rather than rhetorically proclaimed, the citizen exists to process the government’s requirements, repeatedly, in person, in queues, with multiple original documents, at multiple counters, on multiple occasions, regardless of how many times the same information has already been submitted.
This is not a trivial inconvenience. It is a structural tax on every productive citizen and every legitimate enterprise in the country.
The Rhetoric and the Reality
Digitalisation is, on paper, precisely the intervention that would have prevented my seven-hour wait: a delay that a single intranet query, a database check, or a digital confirmation could have eliminated. The technology is not exotic. The conceptual framework already exists. The international funding is arriving (USD50 Mn from the World Bank). The President has made the speeches.
That lagging did not happen because Sri Lanka lacked talent, the Senior Advisor to the President on Digitalization, Dr. Hans Wijayasuriya, has stated that Sri Lanka already possesses 75% of the necessary skills to build a strong digital economy. It happened because institutional culture, interdepartmental rivalry, and the chronic prioritisation of process over outcome have conspired to keep the citizen in the queue long after the queue should have ceased to exist.
The Innocent and the System
Here is the cruellest feature of the Sri Lankan bureaucratic condition, and the one that García Márquez and Kundera both understood with novelist’s precision: the systems are designed, or have calcified into designs, that punish the innocent for the sins of the guilty.
The five-year restriction on my passport existed because some applicants, in the past, had submitted fraudulent identity documents to obtain passports. The solution was to restrict all passports issued without NIC verification, regardless of the individual applicant’s circumstances, regardless of whether there was any evidence of fraud, regardless of the disproportionate cost imposed on genuine citizens. A few bad actors found a loophole. The system’s response was to close the loophole by inconveniencing everyone else, permanently, until they proved themselves worthy of having the loophole closed in their particular case.
This is the bureaucratic logic that produced the waiting room in Battaramulla. It is also the logic that produced the multiple-submission requirement for company address changes, and the interminable queue at every government counter in every district of the island. The system never trusts the citizen. The citizen must always prove, again and again, what has already been proved. And the cost of that proof, in time, in money, in lost productive hours, in the quiet erosion of civic dignity, is paid not by the officials who designed the system, nor by the fraudsters whose behaviour prompted it, but by the ordinary person who just wanted something simple.
What a Stamp Can Tell You About a Nation
There is a measure used by international organisations to assess the quality of governance in a given country. It asks, among other things, how many days it takes to start a business, how many procedures are required to register property, how many agencies a citizen must visit to accomplish a routine administrative task. Sri Lanka’s scores on these measures have been a source of persistent embarrassment.
The first is genuine inter-agency data sharing, not a pilot project, not a working committee, not a memorandum of understanding that sits unimplemented, but a functioning intranet infrastructure through which the DRP’s identity records are accessible to the DIE, through which the RC’s records are accessible to the IRD, through which the citizen’s information, once submitted anywhere in the system, does not need to be submitted again. The World Bank project promises exactly this. It must be delivered.
The second is a single-window principle applied without exception to all citizen services. If a process requires verification from another agency, that verification is the government’s problem to obtain, not the citizens’. The citizen submits once. The system talks to itself.
The third, and this is the hardest, because it requires not technology but culture, is the genuine subordination of process to outcome. The process exists to serve the citizen’s legitimate need. When it ceases to do so, the process is broken, not the citizen.
García Márquez’s woman never made her telephone call.
Kundera’s student never recovered from his postcard joke.
I got my stamp — eventually.
(The writer, a senior Chartered Accountant and professional banker, is Professor at SLIIT, Malabe. The views and opinions expressed in this article are personal.)
Features
Sri Lanka’s vanishing wetlands put elusive otter under growing threat
The world marked World Otter Day 2026 recently. Conservationists are warning that Sri Lanka’s rapidly disappearing wetlands, polluted waterways and unplanned development are placing increasing pressure on one of the island’s most elusive freshwater predators, the Eurasian otter (Lutra lutra).
The species, locally known as “Diya Balla”, is the only otter found in Sri Lanka and is regarded as a key indicator of healthy freshwater ecosystems. Yet despite its ecological importance, experts say the animal remains poorly studied and largely overlooked in national conservation planning.
