Connect with us

Features

My continuing battle against the Tea Hub proposal that would have debased pure Ceylon Tea

Published

on

Multinationals have long reduced the content of Ceylon tea in packs branded as such

(Excerpted from the autobiography of Merrill J. Fernando)

The ruthless philosophy of the multinational packer and retail supplier is to buy low and sell high in mass markets in which the consumer, through relentless advertising and promotion, has been compelled to accept a well-packaged mediocrity masquerading as excellence. The intrinsic value of a product such as Pure Ceylon Tea and its inherent value proposition is subordinated to profit. Concepts such as genuine product purity and uniqueness of origin have no place in such a world. Such values do not belong in the base culture of mass-marketing of bland, homogeneous products.

The importation of cheap tea from multiple origins would immediately result in the discounting, at the Colombo Auction, of equivalent grades produced in this country, which would invariably be of a higher value than the import. In fact, the cost of any cheap imported tea would be well below our national cost of production, which, for a number of well known reasons, is the highest in the world.

A glut of such low-priced imported tea would depress auction prices overall and adversely impact the grower and producer, who are already burdened by high production costs and diminishing land and worker productivity. In the meantime, the cheap blend, with its desirability enhanced by the legend ‘packed in Sri Lanka/Ceylon,’ will be perceived as genuine Ceylon Tea by the overseas consumer. That perception will cause irreparable damage to the image of Pure Ceylon Tea and, also, to the exporter of the genuine product.

Despite the many abuses it has been subject to over the years, at the hands of multinationals and other traders, who have no respect for either purity or origins, Ceylon Tea is not a commodity as other teas are. Pure Ceylon Tea, of itself and in itself, is a brand and a specialty in the eyes of the consumer. There is no other tea in the world which is recognized internationally by the country of its origin like Ceylon Tea; nor is any other country globally identified by the tea it produces like Sri Lanka/Ceylon.

Up to about 20 years ago, Ceylon Tea was promoted and marketed on that unique value proposition and that memory still lingers in the minds of the older, middle-aged consumer. It was that memory of quality which ensured the success of Dilmah in Australia, despite it being priced well above its competing brands produced by the big multinationals.

Historically, though, commoditization has been the strategy of the trader, the promotion of the brand on the strength of the quality image of Ceylon Tea and then gradually reducing the latter component, thus deluding the overseas consumer and impoverishing the local farmer. Consumers who purchase blindly on brand loyalty do not perceive the gradual erosion in the quality of the cup of tea they drink every day. They will continue to patronize the debased product as a conditioned reflex to compelling advertising and promotion.

A recent example of the strategy described above is the fate of the Russian market, first serviced by our own traders, who, instead of developing own labels when the opportunity arose, chose the easy path and became servitors of the foreign label. The end result was an ignominious exit from the market when the Russian buyer, having established market share on the strength of Ceylon Tea, took his business elsewhere or established his own packing plants in Russia itself.

Value addition, branding, and marketing have, for long, been the weakest features in our export field. Despite all their arguments to the contrary, increasing the total value of our exports using cheap imported tea is not practically possible. The immediate result would be the decline of the export price of Pure Ceylon Tea.

Value-added tea is already being exported at prices ranging from Rs. 600 per kg to Rs. 1,100 per kg. The availability of Ceylon Tea at those prices, automatically weakens the argument for importation of cheap tea, unless the purpose is simply to devalue the export price.

It is also most unlikely that global players in the tea trade, packing in-market, using cheap, multi-origin tea, would rush to Sri Lanka to establish packing centres with the establishment of a Tea Hub. We are far removed from the main markets of the global packers and the only inducements for them to set up operations in Sri Lanka would be the availability of low-cost labour and cheap tea, at rock-bottom prices, the margin savings overriding other disadvantages, such as additional shipping and distribution costs. Such operators will not buy the high-priced Ceylon Tea, unless the proposed massive influx of imported tea drives the local auction prices down to the floor! Is it necessary to emphasize that such a scenario would be the death knell for the local producer?

Unacceptable comparisons, Garment Sector vs. Tea Export Industry

Blending hubs such as Dubai and Rotterdam, examples frequently used by the Tea Hub proponents as ideal models for replication, cannot be equated with Sri Lanka, which is a major producer. Such hubs are commercial centers which facilitate the recycling of products from multiple origins and owe no allegiance to producing countries.

As for the much-touted increase in employment generated by a Tea Hub, it is a myth, as any new blending or packing plant would be fully automated and designed specifically to minimize manual labour. In an industrialized world relentlessly driving towards robotization of processes, manpower is the first designated casualty in any new venture.

The loss of traditional markets for our tea has not been due to price concerns, but largely due to our inadequacies in value addition, marketing, and promotion. The emergence of ‘Dilmah’ as a premier product in Australia and New Zealand, despite being much higher in price than the corresponding products from large multinationals, is proof of the effectiveness of product promotion on the intrinsic strengths of the product itself. It completely negates the argument that multi-origin, cheap blends will override the uniqueness of Pure Ceylon Tea on cost alone.

Our tea has for long been acclaimed as the ‘cleanest tea in the world,’ meeting the Minimum Residue Levels (MRL) stipulated by some of the most demanding markets in the world, such as Japan. The importation of cheap tea from multiple origins, of unregulated hygiene and cleanliness standards, would immediately defile that image irrevocably.

The garment sector in Sri Lanka and the establishment of special Free Trade Zones (FTZs) have been quoted by the TEA (Tea Export Association) as successful examples of special manufacturing enclaves, equivalent to the proposed Tea Hub. In my view those are most inappropriate comparisons, as unacceptable as a ‘chalk and cheese’ equivalent.

