Connect with us

Features

POWER POLITICS

Published

on

CHAPTER 14

(Excerpted from N.U. JAYAWARDENA The first five decades)

Continued From Last Week

It is said that Kotelawala made an application to the Central Bank for the transfer of a large sum of money to Britain for the purchase of property. NU mentioned that the application was made during the first premiership of Dudley Senanayake, “as financial protection from unsettling forces which he [Kotelawala] felt would overtake the country” (N.U. Jayawardena, c.1985, p.62). According to the Central Bank and Exchange Control regulations at that time, the transfer of such a large sum was not permissible, and would have violated existing regulations. As such, NU recommended the refusal of Kotelawala’s application to the Finance Minister J.R. Jayewardene and Prime Minister Dudley Senanayake. This action would have serious repercussions in the future. NU’s daughter describes this episode:

When my father was in the Central Bank, Sir John Kotelawala applied for special approval to remit funds to the United Kingdom, which exceeded the legally approved limit. My father in his tactless way said that he could not do this but that Sir John was welcome to change the law and that my father would grant him the required permit after this was done. My parents always maintained that Sir John Kotelawala never forgave my father for the stand he took on his request. (Neiliya Perera, personal recollections)

To shed some light on the reasons for NU’s stance on the issue, it is important to note that, while the “Rubber Boom” of 1950-51 (at the time of the Korean War) had permitted Sri Lanka to enjoy a brief spell of economic prosperity, due to an increase in the export price of rubber, by 1952 the Central Bank had warned the government about worsening economic conditions and began to re-impose “certain restrictions of [foreign] remittances” (Central Bank, c.1975, p.41). In mid-1952, the government also launched a programme that was “primarily designed to conserve foreign exchange and to eliminate the budget deficit” (ibid, p.49). However, in 1953, an adverse balance of trade still existed, leading to cash shortages, and the government had to obtain a sterling loan from the British government to bridge the gap. NU accompanied OEG, the Finance Minister, to Britain in 1953 to negotiate this loan, and did so again in 1954 to negotiate a further loan (Ranasinghe, 1972, p.306).

Kotelawala did not take kindly to NU’s rejection of his application to remit money abroad. According to Neiliya, NU was “a man who did not suffer fools gladly” and who was “outspoken to the point of being arrogant.” This rejection would have only rubbed further salt into the wounds of a powerful man who was quick to take insult. NU, with legendary abilities to master any subject and administrative skills valued by his superiors, would find that these assets did not serve him well in this case. He would soon learn that it was not wise to displease powerful politicians.

Some time during this period, a verbal skirmish of sorts had taken place between John Kotelawala and NU at the silver wedding reception of a mutual friend, with some name-calling, and Kotelawala threatened to take revenge on NU (Wickramaratne, 2002).

John Lionel Kotelawala

The above-described incidents as well as a few biographical details will provide some insight into the nature of the man who succeeded Dudley Senanayake as Prime Minister, and have relevance when describing the events that took place affecting NU. John Lionel Kotelawala, born in 1897 was the son of John Kotelawala, a police inspector, who after marriage became involved in the “management of his wife’s family estates and properties” (Wriggins, 1960, p.32). Kotelawala Sr. was celebrated in some quarters for his bravado and physical exploits. ( . See Dep, pp.317, 319 & 334; Jeffries, pp.29-30, K. Jayawardena, 1972, pp.125-27; and Kotelawala, pp.12-13 & 14. From the age of ten, Kotelawala Jr. was raised by his mother Alice, after his father died under unfortunate circumstances. (See: de Silva and Wriggins, 1988, p.46 and Wriggins, 1960, p.112.)

By his own account, Kotelawala (Jr.) (1956, p.12), was from his early days, impulsive – prone to “acting first and thinking afterwards” – and his memoirs are full of references to incidents in which he appears to extol the use of violence and strong-arm tactics. There are many anecdotes from his contemporaries and historians that attest to his volatile nature. (See Abeysekera, pp.145-46; Fernando, p.21; Jeffries pp.29-30; Kotelawala; pp.68-69, and Manor pp.192, 223-24 & 226.)