Naturalist and conservationist Chaminda Jayasekara, who has spent years documenting otters in Sri Lanka, said the species is facing mounting environmental pressures across the island.
Speaking to The Island, Jayasekara said habitat destruction, chemical pollution, road kills, sand mining, and increasing human disturbance are fragmenting the waterways on which otters depend.
“Otters are extremely sensitive animals. When wetlands are degraded or rivers become polluted, they disappear very quickly. Their survival is directly linked to the health of freshwater ecosystems,” he said.
Jayasekara, who specialised in MSc Environmental Management at the University of Hertfordshire, noted that while the species has been recorded across Sri Lanka’s wet zone, dry zone and coastal wetlands, scientific data on population numbers and distribution remain limited.
According to him, the decline of wetlands has become one of the most serious environmental issues facing Sri Lanka. Marshes, mangroves, irrigation tanks and riverine habitats are increasingly being altered by urban expansion, tourism infrastructure, encroachment and agricultural runoff.
He warns that the loss of these habitats not only threatens otters, but also weakens flood control systems, freshwater security and biodiversity resilience at a time when climate-related disasters are becoming more frequent.
Jayasekara said otters play a vital ecological role by helping maintain balanced fish populations and healthy aquatic ecosystems.
“When otters thrive, it tells us the river system is functioning properly. Their presence is a sign that water quality, fish diversity and habitat conditions remain healthy,” he explained.
One of the best-known locations for otter sightings in Sri Lanka is Aranga Pond, within the Horton Plains National Park, where the species has adapted to the island’s cold montane ecosystem.
However, conservationists stress that even protected areas are not immune to broader environmental degradation occurring outside park boundaries.
Jayasekara’s own work on otters gained prominence through long-term conservation efforts at Jetwing Vil Uyana, where a former degraded chena landscape was restored into a functioning wetland ecosystem.
The restored habitat eventually attracted Eurasian otters, fishing cats, grey slender lorises and numerous wetland bird species.
Over 14 years, Jayasekara carried out field observations, camera trapping and awareness programmes involving hotel staff, surrounding schools and local communities.
“What happened at Vil Uyana clearly showed that habitat restoration works. If degraded ecosystems are given time to recover, wildlife can return naturally,” he said.
He added that wetland restoration should become a central component of Sri Lanka’s environmental policy, particularly as climate change intensifies droughts, floods and biodiversity loss.

Chaminda collecting scat for research purposes in Sigiriya
He says wetlands are among the planet’s most productive ecosystems, functioning as natural water filters and carbon sinks while providing breeding grounds for fish, amphibians and aquatic mammals.
Yet globally, wetlands are disappearing at an alarming rate, and Sri Lanka is no exception.
Conservation groups have repeatedly warned that illegal waste disposal, pesticide contamination and poorly planned infrastructure projects are severely affecting freshwater ecosystems throughout the country.
Jayasekara also highlighted the importance of stronger environmental education and community participation in conservation.
“Awareness is still very limited. Many people living close to wetlands do not realise the ecological importance of otters or the threats they face,” he said.
According to him, involving local communities in conservation monitoring is essential if Sri Lanka hopes to safeguard the species in the long term.
He also pointed to the growing international interest in otter conservation.
In November 2025, Jayasekara represented Sri Lanka at the International Eurasian Otter Conservation Workshop held at Colchester Zoo and organised by the International Otter Survival Fund.
The workshop brought together nearly 100 researchers, conservationists and wildlife experts from 33 countries to discuss emerging threats facing Eurasian otter populations.
Jayasekara presented Sri Lanka’s experience under the theme Rewilding Through Hospitality, focusing on how habitat restoration and sustainable tourism practices at Vil Uyana contributed to otter conservation.
“The international response was extremely encouraging. Many delegates were surprised that a tourism property in Sri Lanka had quietly carried out wetland conservation work for more than a decade,” he said.
Discussions at the workshop also examined wider environmental concerns including river pollution, declining fish stocks, illegal killings and habitat fragmentation affecting otter populations across Europe and Asia.
New conservation technologies such as AI-assisted wildlife tracking and environmental DNA surveys were also highlighted as emerging tools for monitoring elusive species.
