Opinion
Fertiliser testing and MONLAR’s claim
According to a news report (Island, 2-11-20), Mr. Chinthaka Rajapakshe, who is said to be the moderator of an organization known as the “Movement for Land and Agricultural Reform (MONLAR)” claims “a high probability that the fertilizer currently released to the market were of low quality and high in heavy metals, as the National Fertiliser Secretariat had stopped testing samples at local labs”.
It seems that these labs are currently non-functional because of the Covid crisis, and so foreign labs are used. Testing has not stopped. The non-analysis and lack of testing of compost fertilizers are ignored by MONLAR as they are tacitly supported by MONLAR! Here I will show that even if one of the world’s worst rock phosphates, e.g, Nauru phosphate from New Zealand, containing very high amounts of heavy metals (occurring naturally) were imported, it will still have NO TOXIC effect if applied to Sri Lankan soils for agricultural purposes. This is based on the research I have published in peer-reviewed journals. For instance, Mr. Rajapaksa should consult my publication in Environmental Geophysics and Health, August 2018 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10653-018-0140-x where a detailed discussion is found. Here we will explain all this more simply in the following.
However, first we must look at the political agenda of MONLAR itself. Although I am not aware of the current political strategy of MONLAR in detail, I personally knew some of the initial founders of this movement. They were Marxist militants who decided to launch a movement to capture and control the peasant farmers and convert them into a “revolutionary political force”. A key tactic was to rouse the farmers into opposing “big capitalist agricultural multi-nationals” and their genetically modified (GM) products and seeds. Imported fertilizers sold by “capitalist multi-nationals” were also targeted. The opposition to GM products and high-yielding hybrid seeds led them to back “traditional seed varieties”. These yield about a fifth of the harvest from modern hybrid seeds created by the rice scientists at Bathalagoda and other research Institutes. They were the real unsung heroes who have kept the exponentially increased population of the nation away from famine since World War II. A return to traditional seeds will mean a return to shortages, famines, and re-importing “milchaard haal”.
But MONLAR and other backers of “traditional seeds” and compost fertilizers etc., are either mesmerized by false claims and fake science, or are cynically using them to further their political agendas. They want to negate the good work our scientists. Even the Minister Pathirana seems to have been tragically mislead into presenting a motion for “traditional seeds” in place of hybrids (Island, 02-11-20). The motion states that “this Parliament resolves …(to).. educate the public on the nutritious value of the traditional, local rice varieties available in the Sri Lankan market at present, of the new rice varieties consumed at present, and of the varieties of rice that should be consumed by people with various diseases, and also to provide facilities for farmers to cultivate those varieties of paddy.” So the minister wants to cure diseases with rice, while 30% of kids come hungry to school! Unfortunately, it is the minister who has to be educated. This may be a case where the minster’s scientific and medical advisors dare not contradict the minster and put him right!
The opposition to imported fertilizer led these groups to support the use of compost whose composition and quality are never subject to analysis. But MONLAR rushes to claim that imported triple phosphate is full of heavy-metal toxins profiting from a lapse in local testing due to an epidemic! This cry had already found resonance with the “Natha Deviyo” group led by Ms. Senanayake of “Hela-suvaya” together with Dr. Nalin de Silva, then at the Kelaniya Science faculty, and Ven. Rathana, then an MP from the JHU. They claimed that many illnesses, e.g., Kidney diseases in the Rajarata, are caused by arsenic and other toxins in imported fertilizers and herbicides, even though these claims were, and are now found to be completely contrary to exhaustive investigations by several independent research groups. For instance, strong evidence now suggest that the Rajarata Kidney disease is contracted by people who drink water from wells containing excessive amounts of fluoride and hard water, both of geological origin (See: Imbulana et al., Science of the Total Environment, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140716 and references therein ); in contrast, those who drink water from agricultural canals, rivers and tanks carrying fertilizer runoff are free of the disease!
Why do I say that even if one of the cheapest and “worst available” mineral phosphates, e.g., Nauru phosphate were used in agriculture, it will have no effect on our health? Let us consider this in detail.