The Politics of Rice Subsidies

Events closely linked to the issue of food subsidies were to occur, which resulted in the decision by Dudley Senanayake to step down as Prime Minister and his replacement by Kotelawala. Food subsidies, which had been introduced during World War II as emergency measures to keep the cost of living down, had not been removed after the war and were regarded by the masses as an entrenched right However, food subsidies were becoming increasingly untenable, as the gap between the world price and the subsidized price of foodstuffs widened – as we have seen in Chapter 12. The opportunitycost of subsidizing food was the crowding out of expenditure on themuch-needed capital investment required to bring Sri Lanka out of its dependency on imports, which was the crux of the problem. In September 1952, the rice ration was reduced from two measures to one and the price of sugar was raised. Yet, by 1953, 20 per cent of the government revenue was being spent to meet the gap between the subsidized price of rice offered to the public and the actual price the government had to pay on the world market to obtain it (Wriggins, 1960, p.289).

Faced with an acute financial crisis, J.R. Jayewardene, as Finance Minister, proposed the withdrawal of the rice subsidy in the Budget of 1953/1954 – which meant that the price of rice would rise from 25 cents to 70 cents a measure. Aggravating the situation, the free midday meal for school children was also abolished, and the cost of rail travel and postal services was increased.

The Budget was passed in Parliament, but before the debate could be concluded, the Opposition seized this opportunity to organize a hartal (a stoppage of work and all activities) on 12 August 1953. All over the country, large crowds participated and blocked the roads in rural and urban areas. In order to disperse the crowds, the police opened fire, and some protesters were killed.

Unnerved by this event, Dudley Senanayake felt unable to cope with the turmoil and gave up his premiership, resulting in John Kotelawala taking office as Prime Minister in October 1953. J.R. Jayewardene was made Minister of Agriculture, and Oliver Goonetilleke became Finance Minister. Sometime after assuming office, Kotelawala lowered the price of subsidized rice to 55 cents, when a recovery in export prices made this possible. Nevertheless, the resentment of the public continued to grow. And though Kotelawala had finally achieved his ambition of becoming Prime Minister, his tenure in office would last barely two and a half years.

Upon Kotelawala’s assumption of office, the personal animosity between Kotelawala and NU appears to have continued unabated. According to Edmund Eramudugolla (2004, p.16), NU “took lightly” the official functions at Temple Trees (the Prime Minister’s residence) and “invariably arrived late… often just at the time [Kotelawala] was getting ready to leave for [his home in] Kandawala.” On one such occasion, as NU arrived, Kotelawala presented him to the other guests: “His Excellency the Governor of the Central Bank,

N.U. Jayawardena, a very busy man, busier than the PM.” NU did not seem to bow to those in power. As Eramudugolla observed, NU “was conscious of his intellectual brilliance but unfortunately built up an intellectual arrogance to the annoyance of important persons in the political and public life of the country” (ibid, p.18). In this atmosphere of political infighting, heightened emotions and intrigue, it did not take long for John Kotelawala to use his power to settle scores with NU.

Kotelawala’s Turbulent Term in Office

Kotelawala’s term in office was no easier than Dudley’s. Personal discord still existed within the party, while Kotelawala’s flamboyant lifestyle and public pronouncements stoked much controversy and anger among the public. In the course of his abbreviated premiership, both R.G. Senanayake and Dudley Senanayake would leave the party in an attempt to distance themselves from Kotelawala’s actions. While the UNP had many economic and social accomplishments of which it could be proud, resentment and outrage against what was seen as bribery and corruption within the government began to gain momentum. According to Wriggins (1960, p.335):

The wealth of the party, the privileged position of its known supporters… the alleged misuse of the public service and the fact that close relatives of the prime minister himself were appointed to lucrative and prominent posts regardless of competence did much to harm the U.N.P. In an apparent bid to deflect public fury away from the government, Kotelawala set up a Bribery Commission with special powers of investigation. It has been alleged that Kotelawala used the powers of this commission as an instrument to intimidate individuals and, as Wriggins (1960, p.335) stated, also for “personal revenge.”

