Features
I OPPOSE THE PRIME MINISTER, THE MINISTER OF PLANNING AND THE MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE
(Excerpted from Falling leaves, an autobiographical memoir of LC Arulpragasam)
I had no place to go, because I was wedded to the agriculture sector – by my own choosing. Therefore, I was lucky to find a berth as Head of the Agriculture Sector in the Department of National Planning. But I had to pay a career-price for doing this, because it involved my working under a non-civil servant and under someone whom I outranked in the Civil List – which was simply not done in those days.
I also accepted to work in the capacity of Senior Research Officer, which was a post at least two levels below my own rank in the public service. (I always had a penchant toward research – and I must have been fulfilling it at this stage of my life). However, since around 70 per cent of the people were dependent on agriculture, planning its development was the most important job in Sri Lanka at that time. So for me, it was the highest point in my career, although it was ranked in the government service as my lowest!
I soon discovered, however, that the Planning Department had absolutely no influence on policy under the government of Mrs. Sirimavo Bandaranaike. It so happened that I knew the Minister of Finance and Planning, Mr. Felix Dias Bandaranaike on a personal basis. For he had been two years my junior at Royal College, and as Head Prefect I had even reported him for a caning for smoking in school. Despite his personal regard for me, I was averse to approaching him directly on policy/political matters, given my personal ethics and Civil Service training of not finding favour with politicians.
I also feared that my work would be lost in the political infighting between Mr. Felix Bandaranaike and Mr. C.P. de Silva, who were both vying for the post of Deputy Prime Minister. Meanwhile, I was growing increasingly frustrated since I knew that I was getting nowhere and had nowhere else to go. For by specializing in the agriculture sector, I had brought myself to a dead end.
Fortunately, things came to a head in 1960, when Mr. Felix Bandaranaike, as Minister of Finance and Planning wished to bring out a three-year development plan together with his budget. He asked me directly at a big meeting of divisional heads whether I could write such a plan for the agriculture sector. I refused – which caused a stir among those present. I boldly said that since I disagreed fundamentally with the Government’s agricultural policies, there was no way in which I could write the proposed Plan. I added that he could transfer me anywhere, but that I would not write endorsing the government’s programs. He got angry and replied that if I presumed to challenge the Government’s policy, I should write and prove it – or I should officially withdraw my statement.
I had to take up his challenge. I was now saddled with an almost impossible task. However, I realized that suddenly and fortuitously, I had been given the chance to lay out my thinking, with the certainty that it would be read. But I had only 10 days in which to do this. Working around the clock with three stenographers and a dictaphone, I was able to produce the needed paper of about 110 pages within 10 days, since I had been working on these issues for some time.
My paper met with amazement and respect from the Minister, Mr. Felix Bandaranaike, an extremely intelligent and arrogant man. After many personal, one-on-one briefings with him, I was able to convince him that the whole agricultural policy and programs were completely uneconomic. I had confronted him in his anger, and I had convinced him that I was right. He now insisted on taking me to the Prime Minister, Mrs. Bandaranaike – to bring about a change in agricultural policy. Now I had to cope with the Prime Minister, who was equally antagonistic.
I remember her opening words: “My husband (the late Mr. Bandaranaike) told me that Mr. C.P. de Silva was the most knowledgeable man in his Cabinet; and now you are telling me that all his policies are wrong”. So I started off with the Prime Minister on an angry note. Since she knew little about the agriculture sector, I had to commence almost daily one-on-one briefings with her at ‘Temple Trees’ (the personal and official residence of the Prime Minister at that time) while she copied notes. After some two weeks of such almost daily, personal briefings at her residence at ‘Temple Trees’ she agreed that radical changes were required in agricultural policy.
She then wanted me to confront Mr. C.P.de Silva, Minister of Agriculture and Lands, who was against all these changes. She summoned a meeting with Mr. C.P. de Silva and all his department heads to a big, high-powered meeting. Fortunately, I had worked with all the Heads of Departments or their Deputies to arrive at the conclusions in my policy paper – some with heated argument, and some with acceptance. The stakes were high; but since I was already on a slippery slope of policy, beyond which any administrator should not dare, I agreed to this too. This seemed to be the only way in which the needed policy changes could be achieved. At issue was early independence on rice – which was mainly imported at that time.