Cadmium (Cd), arsenic (As) and lead (Pb) are some of the dangerous metal toxins found in minerals.
We will take the example of Cd, as the discussion for other toxins follows the same lines. Nauru rock phosphate contains some 90 mg of cadmium per kg of phosphate, where as a more expensive phosphate fertilizer may contain less than 20 mg of cadmium per kg of fertilizer. European “green” activists who are much like their counterparts in Sri Lanka have clamored for lowered amounts of cadmium (and other such toxins) in fertilizers imported to Europe.
Let us consider that we imported the Nauru phosphate that has been used in New Zealand, and containing some 90 mg of Cd per kilo of rock phosphate. A farmer usually applies some 30 to 60 kg of phosphate fertilizer per hectare of land in planting rice, depending on the soil. The fertilizer is ploughed into about a depth of about 8-12 inches (20-30 cm). Taking a figure of 30 cm depth in a hectare of land, the 60 kg of fertilizer containing 60 x 90 mg (i.e., 0.54 g) of cadmium are dispersed in a soil volume of 3000 cubic meters, or about 3900 metric tonnes of soil of density 1.3 g/litre. So, 0.54 g of cadmium are dispersed in this volume of soil, increasing the soil cadmium concentration by a mere 1.38 micrograms/kg, i.e., 1.38 parts per quadrillion. This is an utterly minuscule amount as the ambient level of cadmium in the soil may be as high as 0.4 mg/kg even in virgin forest soil (Chandrajith and Dissanayake 2012), and this is similar to values known for European soils. NO LEACHING what ever was assume even in estimating the 1.38 parts per quadrillion, and of course this is not true. The monsoonal rains can wash off many many times more than the 1.38 part per quadrillion.
So, when MONLAR claims that substandard fertilizer probably containing dangerous levels of toxins is being imported to Sri Lanka and that no chemical analysis is done, this is just fear-mongering and nothing else. The calculation that I presented needs only a knowledge of simple arithmetic and MONLAR, claiming expertise in agriculture should be able to do this before raising alarms.
This does not mean that EXCESS USE of fertilizer does not pollute the environment. The excess phosphate fertilizer gets washed off into the aquatic ecosystem via rivers and canals and create Algal blooms and weed growth. They de-oxygenate the water and asphyxiate aquatic organisms. The seasonal increase in phosphate levels in the Rajarata tanks is given in Table 1 of a research publication that I authored with other collaborators in Environmental Geochemistry and Health: Volume 37, Issue 2 (2015). This applies to macroscopic components like phosphates contained in the fertilizer, but NOT to the microscopic components (trace amounts) like Cd, As, and Pb. The metal toxins largely come into the environment from other sources (e.g., mining, burning of fossil fuels, acid rain, burning garbage, smoking cigarettes etc) as discussed in relevant publications.
Chandre Dharmawardana,
National Research Council of Canada.
Opinion
The policy of Sinhala Only and downgrading of English
In 1956 a Sri Lankan politician riding a great surge of populism, made a move that, at a stroke, disabled a functioning civil society operating in the English language medium in Sri Lanka. He had thrown the baby out with the bathwater.
It was done to huge, ecstatic public joy and applause at the time but in truth, this action had serious ramifications for the country, the effects have, no doubt, been endlessly mulled over ever since.
However, there is one effect/ aspect that cannot be easily dismissed – the use of legal English of an exact technical quality used for dispensing Jurisprudence (certainty and rational thought). These court certified decisions engendered confidence in law, investment and business not only here but most importantly, among the international business community.
Well qualified, rational men, Judges, thought rationally and impartially through all the aspects of a case in Law brought before them. They were expert in the use of this specialised English, with all its meanings and technicalities – but now, a type of concise English hardly understandable to the casual layman who may casually look through some court proceedings of yesteryear.
They made clear and precise rulings on matters of Sri Lankan Law. These were guiding principles for administrative practice. This body of case law knowledge has been built up over the years before Independence. This was in fact, something extremely valuable for business and everyday life. It brought confidence and trust – essential for conducting business.