Jayasekara said Sri Lanka urgently requires more scientific surveys, stronger environmental law enforcement and greater investment in freshwater conservation research.
He warned that unless wetlands and waterways are protected, several lesser-known freshwater species could face severe decline in the coming decades.
Environmentalists say otter conservation should not be viewed in isolation but as part of a broader effort to protect entire freshwater ecosystems that millions of Sri Lankans depend on for drinking water, irrigation and livelihoods.
He further noted that healthy wetlands also strengthen climate resilience by absorbing floodwaters, reducing soil erosion and supporting groundwater recharge.
As Sri Lanka experiences increasingly erratic weather patterns linked to climate change, conservationists argue that protecting wetlands is becoming both an ecological and economic necessity.
Jayasekara believes Sri Lanka still has an opportunity to become a regional example in balancing tourism, biodiversity conservation and habitat restoration.
“The otter teaches us an important lesson,” he said. “If rivers are protected and wetlands are respected, nature has an incredible ability to recover.”
This year’s observance of World Otter Day 2026 is, therefore, serving not only as a celebration of one of the world’s most charismatic mammals, but also as a reminder of the urgent need to conserve the fragile freshwater ecosystems upon which both wildlife and human communities ultimately depend.

Eurasian otter
By Ifham Nizam
Features
Malaiyaha Tamil people: Healing the Oldest Wound of Independence
In their Vesak messages this year, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake and Prime Minister Harini Amarasuriya highlighted the values of reconciliation, coexistence and justice as essential to Sri Lanka’s future. President Dissanayake emphasised that Buddhism’s teachings remain deeply relevant to contemporary society and described Vesak as a symbol of “mutual understanding, unity and coexistence among all communities” and of reconciliation itself. Prime Minister Amarasuriya similarly called for the building of a society in which justice is assured to all irrespective of caste, race or religion. These messages were not merely religious aspirations, they were a direct challenge to the most serious failures in Sri Lanka’s post-independence history. These include the three-decade-long war, its human rights violations and the inability to implement a political solution.
These have been and continue to be the challenges that have prevented Sri Lanka from reaching its full potential. Added to this have been the persistence of social and economic inequalities that continue to marginalise communities at the bottom of the social hierarchy. One of the most enduring examples of such injustice is the experience of the Malaiyaha Tamil community. The scale of the original exclusion is worth understanding clearly. According to the 1946 Census, the Malaiyaha Tamil community numbered approximately 780,600 persons and constituted 11.73 percent of the country’s population making them the second largest ethnic community, larger than the Sri Lankan Tamil community who numbered 733,700 or 11.02 percent of the population at the time
The denial of citizenship and voting rights to the Malaiyaha Tamil community was the first major injustice inflicted on an ethnic minority in post-independence Sri Lanka. The consequences were devastating and long-lasting. A community that had contributed enormously to the country’s economy through its labour on the plantations was excluded from political participation and denied basic rights. This was a political and moral failure that cast a long shadow over the country’s post-independence history. Responsibility for that injustice needs to be shared widely. Political leaders across ethnic lines failed to resist it. The result was the marginalisation of a community whose contribution to national prosperity far exceeded the recognition it received. Today, nearly eight decades later, Sri Lanka has an opportunity to correct that historic wrong but only if economic reform is matched by genuine social inclusion.
Longstanding Grievances
The NPP government has repeatedly acknowledged the need to address the longstanding grievances of the Malaiyaha Tamil people. In its election manifesto, the NPP pledged to improve living conditions in plantation areas, strengthen land and housing rights, ensure equal access to education and public services, and integrate plantation communities more fully into national development. The NPP’s Nuwara Eliya Declaration of 2023 similarly recognised that the plantation community had suffered generations of exclusion and promised measures to address disparities in housing, land ownership, infrastructure, education and economic opportunity. The need for such action is plain to see. While citizenship issues have largely been resolved over time, the socio-economic consequences of decades of exclusion remain deeply entrenched and continue to shape daily life in plantation communities. A conference organised by the Institute of Social Development to mark International Tea Day on May 21 at the BMICH brought out this and many other salient issues. Headed by P Muthulingam the organisation has advocated for the rights of the Malaiyaha Tamil people for the past 35 years to be equal citizens who enjoy social and economic justice.