Commission of Inquiry

A few months after becoming Prime Minister, Kotelawala began his campaign against NU by appointing a commission to inquire into his conduct as Governor of the Central Bank. The commission consisted of Justice A.R.H. Canakaratne, Justice H. A. de Silva, and Sir Eric Jansz. It was given the following terms of inquiry: the affairs and general conduct of Neville Ubesinghe Jayawardena… and his wife Gertrude Mildred Jayawardena… and the financial and other dealings with banks, corporations and individuals of Mr. and Mrs. Jayawardena, before and after Mr. Jayawardena was appointed as Governor of the Central Bank and in particular upon forty-nine matters therein mentioned.

Oliver Goonetilleke

The Commission sat for 20 days. The lawyers for the Jayawardenas were D.S. Jayawickrema, Q.C., and G.T. Samarawickrema (NU’s maternal relation). The main charge was that NU, as Governor of the Central Bank, had taken loans for building his house from commercial banks and other sources. NU contended that, like any other citizen, he had the right to do so, and that this did not compromise his position as Governor of the Central Bank, nor jeopardize its interests. After the inquiry, the Commission gave its verdict that NU’s actions were violations of the position he held. The Commission reported that: While Mr. Jayawardena was holding the respective offices of Controller of Exchange, Deputy Governor and Governor of the Central Bank, the financial transactions of Mr. and Mrs. Jayawardena with their banks and other persons were on a scale quite out of proportion to their income. (p.72, No. 315 of Sessional Paper XX of 1954)

While holding high office, NU was alleged to have used his official position as security for loans from banks and individuals for the purchase of land. On the Commission’s verdict, NU was dismissed from the Central Bank on 15 October 1954. This blow could not have come at a worse time in his life. After serving the government for 28 years in various capacities and attending to problems that a lesser man could not have coped with, NU now found himself in the wilderness. His wife was suffering from a heart ailment, and he had two sons and a daughter to support. His elder son Lal was already studying for an Economics degree at Cambridge University, and the younger Nimal was soon to leave for Cambridge, to study Economics and Law. Concerned that his father could not meet the expenses, Nimal wanted to stay behind. However, NU assured him that he would somehow meet his expenses at Cambridge and urged him not to be hasty.

NU and his family, having had to move out of Bank House, had no place of their own to live. Until that time, they had lived in rented premises. Like most Sri Lankans, NU put great store in home ownership. Now, the house he had first owned in Park Road – built before he became Governor – had to be sold. As Neiliya recalls, the house:

was designed by Edward, Reid and Begg and built by the Tudawe Brothers. This house was rented out when we moved to the Bank Governor’s residence. Behind the house, he built two flats in the excess land, funded by the Colombo Commercial Company – which was to take on the premises on a rent-free basis for a number of years in return for the money the company invested. My parents had to sell the Park Road home, which they had so lovingly constructed, in order to pay for the case. My father and mother fortunately had the strength and courage to handle the situation.

The trauma took a toll on the family in other ways as well. Neiliya continues:

The period was extremely difficult for my parents and myself. My brothers were fortunately abroad in university and escaped most of the trauma. My parents suffered greatly as a result of this episode. My father, who was a very social person, became a recluse. He started writing articles on economics and banking and on a variety of subjects for the newspapers, to keep himself occupied.