English had been developed into a precise tool for analysing and understanding a problem, a matter, or a transaction. Words can have specific meanings, they were not, merely, the play- thing of those producing “fake news”. English words as used at that time, had meaning – they carried weight and meaning – the weight of the law!
Now many progressive countries around the world are embracing English for good economic and cultural reasons, but in complete contrast little Sri Lanka has gone into reverse!
A minority of the Sinhalese population, (the educated ones!) could immediately see at the time the problems that could arise by this move to down-grade English including its high-quality legal determinations. Unfortunately, seemingly, with the downgrading of English came a downgrading of the quality of inter- personal transactions.
A second failure was the failure to improve the “have nots” of the villagers by education. Knowledge and information can be considered a universal right. Leonard Woolf’s book “A village in the Jungle” makes use of this difference in education to prove a point. It makes infinitely good politics to reduce this education gap by education policies that rectify this important disadvantage normal people of Sri Lanka have.
But the yearning of educators to upgrade the education system as a whole, still remains a distant goal. Advanced English spoken language is encouraged individually but not at a state level. It has become an orphaned child. It is the elites that can read the standard classics such as Treasure Island or Sherlock Holmes and enjoy them.
But, perhaps now, with the country in the doldrums, more people will come to reflect on these failures of foresight and policy implementation. Isn’t the doldrums all the proof you need?
by Priyantha Hettige
Opinion
GOODBYE, DEAR SIR
It is with deep gratitude and profound sorrow that we remember Mr. K. L. F. Wijedasa, remarkable athletics coach whose influence reached far beyond the track. He passed away on November 4, exactly six months after his 93rd birthday, having led an exemplary and disciplined life that enabled him to enjoy such a long and meaningful innings. To those he trained, he was not only a masterful coach but a mentor, a friend, a steady father figure, and an enduring source of inspiration. His wisdom, kindness, and unwavering belief in every young athlete shaped countless lives, leaving a legacy that will continue to echo in the hearts of all who were fortunate enough to be guided by him.
I was privileged to be one of the many athletes who trained under his watchful eye from the time Mr. Wijedasa began his close association with Royal College in 1974. He was largely responsible for the golden era of athletics at Royal College from 1973 to 1980. In all but one of those years, Royal swept the board at all the leading Track & Field Championships — from the Senior and Junior Tarbat Shields to the Daily News Trophy Relay Carnival. Not only did the school dominate competitions, but it also produced star-class athletes such as sprinter Royce Koelmeyer; sprint and long & triple jump champions Godfrey Fernando and Ravi Waidyalankara; high jumper and pole vaulter Cletus Dep; Olympic 400m runner Chrisantha Ferdinando; sprinters Roshan Fernando and the Indraratne twins, Asela and Athula; and record-breaking high jumper Dr. Dharshana Wijegunasinghe, to name just a few.
Royal had won the Senior & Junior Tarbats as well as the Relay Carnival in 1973 by a whisker and was looking for a top-class coach to mould an exceptionally talented group of athletes for 1974 and beyond. This was when Mr. Wijedasa entered the scene, beginning a lifelong relationship with the athletes of Royal College from 1974 to 1987. He received excellent support from the then Principal, late Mr. L. D. H. Pieris; Vice Principal, late Mr. E. C. Gunesekera; and Masters-in-Charge Mr. Dharmasena, Mr. M. D. R. Senanayake, and Mr. V. A. B. Samarakone, with whom he maintained a strong and respectful rapport throughout his tenure.
An old boy of several schools — beginning at Kandegoda Sinhala Mixed School in his hometown, moving on to Dharmasoka Vidyalaya, Ambalangoda, Moratu Vidyalaya, and finally Ananda College — he excelled in both sports and studies. He later graduated in Geography, from the University of Peradeniya. During his undergraduate days, he distinguished himself as a sprinter, establishing a new National Record in the 100 metres in 1955. Beyond academics and sports, Mr. Wijedasa also demonstrated remarkable talent in drama.