Dead End: My Resignation from the Civil Service
I spent hours agonizing over whether I had a right to intervene in matters of policy. I went ahead with a policy-risk course because I knew that I would be the only person that had the knowledge, the position and the nerve to tell the Prime Minister the truth of our failed agricultural policies. I argued for a policy of agricultural intensification, based on the benefits of the green revolution technologies which were becoming known at that time.
The Government was importing so many millions tons of rice every year. On a rough calculation, we would have lost at least 35,000 million tons of rice (in imports) before the Government finally recognized after 10 years (in 1970) the potential of H4 and H11. (remember the Govi Raja of 1970?) I had confronted the Prime Minster and Minister of Agriculture (Mr..C.P. de Silva) ten years before, in 1960. It was all published in the Short-Term Implementation Program of 1961. Ten years passed before the Ceylon Government actually embraced the green revolution; and this was five years before the Indian Five-Year Plan of 1965 which was credited with introducing the green revolution.
Finally a meeting was called, presided over by the Hon. Prime Minister – at which the Minister of Agriculture and Lands, Mr. C. P. de Silva and all his departmental heads were present. After much argument, when Mr. C. P. de Silva raised his voice against me and abused me, calling me a pothe gura who did not know the facts on the ground. In effect, he called me a liar, challenging the figures that I was using. When I showed him that I was quoting from his own Ministry’s Administration Report, he subsided. The same thing happened four times in the two days of acrimonious meetings. After two days of argument, the Minister finally and resignedly agreed to my proposed policy changes, in front of all his departmental heads.
After one week, however, he decided to renege on our agreement and sought to politically confront the Prime Minister. He threatened to cross the floor with 14 of his parliamentary supporters, which would have led to the fall of Mrs. Bandaranaike’s government. The Prime Minister was forced to back down. She called me to her office to personally apologize to me and offered me “any post you want”. So that was it. All my work – and the risks I had undertaken, had been in vain!
In short, I had struggled to introduce a policy of agricultural intensification against a policy of extensification: that is of opening new land. The short-term benefit of intensification was potentially the doubling of our rice production, by embracing the high-yielding varieties of rice. At issue was millions and millions of bushels of rice – which it took 10 years for the Government to realize. In other words, I was advocating the green revolution in 1960.
Fortunately, this was embodied in The Short-Term Implantation Plan of 1961.. My proposals were buried – because one man chose to play politics, rather than think of the country’s need.. It took 10 years for the new government to recognize the high yielding varieties – and to capitalize on it, by coining the phrase, “Govi Raja”. My fight to get this done under the Bandaranaike government was buried in the dust of history. I think the story would have been different, if I had written this and persuaded Dr, Gamini Corea (whom I knew very well) if he headed the national planning at that time.
I now had nothing to look forward to in the Ceylon Civil Service; I did not want to go into any humdrum administrative post. So I tried desperately to get a posting abroad. Luckily for me, within the next six months I was selected for posts both in the UNDP and the FAO. In 1962, I accepted the FAO position and sent in my letter of resignation from the Civil Service. The Prime Minister sent for me immediately and offered me ‘any post you want’. She also offered me secondment, which had been refused to others in the CCS.
Although I had a permanent job with FAO, I promised the Prime Minister idealistically, that I would come back to work in Sri Lanka as soon as she was in a position to carry out our agreed policy changes. But she was not able to keep her side of the bargain because her Government fell – and the UNP Government took over.
Although I had transgressed the Civil Service tradition of not getting involved in policy matters or with politicians, I need to say this in extenuation of my actions. First, as Head of the Agricultural Sector in the Department of National Planning, it was part of my legitimate duties to evaluate agricultural programs and to suggest alternative policy options; hence, I had not acted beyond my mandate. Secondly, I myself had decided to bow out of my post, rather than get involved in the political rivalry between two senior Ministers.