After long being at the centre of a hectic social and working life, NU suddenly found himself relatively alone and isolated. However, during the crisis, he found out who his true friends were. According to Stanley Wickramaratne, some who had known him shunned him, while a few others came to his assistance. For instance, Clarence Amerasinghe, the owner of Car Mart, lent him a car, and some friends gave the family a place to stay. NU also received letters of support from friends around the world. They included persons high up in the banking sector in Britain, some of whom had known him officially. His friend Cyril Hawker, of the Bank of England, kept in touch with NU’s two sons, reporting back on their progress to their parents. In Sri Lanka, Peri Sunderam, an early mentor and former Minister of Labour who had given NU his first opportunities for advancement, and who greatly appreciated his ability, sent him a reassuring letter. He expressed his “deep regret,” and urged NU to have the “will of mind to face this calamity with courage and hope.” Knowing that NU would overcome this misfortune, Peri Sunderam wrote:

You are still young and your talents may be usefully employed for other service. I am sure that the future is not bleak for you and that your experience and ability will be harnessed. I hope that your children are clever enough not to be blasted by this temporary misfortune of yours. (Letter dated 15 Oct. 1954, N.U. Jayawardena Personal Files)

Chapter 13 can read online on – https://island.lk/the-central-bank-2/

By Kumari Jayawardena and Jennifer Moragoda ✍️



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

Silence of the majority keeps West Asian conflict raging

Published

on

Pope Leo the XIVth / President Donald Trump

With no military quick-fix in sight to the ongoing, convoluted West Asian conflict it ought to be clear to the rationally inclined that there is no other way to a solution to the blood-letting other than through a negotiated one. Unfortunately, there are not many takers the world over for such an approach.

Consequently the war rages on incurring the gravest human costs to all relevant sides. Whereas it should be obvious to the Trump administration that Iran wouldn’t be backing down any time soon from its position of taking on the US frontally and with the required military competence in the Hormuz Strait and adjacent regions, the US demonstrates a stubbornness to persist with war strategies that are showing no quick, positive results on the ground.

Clearly, the virtual ‘lock down within a lock down’ situation in the Strait is not proving beneficial for either party. Instead, the spilling of civilian blood in particular continues with unsettling regularity along with an all-encompassing economic crisis that carries a staggering material toll for ordinary people all over the world.

From this viewpoint it is commendable for Pakistan to offer itself as a peace mediator and go ‘the extra mile’ to keep the principal parties engaged in some sort of negotiatory process. But its efforts need to win greater support from the world community. It is a time for peace-makers the world over to stand up and be counted.

It is also a time for straight-talking. To his glowing credit Pope Leo XIV is doing just that and he is the only religious head worldwide to do so. Very rightly he has called on President Trump to end the war through negotiations and described it as ‘unjust’ and ‘a scandal to humanity’.

May this crucial cause be taken up by more and more world leaders, is this columnist’s wish. Instead of speaking fatalistically about a ‘Third World War’, decision and policy makers and commentators, and these are found in plenty in Sri Lanka as well, would do better to help in drumming-up support for a peaceful solution and the latter is within the realms of the possible.

Incidentally, the commonplace definition of the phrase ‘World War’ is quite contentious and it would be premature to speak forebodingly about one right now. The fissures within the West on the Middle East conflict alone rule out the possibility of a ‘World War’ occurring any time soon.

Instead, it would be preferable for the international community, under the aegis of the UN, to take the ‘straight and narrow’ path to a peaceful solution. As implied, this path is no easy avenue; it is cluttered with obstacles that only doughty peace makers could take on and clear.

However, the path to a negotiated peace is worth taking and no less a power than the US should know this. After all, the US ‘bled white’ in Vietnam and had to bow out of the conflict, realizing the futility of pursuing a military solution. A similar lesson should have been learned by Russia which bled futilely in Afghanistan. It too is in an unwinnable situation in Ukraine.

The Pope’s observations to President Trump on negotiating peace have earned for him some snarls and growls of criticism but with time these critics would realize that peace could come only by peaceful means and not through ‘the barrel of a gun.’

For far too long the ‘silent majority’ of the world has allowed politicians to take the sole initiative on working towards peaceful solutions to conflicts and wars. As could be seen, the results have been disastrous. The majority of politicians speak the language of Realpolitik only and this tendency runs contrary to the ways of the selfless peace maker.

Power, which is the essence of Realpolitik, and peace are generally at loggerheads in the real world. Power and self-aggrandizement have to be shelved in the pursuit of durable peace anywhere and it is a pity that the likes of Donald Trump and his team are yet to realize this.