Though proudly an Anandian, he became equally a Royalist through his deep association with Royal’s athletics from the 1970s. So strong was this bond that he eventually admitted his only son, Duminda, to Royal College. The hallmark of Mr. Wijedasa was his tireless dedication and immense patience as a mentor. Endurance and power training were among his strengths —disciplines that stood many of us in good stead long after we left school.
More than champions on the track, it is the individuals we became in later life that bear true testimony to his loving guidance. Such was his simplicity and warmth that we could visit him and his beloved wife, Ransiri, without appointment. Even long after our school days, we remained in close touch. Those living overseas never failed to visit him whenever they returned to Sri Lanka. These visits were filled with fond reminiscences of our sporting days, discussions on world affairs, and joyful moments of singing old Sinhala songs that he treasured.
It was only fitting, therefore, that on his last birthday on May 4 this year, the Old Royalists’ Athletic Club (ORAC) honoured him with a biography highlighting his immense contribution to athletics at Royal. I was deeply privileged to co-author this book together with Asoka Rodrigo, another old boy of the school.
Royal, however, was not the first school he coached. After joining the tutorial staff of his alma mater following graduation, he naturally coached Ananda College before moving on to Holy Family Convent, Bambalapitiya — where he first met the “love of his life,” Ransiri, a gifted and versatile sportswoman. She was not only a national champion in athletics but also a top netballer and basketball player in the 1960s. After his long and illustrious stint at Royal College, he went on to coach at schools such as Visakha Vidyalaya and Belvoir International.
The school arena was not his only forte. Mr. Wijedasa also produced several top national athletes, including D. K. Podimahattaya, Vijitha Wijesekera, Lionel Karunasena, Ransiri Serasinghe, Kosala Sahabandu, Gregory de Silva, Sunil Gunawardena, Prasad Perera, K. G. Badra, Surangani de Silva, Nandika de Silva, Chrisantha Ferdinando, Tamara Padmini, and Anula Costa. Apart from coaching, he was an efficient administrator as Director of Physical Education at the University of Colombo and held several senior positions in national sporting bodies. He served as President of the Amateur Athletic Association of Sri Lanka in 1994 and was also a founder and later President of the Ceylonese Track & Field Club. He served with distinction as a national selector, starter, judge, and highly qualified timekeeper.
The crowning joy of his life was seeing his legacy continue through his children and grandchildren. His son, Duminda, was a prominent athlete at Royal and later a National Squash player in the 1990s. In his later years, Mr. Wijedasa took great pride in seeing his granddaughter, Tejani, become a reputed throwing champion at Bishop’s College, where she currently serves as Games Captain. Her younger brother, too, is a promising athlete.
He is survived by his beloved wife, Ransiri, with whom he shared 57 years of a happy and devoted marriage, and by their two children, Duminda and Puranya. Duminda, married to Debbie, resides in Brisbane, Australia, with their two daughters, Deandra and Tennille. Puranya, married to Ruvindu, is blessed with three children — Madhuke, Tejani, and Dharishta.
Though he has left this world, the values he instilled, the lives he shaped, and the spirit he ignited on countless tracks and fields will live on forever — etched in the hearts of generations who were privileged to call him Sir (Coach).
NIRAJ DE MEL, Athletics Captain of Royal College 1976
Deputy Chairman, Old Royalists’ Athletics Club (ORAC)
Opinion
Why Sri Lanka needs a National Budget Performance and Evaluation Office
Sri Lanka is now grappling with the aftermath of the one of the gravest natural disasters in recent memory, as Cyclone Ditwah and the associated weather system continue to bring relentless rain, flash floods, and landslides across the country.
In view of the severe disaster situation, Speaker Jagath Wickramaratne had to amend the schedule for the Committee Stage debates on Budget 2026, which was subsequently passed by Parliament. There have been various interpretations of Budget 2026 by economists, the business community, academics, and civil society. Some analyses draw on economic expertise, others reflect social understanding, while certain groups read the budget through political ideology. But with the country now trying to manage a humanitarian and economic emergency, it is clear that fragmented interpretations will not suffice. This is a moment when Sri Lanka needs a unified, responsible, and collective “national reading” of the budget—one that rises above personal or political positions and focuses on safeguarding citizens, restoring stability, and guiding the nation toward recovery.