Thirdly, I had ultimately been ordered (although angrily) by the Minister of Planning (my own Minister) to write and prove my challenge against the agricultural policies of the Government: so I was only obeying orders. Fourthly, I had infringed on policy only because I had known that the country could achieve self-sufficiency in food (that the production of rice could be almost doubled) if only the Minister of Agriculture would agree with the policy recommendations that he himself had agreed to.
I had confronted the Minister of Planning, the Minister of Agriculture and even the Prime Minister, who had all been against my policy proposals.. The price was too high for the country, for me to do otherwise. I think I always knew that there would be a personal price to pay.
Moreover, even though I had spent hours alone with the Prime Minister, I had deliberately kept away from any personal conversation with her. There were many points of personal contacts, which I had deliberately avoided mentioning to her. For instance, my mother-in-law was her close friend and had actually dressed Mrs. Bandaranaike as a bride. Moreover, every time that the Prime Minister went to London, she would bring back presents from my mother-in-law to me, which I had refused to collect from ‘Temple Trees’, because I considered it improper for my mother-in-law to try to ingratiate me with the Prime Minister! Such was the stiff-upper-lip tradition that I had imbibed from the CCS.
Looking back on my ten years in the Ceylon Civil Service (1951 -1961), I can only be thankful for the opportunity that I was given to serve at that time. It is true that I failed to achieve what I set out to do; but this was obviously due to my unrealistic expectations of what could be achieved within an administrative service, rather than any fault of the Civil Service itself. Despite my hard work in the agricultural sector, all my efforts had ended in frustration – due to purely political reasons. It took ten long years before the changes that I had advocated in 1960 were finally embraced by the Government of Sri Lanka. I have no regrets, however, that I tried.
I must also record that I managed to win at least four first places in the Ceylon Civil Service. First, I managed to come first in the Civil Service examination in my year. Second, I was the first Civil Servant to specialize in one sector only – and to ultimately pay a price for doing so. Third, I was the only civil servant, who by choice, agreed to work under a non-civil servant, also someone lower to me in rank in the Civil List. Fourth, I was also the only civil servant (again by my own choice) to go backwards, with my last job being lower than my previous one. So I did hold some records in the CCS – even if only negative ones!
Features
Putting people back into ‘development’ – a challenge for South
Should Sri Lanka consider an 18th IMF programme? Some academicians exploring Sri Lanka’s development prospects in depth are raising this issue. It is yet to emerge as a hot topic among policy and decision-making circles in this country but common sense would sooner rather than later dictate that it be taken up for discussion by the wider public and a decision arrived at.
The issue of an 18th IMF programme was raised with some urgency locally by none other than Dr. Ganeshan Wignaraja,Visiting Senior Fellow, ODI Global London, one of whose presentations, made at the Regional Centre for Strategic Studies (RCSS), Colombo, was highlighted in this column last week, May 7th. An IMF programme is far from the ideal way out for a bankrupt country such as Sri Lanka but a policy of economic pragmatism would indicate that there is no other way out for Sri Lanka. Such a programme is the proverbial ‘Bird in the hand’ for Sri Lanka and it may be compelled to avail of it to get itself out of the morass of economic failures it is bogged down in currently.
While local economic growth possibilities are far from encouraging at present, such prospects globally are far from bright as well. Some of the more thought-provoking data in the latter regard were disclosed by Dr. Wignaraja. For example, ‘The IMF’s April 2026 World Economic Outlook projects global growth slowing to 3.1 percent in 2026; with downside risks dominating: prolonged conflict, geopolitical fragmentation, renewed trade tensions, bearing down hardest on emergent and developing economies.’
However, as is known, an ‘IMF bailout’ is fraught with huge risks for the people of a developing country. ‘The Silver Bullet’ brings hardships for the people usually and they would be required by their governments to increasingly ‘tighten their belts’ and brace for perhaps indefinite material hardships and discontent. For Sri Lanka, the cost of living is unsettlingly high and 20 percent of the population is languishing below the poverty line of $ 3.65 per day.
These statistics should help put the spotlight on the people of a country, who are theoretically the subjects and beneficiaries of development, and one of the main reasons, in so far as democracies are concerned, for the existence of governments. Placing people at the centre of the development process is urgently needed in the global South and shifting the focus to other considerations would be tantamount to governments dabbling in misplaced priorities.