The apparel industry exists almost entirely for the servicing of foreign labels, with 95% of the components being imported, whilst, locally, we simply supply the labor. It is. essentially, a massive labor- intensive operation, dedicated to the concept of maximum production at the lowest cost, but embellished with attractive labels, supported by cutting-edge technology, best manufacturing practices, and compliance with international standards, process hygiene and worker safety.

I am not, even for one moment, belittling the success of the garment industry in Sri Lanka, but those are the realities. Sri Lankans do not own the garment industry and are almost entirely dependent on foreign label patronage for continued existence. In that respect alone, the garment industry in Sri Lanka is very similar to the foreign label service provided by Sri Lankan traders to multi-national tea packers. The establishment of a Tea Hub will relegate our tea industry to that unattractive niche. As long as we are in control of the production of the raw material, we have the power to strategize how and where we sell it and at what price.

The establishment of FTZs was to ensure that the finished product, or the raw material, is not leaked out to local markets. As opposed to that, in the plantation industry, possibly over 95% of the raw material and other components are generated locally. It is a totally home-grown industry where the raw material, in its totality, is produced within.

There are only two sustainable ways of increasing the export value of our tea. One is to improve our land and labour productivity and increase annual production and, thus, send more tea to the auction annually. Another is to increase value addition at source to locally-owned brands, thus enhancing the export price. In fact, simply increasing production without a parallel strategy for adding value is also counterproductive.

Auction prices are determined by supply/ demand dynamics which are outside the producers’ area of control and a combination of both volume and quality will not ensure a sustainable revenue increase. Finally, value addition at source to a good quality finished product, namely ‘Pure Ceylon Tea,’ is the surest method of increasing earnings.

Every kilo of tea produced in Ceylon sells at premium prices and, irrespective of other market dynamics, is still considered as a benchmark for overall quality. In such a scenario, the only objective of devaluing it would be for personal gain, in order to compete with the mass-selling, low-priced, multinational trader.

Example of exploitation

The multinational traders’ exploitative strategy in regard to third world products is best illustrated by coffee, grown in countries such as Brazil, Vietnam, Colombia, Ethiopia, Uganda, and many other countries in Africa. In all the countries where coffee is grown in volume, the per capita income of the farmer is a fraction of that of an average farmer in a developed country and miniscule in comparison to the earnings of the average coffee consumer in the West.

Colvin R. de Silva, as Minister of Plantations, was one of the first politicians to publicly and unequivocally articulate this unacceptable disparity. For every plastic cup of coffee sold for USD 3-4 in affluent societies, the farmer in Africa gets five cents. From a kilogramme of coffee sold at USD 2.75, 110 cups can be brewed, translating to a profit margin of over USD 300 for those in between the poor farmer and the rich consumer.

The story of the tea trade in the hands of the multinational tea trader is no different and the cheapening of Ceylon Tea by importing, blending, and re-exporting will contribute further to that unacceptable social and economic disequilibrium.

It is a cardinal rule of all major packers – multinationals – never to purchase their material from one source or origin. Invariably they operate through two or more suppliers. However, because of the excellent and longstanding quality proposition of Ceylon Tea and the confidence we inspired in all the buyers of the major retailers, for many decades Ceylon Tea used to be, if not the major component, the most important ingredient of multinational packs.

Disappointing indications

During a previous Government’s term, the then Finance Minister, Ravi Karunanayake, deluded by the facile arguments of the Tea Hub proponents, facilitated the importation of tea in one of his budgets.

However, my protests against this provision, supported by the then Minister, Ranil Wickremesinghe, resulted in its removal.

I must also admit to being disappointed by the stance of the Planters’ Association, in regard to the issue of the Tea Hub. I recall a strongly-worded press statement (Daily FT, May 17, 2012), in which the PA declared its opposition to the concept. However, as the umbrella body which primarily represents producer interests, I would have expected it to come out far more strongly, vocally, and actively, against an initiative with the very obvious potential to cause serious damage producer.

Sometime in March 2012, immediately after a meeting of the anvil, chaired by me, certain members of the Tea Council met then Plantations Minister, Mahinda Samarasinghe, and advised him that they would boycott future meetings of the Council chaired by me if I continued to oppose the TEA proposals regarding importation of tea. However, they did not breathe a word about this matter at the meeting itself, though that was the most obvious forum for the issue to have been discussed.

Frankly, I was disgusted by the base conduct of those exporters and, by my letter of March 30, 2012, addressed to Minister Samarasinghe, I resigned from the chairmanship of the Council. In my letter I also clearly stated the reasons for my resignation. The Minister accepted it and appointed Tyeab Akberally, Vice Chairman, to the position I relinquished.

The Tea Council was set up in 1989, under the direction of the then Minister of Plantations, Gamini Dissanayake. Its core purpose was resolving the many problems of the entire industry, in a manner that would benefit the industry in its totality; the plantation worker, the producer, the broker, and the exporter, all included. The very submission of a proposal which only addressed the interests of the exporter, to the obvious detriment of all other stakeholders, was in conflict with the remit of the Council.

Dr. P. B. Jayasundera, then Secretary to the Treasury, has always been a strong opponent of the Tea Hub concept. Addressing the CTTA’s 118th Annual General Meeting in late 2012, ironically flanked at the head table by a couple of ardent proponents of the Tea Hub concept, Dr. Jayasundera stated quite unequivocally that the only manner in which the export earnings from tea could be increased was by “creating a new development framework and promoting Ceylon Tea at a premium, setting aside the idea of making the country a Tea Hub”.

Basically, what Dr. Jayasundera supported was to position Sri Lanka as an exclusive centre for value addition to Pure Ceylon Tea and not to convert it to a trading platform for tea from any and every origin.