At this juncture the ‘peace constituency’ or the silent majority would need to take centre stage and play their rightful role as the ‘Conscience of the World’. If the latter begins to take on the cause of peace in earnest everywhere, the politicians would have no choice but to pay heed to their cause and take it up, since a contrary course would earn for them public displeasure and votes.

An immediate challenge would be for the ‘peace constituency’ to come together and act as one. Right now, such a coordinating role could be played effectively by only the UN and its agencies. Practical problems are likely to get in the way but these need to be managed insightfully and resourcefully by all stakeholders to peace.

In fact the time couldn’t be more appropriate for the backers of peace to come together and work as one. Right now, economic pressures are increasing worldwide and no less a public than that in the US is beginning to feel them in a major, crushing way.

Going ahead the US public, along with other polities, would find the economic consequences of war to be intolerable. There would be no choice but for governments and peoples to champion peace. Peace makers would need to ‘strike while the iron is hot.’

The success of the above endeavours hinges on the importance humans attach to their consciences. The danger about prolonged wars is that they deaden consciences; particularly those of politicians. The latter deaden their consciences to the extent that they prove impervious to the pain and suffering wars incur.

Thus, the ‘peace constituency’ has its work cut out; it cannot rest assured that politicians would prove sensitive to their demands. The latter would need to be constantly dinned into the hearts and minds of politicians and decision-makers if peaceful solutions to conflicts are to be arrived at.

Likewise, the publics of war-torn countries would need to demand the activation and sustaining of accountability processes with regard to those sections that are suspected of committing war crimes and like atrocities. Those publics that cease to demand accountability from powerful sections among them which are faced with war-time atrocity charges are as good as condemning themselves to lives of permanent dis-empowerment and enslavement.

Continue Reading

Features

Don’t take the baby: In the quiet night, mother always returns

Published

on

Grey Slender Loris

Chaminda Jayasekara

There is a particular stillness in Sri Lanka’s forests, after dusk — a kind of hushed expectancy where shadows lengthen, cicadas soften their chorus, and the night begins to breathe in its own rhythm. It is a world that does not reveal itself easily. You have to wait for it. You have to listen.

And then, suddenly, you see them — a pair of luminous, unblinking eyes suspended in the dark.

The Grey Slender Loris, or unahapuluwa, emerges, not with drama, but with quiet precision. Small, slow-moving, and almost impossibly delicate, it is one of Sri Lanka’s most enigmatic nocturnal primates — a creature that has survived millennia by mastering the art of stillness.

Yet, during these months — from late March through July — the forests hold a more tender story. It is the breeding season of the slender loris, and with it comes a scene that is often misunderstood by those who encounter it for the first time: a tiny infant, alone on a branch, barely three inches long, its fragile body silhouetted against the night.

Grey Slender Loris with twin babies

To many, it appears to be a moment of abandonment.

To nature, it is a moment of trust.

“People often act out of compassion, but without understanding what they are seeing,” explains Chaminda Jayasekara of the University of Hertfordshire. “A baby loris left alone is not necessarily in danger. In fact, it is part of a natural process that is critical for its survival.”

According to Jayasekara, when a baby loris is about a month old, the mother begins a remarkable routine. As darkness settles, she gently places her infant on a secure branch and moves off into the forest to forage. Her journey can take her hundreds of metres away — sometimes close to 800 metres — as she searches for insects and other small prey.

In those hours of solitude, the infant is not abandoned. It is learning.

Clinging to the branch, it begins to explore its immediate surroundings. Tentatively, almost hesitantly, it reaches out — testing balance, grip, and instinct. It may attempt to catch tiny insects, mimicking behaviours it will one day rely on entirely. This is its first classroom, and the forest its only teacher.

“Those early nights are crucial,” Jayasekara says. “The baby is developing motor skills, coordination, and the ability to interact with its environment. These are things that cannot be replicated in captivity.”

And yet, this is precisely where human intervention often disrupts the process.