Technocrats are needed for the propelling of economic growth but a Southern country’s main approach to development cannot be entirely technocratic in nature. The well being of the people and how it is affected by such growth strategies need to be prime focuses in discussions on development. Accordingly, discourses on how poverty alleviation could be facilitated need urgent initiation and perpetuation. There is no getting away from people’s empowerment.
In the South over the decades, the above themes have been, more or less, allowed to lapse in discussions on development. With economic liberalization and ‘market economics’ being allowed to eclipse development, correctly understood, people’s well being could be said to have been downplayed by Southern governments.
The development issues of Southern publics could be also said to have been compounded over the years as a result of the hemisphere lacking a single and effective ‘voice’ that could consistently and forcefully take up its questions with the global powers and institutions that matter. That is, the South lacks an all-embracing, umbrella organization that could bring together and muster the collective will of the South and work towards the realization of its best interests.
This columnist has time and again brought up the need for concerned Southern sections to explore the potential within the now virtually moribund Non-Aligned Movement to reactivate itself and fill the above lacuna in the South’s organizational and mobilization capability. In its heyday NAM not only possessed this institutional capability but had ample ‘voice power’ in the form of its founding fathers, with Jawaharlal Nehru of India, for example, proving a power to reckon with in this regard. The lack of such leaders at present needs to be factored in as well as accounting for the South’s lack of power and presence in the deliberative forums of the world that have a bearing on the hemisphere’s well being.
The Executive Director of the RCSS, Ambassador (Retd) Ravinatha Aryasinha, articulated some interesting thoughts on the above and related questions at a forum a couple of months back. Speaking at the launching of the book authored by Prof. Gamini Keerewella titled, ‘Reimagining International Relations from a Global South Perspective’, at the Bandaranaike Centre for International Studies, Colombo, Amb. Aryasinha said, among other things: ‘Historically, there is a precedent that has been realized by the Non-Aligned group of countries – unfortunately, rather than being reformed and modified at the end of the Cold War, it has been tossed away.’
The inability of the nominally existent NAM to come out of its state of veritable paralysis and voice and act in the name of the South in the current international crises lends credence to the view that the organization has allowed itself to be ‘tossed away.’ The challenge before NAM is to prove that it is by no means a spent force.
As indicted, NAM needs vibrant voices that could advocate value-based advancement for the global South. Moral principles need to triumph over Realpolitik. Such transformative changes could come to pass if there is a fresh meeting of enlightened minds within the South. Pakistan by offering to mediate in the ongoing conflict between the US and Iran, for instance, proved that there are still states within the South that could look beyond narrow self-interest and work towards some collective goals. Hopefully, Pakistan’s example will be emulated.
Along with Pakistan some Gulf states have shown willingness to work towards a de-escalation of the present hostilities in West Asia. This could be a beginning for the undertaking of more ambitious, collective projects by the South that have as their goals political solutions to current international crises. These developments prove that the South is not bereft of visionary thinking that could lay the basis for a measure of world peace. That is, there are grounds to be hopeful.
NAM needs to see it as its responsibility to make good use of these hopeful signs to bring the South together once again and work towards the realization of its founding principles, such as initiating value-based international politics and laying the basis for the collective economic betterment of Southern people.
Features
Artificial Intelligence in Academia: Menace or Tool?
(The author is on X as @sasmester)
I have often been told by university colleagues how soulless and dangerous ‘artificial intelligence’ (AI) is to academia and humanity. They lament that students no longer read anything as they can now get various AI programmes to summarise what is recommended which is mostly in the English language to Sinhala or Tamil or get easier versions in English itself. They get their assignments and even dissertations fully or partially written by AI. And I am led to believe that universities do not have reliable detection software to assess plagiarism and academic fraud that have been committed using AI beyond the software freely available on the internet with their own limitations. This is due to financial restrictions in these institutions. Even these common malpractices have been done mostly with the aid of free AI programmes which are readily available, which means cheating in this sense is free and mostly safe. For teachers, this is a ‘menace’ in the same way ‘copying’ once was. But its implications are far worse.