Bleak certainties

To any impartial observer, it would be clear that the TEA call for liberalization of imports was driven by the sense of insecurity, generated by the rapidly-diminishing profit margins of the proponents. It is a proposal which reflects, with embarrassing clarity, the mindset of the timid exporter and his submission to foreign label pressure. In my many arguments against the Hub, I have frequently requested its supporters to take a moment to consider why a few exporters from Sri Lanka sell comfortably at USD 10 FOB per kilo, whilst others scramble at the bottom, selling at USD 3 per kilo.

All the multinationals operating in Sri Lanka are now manned entirely by Sri Lankans and the industry’s reliance on the former to market our tea should be minimal. However, I am both baffled and saddened by the still very evident orientation and adherence within the industry to archaic multinational thinking and strategy.

In their hunger for short-term gain, the proponents of the Tea Hub are prepared to sacrifice the long-term potential of Pure Ceylon Tea, as well as consign the hundreds of thousands of low-income earners at the producers’ end to permanent impoverishment. In their pursuit of immediate and short term survival, they are prepared to surrender every natural advantage in ‘Pure Ceylon Tea’. The reality is that it is the locally-owned brands exporting exclusively ‘Pure Ceylon Tea,’ which are the flag bearers of the national product on the global stage.

In total, about 12% of this country’s population is dependent, either directly or indirectly, on the plantation economy. Of that proportion, about 90% toil at the producers’ end; plantation workers and residents, small-holders, their dependents, ancillary service suppliers, bought leaf manufacturers, and so on. A decline in the Colombo tea prices, arising from cheap imports, would result in a permanent adverse impact on the lives of this multitude, whilst temporarily enriching a minuscule proportion at the exporters’ end.

Pure Ceylon Tea was, and still is, this country’s greatest asset. It’s a primary home-grown product and identifies Ceylon/Sri Lanka globally. Its real value and significance have either been misinterpreted by successive governments, and many of our local traders, but fully exploited by the multinational who understood its actual worth. Through Ceylon Tea, the country has a product which can stand alone and compete successfully against any tea grown or manufactured in any other country. The maximization of its inherent value proposition simply requires vision, dedication, and integrity of purpose.

For over a century we have permitted Ceylon Tea, a valuable and attractive ‘finished product’ with enormous potential to this country, to be exported by multinational companies to other countries as a ‘raw material’. The importing countries debase its natural quality by blending with inferior tea from other origins, whilst reducing its cost and, with pretty packaging, claim to add value to a less-than-mediocre mix, but still sell it on its intrinsic value as Ceylon Tea. In the process, the tea that is grown by the farmer in our country enriches a chain which has no real link to his country, at the expense of our producer, our farmer, and our plantation worker.

What the proponents of the Tea Hub are advocating so strongly is the replication of the same odious process, in the country of the orign of Ceylon Tea, though they have clothed the proposal in noble rhetoric, as a panacea for all the ills of the tea industry.

Pure Ceylon Tea is still synonymous with quality in the many countries in which it has been a traditional brew, despite the debasement it has suffered at the hands of multinationals who, whilst devaluing its intrinsic goodness, still leveraged the original quality perception in their marketing. Thus, packers determine the quality that they offer the consumer, as the purchasing choice of the latter is limited to what is available on the supermarket shelf.

This compulsion created by the multi-national marketer appears to have created an illusory perception in the minds of certain exporters, especially the Tea Hub proponents, that the cheap, debased tea is actually a consumer demand or preference. Dilmah, however, convincingly exploded this myth with its success in the marketing of quality ‘Pure Ceylon Tea’ in Australia and New Zealand.

Marshalling the opposition

At the beginning of this chapter I referred to the proposal by the then Trade Minister, Lalith Athulathmudali, in 1979, which, to the best of my knowledge, was the first instance when a leading politician presented tea importation as a strategy with potential for economic benefit to the country. To the best of my recollection, there had been no serious discussion about it before, although I am certain that the idea would have been tossed around in tea trading circles. It is really in the 1980s that wider discussion around the concept commenced, eventually gathering momentum until, within a couple of decades, it became an existential threat to the tea industry in its totality.

When I first opposed Athulathmudali’s proposal, I was, essentially, a bulk tea exporter. Dilmah arrived almost 10 years later. Thus, it must be clear to all readers that my opposition to the concept of a Tea Hub, contrary to the arguments of my opponents, was not to protect my interests or my personal brand, but entirely in the larger interests of the tea industry of Sri Lanka. It is for that reason that in this writing I have explained in considerable detail the likely impact of the implementation of such a proposal.

In the years since 2010, during which the Tea Hub proposal has been canvassed by its advocates at all relevant forums, I have used all the resources that I was able to muster to oppose it. My views have been expressed publicly, via newspapers and the electronic media, whilst concurrently being made known at the highest levels of government. I was also able to enlist the support of the Tea Small Holders’ Association and the assistance of the Private Tea Factory Owners’ Association, whilst the Planters’ Association also endorsed my view. However, as I have said earlier in this writing, from the latter I would have welcomed a far more involved engagement in opposition given that, in the event of unrestricted importation, the producer stood to lose more than any other industry group.

Independent journalists of several newspapers, both Sinhala and English, also published articles in support. My friend Herman Gunaratne, plantation owner and specialty tea producer-exporter from Galle, with his passion for Pure Ceylon Tea and his wide contacts within the smallholder segment and private factory owners of the south, was of immense help to me in marshalling support in resistance of the Tea Hub proposal.

The combined strength of the opposition groups, representing about 12% of the country’s population, eventually succeeded in temporarily suppressing a scheme which would have briefly benefited a few thousand people at most. However, the industry needs to be always aware of and be constantly on guard against a resurgence of the Tea Hub movement. If implemented, it will be, for a short while, very profitable for the proponents who are only interested in short-term gain. Since there is money in it, albeit for a handful of profiteers, I suspect that the idea will never be abandoned altogether, irrespective of opposition.