The central problem facing many plantation workers is the low level of income they receive. Daily wages remain among the lowest in the country relative to the difficulty and intensity of the work. Plantation labour continues to depend heavily on methods that have changed little over generations. Productivity remains low compared to competing tea-producing countries — not because workers lack capability, but because sustained investment in their welfare, skills and economic mobility has been withheld. Workers consequently remain trapped in a cycle of low wages and limited economic mobility. Their housing situation compounds these difficulties. Many plantation families continue to live in housing owned either by plantation companies or the state. Lack of secure ownership limits their ability to accumulate assets, access credit or make independent decisions regarding their future. When Cyclone Ditwah damaged plantation housing, it exposed the inability of those living in that housing to access state compensation as they did not own the housing in which they lived.
The problems extend beyond the central highlands. Plantation workers living in private estates and smallholdings in other parts of the country face similar challenges. A recent Amnesty International report documented serious abuses affecting Malaiyaha Tamil workers in private tea estates in the Southern Province. These include wage withholding, debt dependency, restrictions on movement and intimidation and practices the report argued correspond to internationally recognised indicators of forced labour. These findings are not peripheral. They reveal that the structural exclusion of the Malaiyaha Tamil community is not a relic of the past but an active, ongoing condition. Economic vulnerability and social marginalisation continue to leave many plantation workers without effective protection or access to justice. It is against this backdrop that the government’s recent plantation reform initiative assumes special significance.
Second Phase
The government has announced the second phase of a programme to make underutilised plantation lands and assets available for investment. The objective is to transform underperforming assets into productive enterprises capable of generating employment, attracting investment and revitalising regional economies. The programme seeks to modernise the plantation sector, improve productivity and create new opportunities in tourism, renewable energy and export-oriented industries. These objectives are necessary and welcome. However, economic reform alone will not be sufficient and Sri Lanka’s own history provides the warning. Previous rounds of plantation modernisation pursued productivity gains without addressing the structural disempowerment of the people at the centre of the industry. The result was investment that generated wealth without distributing it. The workers who produced the wealth were once again treated as labour inputs rather than as beneficiaries. If the current reform follows the same logic, it risks reproducing the same failure.
For reform to succeed, plantation workers must be recognised not merely as a labour force but as stakeholders with rights, aspirations and a legitimate claim to share in the benefits of development. Housing ownership, secure land tenure, quality education, vocational training and entrepreneurship need to be built into the reform process from the outset. The government’s commitments to the Malaiyaha Tamil community therefore need to be incorporated into every stage of the reform process. On the contentious question of land, the government should consider establishing an independent national land commission. Such a body should include respected government officials, professionals and representatives from all ethnic and religious communities. It should review land policy comprehensively, develop transparent principles for allocation and use, ensure fairness in decision making and provide a trusted mechanism for resolving disputes. A credible land commission would help build public confidence that land reforms are being undertaken in the national interest rather than for the benefit of particular groups.
The correction of historic injustices should not be viewed as a concession to one community. It should be understood as an investment in national unity, because societies do not become stronger by maintaining the exclusion of those they have wronged. On the contrary, they become stronger by ending it. The first great injustice committed against an ethnic minority after independence cannot be undone. But its consequences can be addressed, and doing so would strengthen reconciliation, enhance social cohesion and bring Sri Lanka closer to the vision of a country in which all communities live with equal dignity and equal hope. This is what the Vesak messages of the President and Prime Minister promised. The plantation reform now underway is the moment to make good on that promise not in words alone, but in sustained policy that endures beyond any single government and reaches the people who have waited longest for it.
by Jehan Perera
-
News4 days agoIMF urges Lanka not to meddle with exchange rate
-
Business5 days agoSri Lanka’s construction industry losing ground while no one watches
-
Business2 days agoIMF’s unstated rate:Sri Lanka’s $695m loan costs about 5.33% per annum
-
News4 days agoState of emergency extended
-
Features5 days agoThe Division Bell Mystery
-
News2 days agoUNP challenges NPP move to amend Vihara – Devalagam Act
-
Features3 days agoAre threats to Buddha Sasana external or from within?
-
News6 days agoRTI query of Ditwah funds: Presidential Secretariat mum on key questions