But given the global investments made over AI, it cannot be wished away despite the enormous negative impact its use has on the environment, particularly due to its massive demand for energy. So, AI is with us to stay, and it has a considerable role to play in human civilisation even though like most innovations and inventions, this too carries its own burden of negativity. In this context, instead of demonising AI and lamenting its replacement of human agency and ingenuity, one needs to think seriously about how to deal with and engage with it reflectively and pragmatically as there is much it can offer if people are intelligent enough to make rational and sensible choices.
When I am making these observations, I am restricting myself to a handful of practices involving only writing both in university-based examination processes and in the fields of creative writing.
My initial introduction to AI was through the Research Methods class I used to teach in New Delhi. In 2022, this class was supposed to go to Dharmshala in Uttar Pradesh for fieldwork training, and we needed to write a funding proposal quickly. One of the students in the class, already familiar with ChatGPT introduced by OpenAI as a free programme in 2022, did the proposal with its help before the two-hour class was over. I edited it soon after and sent it off to the university administration for funding which we received. That stint of field work was completed in five days and was the most detailed work undertaken as a training programme up to that time in the university which had considerable output ranging from a documentary film to a detailed ethnography based on the findings.
While the technical details, the format of the proposal and its basic writing were done by AI due to the time constraints the class faced, its fine-tuning was done by me and a few students. AI could not then and even now cannot undertake that level of specificity without close human intervention. But the film, the ethnography and the actual process of research had nothing to do with AI. It was the result of human labour, thinking, planning and at times creativity and ingenuity. This was an early example of how AI could coexist in an academic environment if its technical usefulness was clearly understood and potential for excesses was also understood. But this was a time, easily accessible AI was just emerging, and we did not know much about it. But I was fortunate enough to have intelligent students in my class who gave me a crash course into this kind of AI use, which I followed up with my own reading and experimentation later on. As a result, I am keener now to see how it can be used for the betterment of academic practice rather than taking an uncritically demonising position, which I know will not lead anywhere.
But how is this possible? The lamentations of my colleagues about the abuse of AI in academic practice is not unfounded. It is a serious threat that remains mostly unaddressed not only in our country but almost everywhere else in the world too. This is mostly because the advancements of AI even in day-to-day free usage have far exceeded any thoughts for actionable codes of ethics to ensure its practice is sensible and ethical. At the same time, I cannot see why a student should not use AI to correct his spelling and grammar in assignments. I also cannot see why a student cannot seek AI’s help to secure research material from secondary sources available online which I have been doing for years. For instance, the originals of specific books and rare manuscripts might not be available in any repositories in our part of the world. In such situations, what AI might find us is all we have access to in a world where we are restricted in our mobility due to semi-racist visa regimes of failed empires and former superpowers as well as our own lack of ability to travel due to our own unenviable economic conditions. But unfortunately, the materials we need are often only available in research centers and libraries in those nations.
Similarly, when it comes to academic prose, it makes no sense now to take years to translate works from multiple languages to Sinhala and Tamil. This has always been a time-consuming, cumbersome and expensive process. Non-availability of Sinhala and English translations of core originals in languages such as English, French, German and so on has been a long-term problem for our country. But this can now be done well – at least from English to our languages – quite quickly and with a very low margin for error by using specific AI programmes which are meant to do precisely this. What this means is a quick expansion of knowledge in local languages which would have ordinarily taken years to achieve or might not have been possible at all. But still, this needs significant human intervention and time towards perfection. However, I do not think AI-based translations work as well for fiction and poetry or creative works more generally. But the ability for AI to emulate nuance and feeling in language is fast emerging. These are two clear examples of improving technical abilities in research and writing in which AI can be of help.
But looking for sources of information with help the help of AI or using it as a tool to undertake essential translations from one language to another is quite different from simply using it without ascertaining the accuracy of collected information, getting AI to do all your work without any reflection or without any hard work at all, including engaging AI to do the final product in a writing assignment — be that a term paper or a work of fiction. If one proceeds in this direction, as many unfortunately do nowadays, then, our ability to think and be creative as a species will become diminished over time and our sense of humanity itself will take a toll. This is what my colleagues worry about when they say AI is making younger generations soulless.