The Tea Hub proposition is a delusional attempt to bridge the chasm between the supplier of tea and the marketer of tea. It is a futile exercise to conflate these two mutually-exclusive concepts. The supplier furnishes a featureless commodity whilst the marketer markets a branded product with a specific identity. There can never connection between these two extremes. Finally, despite all opposition, if the Hub eventually becomes a dismal reality, and the local tea industry collapses as a result – as it surely will – there will not be one expert at that time to acknowledge responsibility and openly say, “Yes, I supported the importation of Orthodox Tea!”



Features

Hanoi’s most popular street could kill you

Published

on

By

[pic BBC]

Train Street started life as a razor-thin alley with a train rushing through it. Now, it’s swarmed with Instagrammable cafes and tourists who can’t stay away, despite the risks.

A train chugs through Hanoi, approaching a narrow passageway festooned with Chinese-style lanterns. Just as it screams into the station, a tourist jumps onto the tracks, attempting her most social-media friendly pose. Moments before the train strikes, its horn blaring into the humid air, she recoils to safety. Click, post.

It’s just an ordinary day on Hanoi’s Train Street, a 400m stretch of railway flanked by cafes where tourists nurse beers and watch, mesmerised, as trains roar past them at dangerously close proximity: sometimes crashing into tables and chairs.

Fun? Evidently – in a few short years, Train Street has entered Vietnam’s pantheon of “must-see” attractions, along with Ha Long Bay and the Cu Chi Tunnels. But the Vietnamese government is less impressed; since the site went viral in 2017, it has attempted various shutdowns, first in 2019, then 2022 and most recently further investigations and crackdowns in 2025 after an incident where a selfie-snapping tourist was nearly dragged under an oncoming train’s wheels. Police barricades go up between train arrivals; edicts are issued to tour operators and bar owners.

The tourists come anyway.

Alamy The Vietnamese government has attempted numerous shutdowns of the area (Credit: Alamy)
The Vietnamese government has attempted numerous shutdowns of the area (BBC)

How did an ordinary street become one of Vietnam’s hottest tourist attractions? It started innocently enough.

The North-South Railway was built by colonialist French forces in 1902, connecting Hanoi to Ho Chi Minh City. Fifty-four years later, the General Department of Railway erected a series of squat buildings straddling a stretch in central Hanoi to house employees. By the 1970s, the area was considered a slum; residents regularly roused out of their sleep by trains rumbling through, their houses quaking.

“It was just an ordinary street with train tracks running through it,” said Minh Anh, a lifelong Hanoi local who works at local whisky distillery,

Alamy The Vietnamese government has attempted numerous shutdowns of the area (Credit: Alamy)Alamy
The Vietnamese government has attempted numerous shutdowns of the area (Credit: Alamy)
From ordinary to unmissable

How did an ordinary street become one of Vietnam’s hottest tourist attractions? It started innocently enough.

The North-South Railway was built by colonialist French forces in 1902, connecting Hanoi to Ho Chi Minh City. Fifty-four years later, the General Department of Railway erected a series of squat buildings straddling a stretch in central Hanoi to house employees. By the 1970s, the area was considered a slum; residents regularly roused out of their sleep by trains rumbling through, their houses quaking.

“It was just an ordinary street with train tracks running through it,” said Minh Anh, a lifelong Hanoi local who works at local whisky distillery, Về Để Đi’. “When it started popping up all over social media, I was honestly surprised.”

Nhi Nguyn, a tour guide for A Taste of Hanoi, used to walk tourists through, just before it exploded in popularity. “People were still living ordinary lives there back then and there weren’t so many cafes next to the tracks,” she said. “It had a much more authentic feel: scooters were locked up just meters from the tracks, laundered clothes hung outside, and people were cooking outside on small gas stoves.”

. “When it started popping up all over social media, I was honestly surprised.”

Nhi Nguyn, a tour guide for

Alamy The Vietnamese government has attempted numerous shutdowns of the area (Credit: Alamy)Alamy
The Vietnamese government has attempted numerous shutdowns of the area (Credit: Alamy)
From ordinary to unmissable

How did an ordinary street become one of Vietnam’s hottest tourist attractions? It started innocently enough.

The North-South Railway was built by colonialist French forces in 1902, connecting Hanoi to Ho Chi Minh City. Fifty-four years later, the General Department of Railway erected a series of squat buildings straddling a stretch in central Hanoi to house employees. By the 1970s, the area was considered a slum; residents regularly roused out of their sleep by trains rumbling through, their houses quaking.

“It was just an ordinary street with train tracks running through it,” said Minh Anh, a lifelong Hanoi local who works at local whisky distillery, Về Để Đi’. “When it started popping up all over social media, I was honestly surprised.”

Nhi Nguyn, a tour guide for A Taste of Hanoi, used to walk tourists through, just before it exploded in popularity. “People were still living ordinary lives there back then and there weren’t so many cafes next to the tracks,” she said. “It had a much more authentic feel: scooters were locked up just meters from the tracks, laundered clothes hung outside, and people were cooking outside on small gas stoves.”

, used to walk tourists through, just before it exploded in popularity. “People were still living ordinary lives there back then and there weren’t so many cafes next to the tracks,” she said. “It had a much more authentic feel: scooters were locked up just meters from the tracks, laundered clothes hung outside, and people were cooking outside on small gas stoves.”