Budget 2026 is unique for several reasons. To understand it properly, we must “read” it through the lens of Sri Lanka’s current economic realities as well as the fiscal consolidation pathway outlined under the International Monetary Fund programme. Some argue that this Budget reflects a liberal policy orientation, citing several key allocations that support this view: strong investment in human capital, an infrastructure-led growth strategy, targeted support for private enterprise and MSMEs, and an emphasis on fiscal discipline and transparency.
Anyway, it can be argued that it is still too early to categorise the 2026 budget as a fully liberal budget approach, especially when considering the structural realities that continue to shape Sri Lanka’s economy. Still some sectors in Sri Lanka restricted private-sector space, with state dominance. And also, we can witness a weak performance-based management system with no strong KPI-linked monitoring or institutional performance cells. Moreover, the country still maintains a broad subsidy orientation, where extensive welfare transfers may constrain productivity unless they shift toward targeted and time-bound mechanisms. Even though we can see improved tax administration in the recent past, there is a need to have proper tax rationalisation, requiring significant simplification to become broad-based and globally competitive. These factors collectively indicate that, despite certain reform signals, it may be premature to label Budget 2026 as fully liberal in nature.
Overall, Sri Lanka needs to have proper monitoring mechanisms for the budget. Even if it is a liberal type, development, or any type of budget, we need to see how we can have a budget monitoring system.
Establishing a National Budget Performance and Evaluation Office
Whatever the budgets presented during the last seven decades, the implementation of budget proposals can always be mostly considered as around 30-50 %. Sri Lanka needs to have proper budget monitoring mechanisms. This is not only important for the budget but also for all other activities in Sri Lanka. Most of the countries in the world have this, and we can learn many best practices from them.
Establishing a National Budget Performance and Evaluation Office is essential for strengthening Sri Lanka’s fiscal governance and ensuring that public spending delivers measurable value. Such an office would provide an independent, data-driven mechanism to track budget implementation, monitor programme outcomes, and evaluate whether ministries achieve their intended results. Drawing from global best practices—including India’s PFMS-enabled monitoring and OECD programme-based budgeting frameworks—the office would develop clear KPIs, performance scorecards, and annual evaluation reports linked to national priorities. By integrating financial data, output metrics, and policy outcomes, this institution would enable evidence-based decision-making, improve budget credibility, reduce wastage, and foster greater transparency and accountability across the public sector. Ultimately, this would help shift Sri Lanka’s budgeting process from input-focused allocations toward performance-oriented results.
There is an urgent need for a paradigm shift in Sri Lanka’s economy, where export diversification, strengthened governance, and institutional efficiency become essential pillars of reform. Establishing a National Budget Performance and Evaluation Office is a critical step that can help the country address many long-standing challenges related to governance, fiscal discipline, and evidence-based decision-making. Such an institution would create the mechanisms required for transparency, accountability, and performance-focused budgeting. Ultimately, for Sri Lanka to gain greater global recognition and move toward a more stable, credible economic future, every stakeholder must be equipped with the right knowledge, tools, and systems that support disciplined financial management and a respected national identity.
by Prof. Nalin Abeysekera ✍️
-
Features4 days agoFinally, Mahinda Yapa sets the record straight
-
News6 days agoOver 35,000 drug offenders nabbed in 36 days
-
News5 days agoCyclone Ditwah leaves Sri Lanka’s biodiversity in ruins: Top scientist warns of unseen ecological disaster
-
News6 days agoRising water level in Malwathu Oya triggers alert in Thanthirimale
-
Features4 days agoHandunnetti and Colonial Shackles of English in Sri Lanka
-
Business3 days agoCabinet approves establishment of two 50 MW wind power stations in Mullikulum, Mannar region
-
Business6 days agoSri Lanka betting its tourism future on cold, hard numbers
-
News6 days agoNew landslide alerts as Ditwah aftermath worsens