It is here that ethical practices on how to use AI responsibly without compromising our sense of humanity must play a central role. But these ethical practices must be formally written and taught, followed by viable programmes for detection and publication if unethical practices are followed. This needs to be the case particularly in teaching institutions as well as the broader domain of creative writing. After all, what is the fun in reading a novel or a collection of poetry written by AI?
It is time people began to think about what AI can do in their own fields without falling prey to its power and their own laziness. This brings to my mind Geoffrey Hinton’s words: “There is no chance of stopping AI’s development. But we need to ensure alignment; to ensure it is beneficial to us …” Similarly, as Yann LeCun observed, “AI is not just about replicating human intelligence; it’s about creating intelligent systems that can surpass human limitations.” In this sense, it is up to us to find our edge in creativity and common sense to find the most sensible way forward in using AI.
Features
Engelbert’s 90th birthday bash
The legendary Engelbert Humperdinck, who is known for his hit songs such as ‘A Man Without Love’, ‘Release Me’, ‘Spanish Eyes’, ‘The Last Waltz’, ‘Am I That Easy To Forget’, ‘Ten Guitars’ and ‘I Can’t Stop Loving You’, turned 90 on 02 May, 2026, and there were some lovely Hollywood-related celebrations.
Before his birthday, Engelbert’s new single ‘I’ve Got You’ was released – on 23 April – and Engelbert had this to say: “‘I’ve Got You’ is especially close to my heart. It speaks to love, loyalty, and the quiet strength we find in one another”.
The main birthday event was held at The Starlight Cabaret, in Los Angeles, California, and Sri Lankan Raju Rasiah, now based in the States, and his wife Renuka, who are personal friends of Engelbert, were invited to participate in the celebrations, along with Ingrid Melicon – also a Sri Lankan, now domiciled in America.
The invitation said “An evening of music, memories and celebration. Let’s make it a night to remember!” And it certainly turned out to be a night never ever to be forgotten!

Invitees experienced a “magical entrance” with Engelbert’s name lighting up the screen and showing him performing his hit songs.
The invitees were also presented with a unique gift – a necklace with Engelbert’s face, engraved with the words “Remember, I Love You.”
Engelbert’s son, Bradley Dorsey, sang a tribute song ‘Only You’ for his dad, while Eddy Fisher’s daughters, Tricia and Joely, also got on stage to entertaining the distinguish gathering.
Engelbert didn’t perform but got on stage for the cutting of the birthday cake.
There was also a video compilation of birthday wishes from fellow celebrities, and the lineup included Gloria Gaynor, Micky Dolenz, Wayne Newton, Pat Boone, Lulu, Judy Collins, Deana Martin, Angélica María, Rupert Everett, Matt Goss, and more.

Birthday boy Engelbert Humperdinck
At 90, Engelbert is still performing. He’s on THE CELEBRATION TOUR for his 90th year, with over 50 international dates in 2026, including Australia, Germany, the US, and Canada. He’ll be at Massey Hall in, Toronto, on 06 October, 2026. He said: “The stage is my home… Canada has always been a highlight”.
He performed 60+ concerts, worldwide, in 2025, and says karaoke keeps his songs fresh: “Most of my songs are on karaoke because people love to sing them”.
-
News4 days agoLanka Port City officials to meet investors in Dubai
-
News1 day agoEx-SriLankan CEO’s death: Controversy surrounds execution of bail bond
-
News5 days agoSLPP expresses concern over death of former SriLankan CEO
-
Editorial6 days agoThe Vijay factor
-
News5 days agoPolice inform Fort Magistrate’s Court of finding ex-CEO of SriLankan dead under suspicious circumstances
-
Features2 days agoHigh Stakes in Pursuing corruption cases
-
Features2 days agoWhen University systems fail:Supreme Court’s landmark intervention in sexual harassment case
-
Features6 days agoPalm leaf manuscripts of Sri Lanka – 1