Alamy The rushing of the trains paired with the atmospheric setting are irresistible to tourists (Credit: Alamy)
The rushing of the trains paired with the atmospheric setting are irresistible to tourists (BBC)

In early 2013, Colm Pierce and Alex Sheal, co-founders of Hanoi-based photography tours Vietnam in Focus, launched a Hanoi on the Tracks tour to show visitors how local residents had adopted to the locomotive-sized challenge of living on railway tracks. Serendipitously, in June 2013, Instagram launched its new video-sharing feature. A year later, the Travel Channel show “Tough Trains”  featured Pierce walking down Train Street with a camera crew, further enticing travellers.

In 2017, an enterprising resident started selling beer and coffee, inviting curious tourists to stay to watch the train go by. Neighbours noticed the economic opportunity and cafes and bars rapidly spread. Soon, the formerly derelict alley, now dubbed Phố Đường Tàu (literally: “Train Street”) became bedecked with colourful lanterns and Christmas lights. Visitors learned to time their arrival for 30 minutes before a scheduled train and the “classic” Train Street experience was cemented: upon entering the tracks, tourists were shepherded into rail-side bars by local merchants and plied with beers and coffee, until the train shrieked through, rattling plates and causing hearts to pound.

Julia Husum, a university student from Norway, visited Train Street in February 2026, and “loved” the experience. “We put our beer caps on the railway, and the train flattened it, creating souvenirs for us,” she said. “I’d go back again.”

Without the advent of social media, would Train Street have become popular? As a travel writer, I’ve witnessed dozens of would-be influencers’ death-defying acts, like scaling down a rocky cliff above Dubrovnik and standing atop the side wall of 14th-Century Charles Bridge in Prague; wistfully looking off into the distance as the camera flashes. I’ve come to conclude that Train Street is no different; here, too, visitors risk their own safety for a picture-perfect opportunity.

Ivana Larrosa Once a derelict alley, Train Street has become one of Hanoi's most atmospheric lanes (Credit: Ivana Larrosa)
Once a derelict alley, Train Street has become one of Hanoi’s most atmospheric lanes (BBC)

“Essentially social media has fuelled Train Street into what it is today, [where] tourists flock in droves to the area to feel the adrenaline of the passing train while sipping local coffee,” echoed Michael Stanbury, the creative director for Vietnam in Focus. “Even without the train, the Instagrammable decorated street holds a very Hanoian charm.”

Local debate; the government proposes halting passenger trains for good. And each attempted shutdown, tourists climb past the barricades. There are, to date, more than 100,000 posts tagging Train Street on Instagram. Men’s grooming blogger Adam Hurly visited because a friend had hyped it. “It felt more like an Instagram attraction rather than a neighbourhood street,” he admitted, noting that once the crowds arrive, it becomes congested and less enjoyable, “Especially if you’re just standing on the main sidewalk trying to get a picture.”

He added: “It’s one of those places that looks better in photos than it feels in reality.”

But Matthew Tran, an artisanal footwear designer who visits Hanoi regularly, loves the pull of Train Street.

“The coffees were absurdly overpriced, yet I paid for them every time because I couldn’t stop marvelling at how the place worked; how an entire economy could thrive in such an improbable space,” he said. “These vendors built something real out of something most people would call chaos – that, to me, is worth coming back for.”

Ivana Larrosa Despite its tourist appeal, Train Street is full of residents who see it as part of their daily reality (Credit: Ivana Larrosa)
Despite its tourist appeal, Train Street is full of residents who see it as part of their daily reality (BBC)

He offers advice for future visitors: “It’s a unique experience you won’t get anywhere else. Although I wish more visitors would stop for a moment and remember that while it’s a tourist attraction to them, living beside those train tracks is someone else’s daily reality.”

Under more superficial reasons, visiting Train Street is similar to the appeal of visiting the Eiffel Tower during someone’s first visit to Paris, said Charlotte Russell, founder of  The Travel Psychologist.

“Humans are a social species and if we perceive that other people are enjoying an experience, it is natural for us to want to do it too,” she said. “This goes back to our evolution, when we lived in small groups and it would be advantageous for us to emulate other people in this way. So the sense of fear of missing out that we experience when seeing other people visiting places like Train Street is part of being human.”

Bearix Stewart-Frommer, an American pre-med student, validates Russell’s theory: “I found out about Train Street from my mum,” she said. “I didn’t have some deep motivation to see it, but I was curious because it’s one of those quirky, very photogenic spots that people talk about on social media.”

But there may be a more deep-seated reason why we’re lured to such places, Russell notes: “With Train Street specifically, the risk element is part of what makes it so novel, especially those of us from countries like the UK… We are used to regulation and precaution, railings, barriers and painted lines that we must stand behind. In contrast, Train Street can feel unbelievable to see and experience… [it helps] us reflect on our own norms and realise that other perspectives do exist.”

Ivana Larrosa Risks aside, the street's fame has given locals unique business opportunities (Credit: Ivana Larrosa)
Risks aside, the street’s fame has given locals unique business opportunities (BBC)

Local tour guide Phuong Loan Ngo offers one such alternative perspective: “The economic boost is undeniable, giving families who live along Train Street financial opportunities,” she said. “On the other hand, there are cultural challenges too. When an area becomes a ‘spotlight’ for social media, a place’s historical and cultural heritage can get lost. Instead of learning about how this railway has functioned since the colonial era, people often leave with only a photo, missing the true soul of the neighbourhood.”

The irony is that Vietnam in Focus has now moved their photography tours to another, far-less trammelled part of the railway, so they can show visitors that old, track-side way of life.

“As with all good things, the popularity of Train Street and the crowds it attracts are spreading,” said Sheal. “Thankfully, we have scoured Hanoi and found a fantastic local market that runs along the Hanoian railway further out in the suburbs – a new attraction.”

That is, until the social-media-obsessed travel masses find out about it. For better or worse, the unbearable lightness of Train Street is a permanent, but moveable feast.

[BBC]

Continue Reading

Features

An innocent bystander or a passive onlooker?

Published

on

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi (C) meeting President of the European Council, Antonio Luis Santos da Costa and the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen ahead of the Exchange of MoUs between India and EU, in Hyderabad House, New Delhi, India, on 27 January, 2026.

After nearly two decades of on-and-off negotiations that began in 2007, India and the European Union formally finally concluded a comprehensive free trade agreement on 27 January 2026. This agreement, the India–European Union Free Trade Agreement (IEUFTA), was hailed by political leaders from both sides as the “mother of all deals,” because it would create a massive economic partnership and greatly increase the current bilateral trade, which was over US$ 136 billion in 2024. The agreement still requires ratification by the European Parliament, approval by EU member states, and completion of domestic approval processes in India. Therefore, it is only likely to come into force by early 2027.

An Innocent Bystander

When negotiations for a Free Trade Agreement between India and the European Union were formally launched in June 2007, anticipating far-reaching consequences of such an agreement on other developing countries, the Commonwealth Secretariat, in London, requested the Centre for Analysis of Regional Integration at the University of Sussex to undertake a study on a possible implication of such an agreement on other low-income developing countries. Thus, a group of academics, led by Professor Alan Winters, undertook a study, and it was published by the Commonwealth Secretariat in 2009 (“Innocent Bystanders—Implications of the EU-India Free Trade Agreement for Excluded Countries”). The authors of the study had considered the impact of an EU–India Free Trade Agreement for the trade of excluded countries and had underlined, “The SAARC countries are, by a long way, the most vulnerable to negative impacts from the FTA. Their exports are more similar to India’s…. Bangladesh is most exposed in the EU market, followed by Pakistan and Sri Lanka.”

Trade Preferences and Export Growth

Normally, reduction of price through preferential market access leads to export growth and trade diversification. During the last 19-year period (2015–2024), SAARC countries enjoyed varying degrees of preferences, under the EU’s Generalised Scheme of Preferences (GSP). But, the level of preferential access extended to India, through the GSP (general) arrangement, only provided a limited amount of duty reduction as against other SAARC countries, which were eligible for duty-free access into the EU market for most of their exports, via their LDC status or GSP+ route.

However, having preferential market access to the EU is worthless if those preferences cannot be utilised. Sri Lanka’s preference utilisation rate, which specifies the ratio of eligible to preferential imports, is significantly below the average for the EU GSP receiving countries. It was only 59% in 2023 and 69% in 2024. Comparative percentages in 2024 were, for Bangladesh, 96%; Pakistan, 95%; and India, 88%.

As illustrated in the table above, between 2015 and 2024, the EU’s imports from SAARC countries had increased twofold, from US$ 63 billion in 2015 to US$ 129 billion by 2024. Most of this growth had come from India. The imports from Pakistan and Bangladesh also increased significantly. The increase of imports from Sri Lanka, when compared to other South Asian countries, was limited. Exports from other SAARC countries—Afghanistan, Bhutan, Nepal, and the Maldives—are very small and, therefore, not included in this analysis.

Why the EU – India FTA?

With the best export performance in the region, why does India need an FTA with the EU?

Because even with very impressive overall export growth, in certain areas, India has performed very poorly in the EU market due to tariff disadvantages. In addition to that, from January 2026, the EU has withdrawn GSP benefits from most of India’s industrial exports. The FTA clearly addresses these challenges, and India will improve her competitiveness significantly once the FTA becomes operational.

Then the question is, what will be its impact on those “innocent bystanders” in South Asia and, more particularly, on Sri Lanka?

To provide a reasonable answer to this question, one has to undertake an in-depth product-by-product analysis of all major exports. Due to time and resource constraints, for the purpose of this article, I took a brief look at Sri Lanka’s two largest exports to the EU, viz., the apparels and rubber-based products.

Fortunately, Sri Lanka’s exports of rubber products will be only nominally impacted by the FTA due to the low MFN duty rate. For example, solid tyres and rubber gloves are charged very low (around 3%) MFN duty and the exports of these products from Sri Lanka and India are eligible for 0% GSP duty at present. With an equal market access, Sri Lanka has done much better than India in the EU market. Sri Lanka is the largest exporter of solid tyres to the EU and during 2024 our exports were valued at US$180 million.

On the other hand, Tariffs MFN tariffs on Apparel at 12% are relatively high and play a big role in apparel sourcing. Even a small difference in landed cost can shift entire sourcing to another supplier country. Indian apparel exports to the EU faced relatively high duties (8.5% – 12%), while competitors, such as Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka, are eligible for preferential access. In addition to that, Bangladesh enjoys highly favourable Rules of Origin in the EU market. The impact of these different trade rules, on the EU’s imports, is clearly visible in the trade data.

During the last 10 years (2015-2024), the EU’s apparel imports from Bangladesh nearly doubled, from US$15.1 billion, in 2015, to US$29.1 billion by 2024, and apparel imports from Pakistan more than doubled, from US$2.3 billion to US$5.5 billion. However, apparel imports from Sri Lanka increased only from US$1.3 billion in 2015 to US$2.2 billion by 2024. The impressive export growth from Pakistan and Bangladesh is mostly related to GSP preferences, while the lackluster growth of Sri Lankan exports was largely due to low preference utilisation. Nearly half of Sri Lanka’s apparel exports faced a 12% tariff due to strict Rules of Origin requirements to qualify for GSP.

During the same period, the EU’s apparel imports from India only showed very modest growth, from US$ 5.3 billion, in 2015, to US$ 6.3 billion in 2024. The main reason for this was the very significant tariff disadvantage India faced in the EU market. However, once the FTA eliminates this gap, apparel imports from India are expected to grow rapidly.

According to available information, Indian industry bodies expect US$ 5-7 billion growth of textiles and apparel exports during the first three years of the FTA. This will create a significant trade diversion, resulting in a decline in exports from China and other countries that do not enjoy preferential market access. As almost half of Sri Lanka’s apparel exports are not eligible for GSP, the impact on our exports will also be fierce. Even in the areas where Sri Lanka receives preferential duty-free access, the arrival of another large player will change the market dynamics greatly.

A Passive Onlooker?

Since the commencement of the negotiations on the EU–India FTA, Bangladesh and Pakistan have significantly enhanced the level of market access through proactive diplomatic interventions. As a result, they have substantially increased competitiveness and the market share within the EU. This would help them to minimize the adverse implications of the India–EU FTA on their exports. Sri Lanka’s exports to the EU market have not performed that well. The challenges in that market will intensify after 2027.

As we can clearly anticipate a significant adverse impact from the EU-India FTA, we should start to engage immediately with the European Commission on these issues without being passive onlookers. For example, the impact of the EU-India FTA should have been a main agenda item in the recently concluded joint commission meeting between the European Commission and Sri Lanka in Colombo.

Need of the Hour – Proactive Commercial Diplomacy

In the area of international trade, it is a time of turbulence. After the US Supreme Court judgement on President Trump’s “reciprocal tariffs,” the only prediction we can make about the market in the United States market is its continued unpredictability. India concluded an FTA with the UK last May and now the EU-India FTA. These are Sri Lanka’s largest markets. Now to navigate through these volatile, complex, and rapidly changing markets, we need to move away from reactive crisis management mode to anticipatory action. Hence, proactive commercial diplomacy is the need of the hour.

(The writer can be reached at senadhiragomi@gmail.com)

By Gomi Senadhira

Continue Reading

Features

Educational reforms: A perspective

Published

on

Dr. B.J.C. Perera (Dr. BJCP) in his article ‘The Education cross roads: Liberating Sri Lankan classroom and moving ahead’ asks the critical question that should be the bedrock of any attempt at education reform – ‘Do we truly and clearly understand how a human being learns? (The Island, 16.02.2026)

Dr. BJCP describes the foundation of a cognitive architecture taking place with over a million neural connections occurring in a second. This in fact is the result of language learning and not the process. How do we ‘actually’ learn and communicate with one another? Is a question that was originally asked by Galileo Galilei (1564 -1642) to which scientists have still not found a definitive answer. Naom Chomsky (1928-) one of the foremost intellectuals of our time, known as the father of modern linguistics; when once asked in an interview, if there was any ‘burning question’ in his life that he would have liked to find an answer for; commented that this was one of the questions to which he would have liked to find the answer. Apart from knowing that this communication takes place through language, little else is known about the subject. In this process of learning we learn in our mother tongue and it is estimated that almost 80% of our learning is completed by the time we are 5 years old. It is critical to grasp that this is the actual process of learning and not ‘knowledge’ which tends to get confused as ‘learning’. i.e. what have you learnt?

The term mother tongue is used here as many of us later on in life do learn other languages. However, there is a fundamental difference between these languages and one’s mother tongue; in that one learns the mother tongue- and how that happens is the ‘burning question’ as opposed to a second language which is taught. The fact that the mother tongue is also formally taught later on, does not distract from this thesis.

Almost all of us take the learning of a mother tongue for granted, as much as one would take standing and walking for granted. However, learning the mother tongue is a much more complex process. Every infant learns to stand and walk the same way, but every infant depending on where they are born (and brought up) will learn a different mother tongue. The words that are learnt are concepts that would be influenced by the prevalent culture, religion, beliefs, etc. in that environment of the child. Take for example the term father. In our culture (Sinhala/Buddhist) the father is an entity that belongs to himself as well as to us -the rest of the family. We refer to him as ape thaththa. In the English speaking (Judaeo-Christian) culture he is ‘my father’. ‘Our father’ is a very different concept. ‘Our father who art in heaven….

All over the world education is done in one’s mother tongue. The only exception to this, as far as I know, are the countries that have been colonised by the British. There is a vast amount of research that re-validates education /learning in the mother tongue. And more to the point, when it comes to the comparability of learning in one’s own mother tongue as opposed to learning in English, English fails miserably.

Education /learning is best done in one’s mother tongue.

This is a fact. not an opinion. Elegantly stated in the words of Prof. Tove Skutnabb-Kangas-“Mother tongue medium education is controversial, but ‘only’ politically. Research evidence about it is not controversial.”

The tragedy is that we are discussing this fundamental principle that is taken for granted in the rest of the world. It would not be not even considered worthy of a school debate in any other country. The irony of course is, that it is being done in English!

At school we learnt all of our subjects in Sinhala (or Tamil) right up to University entrance. Across the three streams of Maths, Bio and Commerce, be it applied or pure mathematics, physics, chemistry, zoology, botany economics, business, etc. Everything from the simplest to the most complicated concept was learnt in our mother tongue. An uninterrupted process of learning that started from infancy.

All of this changed at university. We had to learn something new that had a greater depth and width than anything we had encountered before in a language -except for a very select minority – we were not at all familiar with. There were students in my university intake that had put aside reading and writing, not even spoken English outside a classroom context. This I have been reliably informed is the prevalent situation in most of the SAARC countries.

The SAARC nations that comprise eight countries (Sri Lanka, Maldives, India, Pakistan Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Nepal and Bhutan) have 21% of the world population confined to just 3% of the earth’s land mass making it probably one of the most densely populated areas in the world. One would assume that this degree of ‘clinical density’ would lead to a plethora of research publications. However, the reality is that for 25 years from 1996 to 2021 the contribution by the SAARC nations to peer reviewed research in the field of Orthopaedics and Sports medicine- my profession – was only 1.45%! Regardless of each country having different mother tongues and vastly differing socio-economic structures, the common denominator to all these countries is that medical education in each country is done in a foreign language (English).

The impact of not learning in one’s mother tongue can be illustrated at a global level. This can be easily seen when observing the research output of different countries. For example, if one looks at orthopaedics and sports medicine (once again my given profession for simplicity); Table 1. shows the cumulative research that has been published in peer review journals. Despite now having the highest population in the world, India comes in at number 16! It has been outranked by countries that have a population less than one of their states. Pundits might argue giving various reasons for this phenomenon. But the inconvertible fact remains that all other countries, other than India, learn medicine in their mother tongue.

(See Table 1) Mother tongue, medium of education in country rank order according to the volume of publications of orthopaedics and sports medicine in peer reviewed journals 1996 to 2024. Source: Scimago SCImago journal (https://www.scimagojr.com/) has collated peer review journal publications of the world. The publications are categorized into 27 categories. According to the available data from 1996 to 2024, China is ranked the second across all categories with India at the 6th position. China is first in chemical engineering, chemistry, computer science, decision sciences, energy, engineering, environmental science, material sciences, mathematics, physics and astronomy. There is no subject category that India is the first in the world. China ranks higher than India in all categories except dentistry.

The reason for this difference is obvious when one looks at how learning is done in China and India.

The Chinese learn in their mother tongue. From primary to undergraduate and postgraduate levels, it is all done in Chinese. Therefore, they have an enormous capacity to understand their subject matter just not itself, but also as to how it relates to all other subjects/ themes that surround it. It is a continuous process of learning that evolves from infancy onwards, that seamlessly passes through, primary, secondary, undergraduate and post graduate education, research, innovation, application etc. Their social language is their official language. The language they use at home is the language they use at their workplaces, clubs, research facilities and so on.

In India higher education/learning is done in a foreign language. Each state of India has its own mother tongue. Be it Hindi, Tamil, Urdu, Telagu, etc. Infancy, childhood and school education to varying degrees is carried out in each state according to their mother tongue. Then, when it comes to university education and especially the ‘science subjects’ it takes place in a foreign tongue- (English). English remains only as their ‘research’ language. All other social interactions are done in their mother tongue.

India and China have been used as examples to illustrate the point between learning in the mother tongue and a foreign tongue, as they are in population terms comparable countries. The unpalatable truth is that – though individuals might have a different grasp of English- as countries, the ability of SAARC countries to learn and understand a subject in a foreign language is inferior to the rest of the world that is learning the same subject in its mother tongue. Imagine the disadvantage we face at a global level, when our entire learning process across almost all disciplines has been in a foreign tongue with comparison to the rest of the world that has learnt all these disciplines in their mother tongue. And one by-product of this is the subsequent research, innovation that flows from this learning will also be inferior to the rest of the world.

All this only confirms what we already know. Learning is best done in one’s mother tongue! .

What needs to be realised is that there is a critical difference between ‘learning English’ and ‘learning in English’. The primary-or some may argue secondary- purpose of a university education is to learn a particular discipline, be it medicine, engineering, etc. The students- have been learning everything up to that point in Sinhala or Tamil. Learning their discipline in their mother tongue will be the easiest thing for them. The solution to this is to teach in Sinhala or Tamil, so it can be learnt in the most efficient manner. Not to lament that the university entrant’s English is poor and therefore we need to start teaching English earlier on.

We are surviving because at least up to the university level we are learning in the best possible way i.e. in our mother tongue. Can our methods be changed to be more efficient? definitely. If, however, one thinks that the answer to this efficient change in the learning process is to substitute English for the mother tongue, it will defeat the very purpose it is trying to overcome. According to Dr. BJCP as he states in his article; the current reforms of 2026 for the learning process for the primary years, centre on the ‘ABCDE’ framework: Attendance, Belongingness, Cleanliness, Discipline and English. Very briefly, as can be seen from the above discussion, if this is the framework that is to be instituted, we should modify it to ABCDEF by adding a F for Failure, for completeness!

(See Figure 1) The components and evolution of learning: Data, information, knowledge, insight, wisdom, foresight As can be seen from figure 1. data and information remain as discrete points. They do not have interconnections between them. It is these subsequent interconnections that constitute learning. And these happen best through the mother tongue. Once again, this is a fact. Not an opinion. We -all countries- need to learn a second language (foreign tongue) in order to gather information and data from the rest of the world. However, once this data/ information is gathered, the learning needs to happen in our own mother tongue.

Without a doubt English is the most universally spoken language. It is estimated that almost a quarter of the world speaks English as its mother tongue or as a second language. I am not advocating to stop teaching English. Please, teach English as a second language to give a window to the rest of the world. Just do not use it as the mode of learning. Learn English but do not learn in English. All that we will be achieving by learning in English, is to create a nation of professionals that neither know English well nor their subject matter well.

If we are to have any worthwhile educational reforms this should be the starting pivotal point. An education that takes place in one’s mother tongue. Not instituting this and discussing theories of education and learning and proposing reforms, is akin to ‘rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic’. Sadly, this is not some stupendous, revolutionary insight into education /learning. It is what the rest of the world has been doing and what we did till we came under British rule.

Those who were with me in the medical faculty may remember that I asked this question then: Why can’t we be taught in Sinhala? Today, with AI, this should be much easier than what it was 40 years ago.

The editorial of this newspaper has many a time criticised the present government for its lackadaisical attitude towards bringing in the promised ‘system change’. Do this––make mother tongue the medium of education /learning––and the entire system will change.

by Dr. Sumedha S. Amarasekara

Continue Reading

Trending