Across rural and even semi-urban Sri Lanka, stories circulate of well-meaning individuals who come across a lone baby loris and assume the worst. Driven by concern, they pick it up, take it home, or attempt to hand-rear it — believing they are saving a life.

Grey Slender Loris

But the reality is far more complex — and far more tragic.

“When a baby is removed unnecessarily, it loses something fundamental,” Jayasekara emphasises. “It loses the chance to learn how to survive in the wild. Without that, even if it survives in the short term, its long-term prospects are extremely poor.”

The forest, after all, is not just a habitat. It is a living, evolving system of lessons — how to detect predators, how to navigate branches, how to hunt silently, how to recognise territory. These are not instincts alone; they are behaviours refined through experience.

And the mother, contrary to assumption, is rarely far away.

“If people simply waited — even for several hours — they would often see the mother return,” Jayasekara explains. “She knows exactly where she left her baby. Her absence is temporary, purposeful.”

The advice from conservationists is clear and consistent: observe, but do not interfere.

If you encounter a baby loris, watch quietly from a distance. Avoid using bright lights or making noise. Give it time — at least 10 to 12 hours — before drawing conclusions. In most cases, the situation will resolve itself, just as nature intended.

35 days old Grey Slender Loris

Only if the animal is clearly injured, or if there is strong evidence of abandonment after prolonged observation, should intervention be considered — and even then, it must be done through the proper channels, particularly the Department of Wildlife Conservation.

Attempting to care for such a delicate animal at home is not only ineffective but often fatal.

Sri Lanka is home to two species of slender loris — the Grey Slender Loris and the Red Slender Loris — each adapted to specific ecological zones across the island. Both are protected under national legislation and recognised internationally as species requiring urgent conservation attention.

Their threats are many: habitat loss, road mortality, illegal pet trade, and, increasingly, human misunderstanding.

Yet, in the midst of these challenges, there are also signs of hope.

In recent years, the slender loris has become the focus of a unique form of wildlife tourism — one that values patience over spectacle. Night walks, conducted with trained naturalists and strict ethical guidelines, offer visitors a chance to witness the loris in its natural environment without disturbing its behaviour.

At places like Jetwing Vil Uyana, this approach has been refined into a model of responsible eco-tourism. Over more than a decade, the property has developed a dedicated Loris Conservation Project, recording thousands of sightings while educating visitors and supporting local communities.

Here, the loris is not handled, chased, or exploited. It is simply observed — a quiet presence in a carefully protected landscape.

“The success of such initiatives shows that conservation and tourism do not have to be at odds,” Jayasekara reflects. “When done responsibly, tourism can actually support conservation by creating awareness and value for these species.”

There is something profoundly moving about encountering a loris in the wild. It does not roar or charge. It does not demand attention. Instead, it exists — quietly, deliberately — as it has for millions of years.

And perhaps that is why it is so easily misunderstood.

In a world that often equates visibility with importance, the loris reminds us that some of the most extraordinary lives unfold beyond the spotlight.

It also reminds us of something else — something simpler, yet harder to practice.

Restraint.

Because conservation is not always about stepping in. Sometimes, it is about stepping back. About recognising when nature does not need our help, but our patience.

So if, on some future night, you find yourself walking beneath the trees, and your light catches a tiny figure sitting alone on a branch — do not rush forward.

Pause.
Watch.
Let the moment unfold.

Because somewhere, moving silently through the darkness, guided by instinct and memory, a mother is already on her way back.

And by morning, the forest will be whole again.

 

By Ifham Nizam

Continue Reading

Features

Kumar de Silva: 40 years of fame and flair

Published

on

Kumar de Silva: The four-decade journey

We first saw him on the small screen in January 1986 – a relatively raw, totally untrained and a very nervous 24-year-old presenting ‘Bonsoir’ on ITN.

And now, 40 years later, and as one looks back, one realises what a multi-dimensional journey Kumar de Silva has navigated across the small screen yes, from your television screens to your laptops, and iPads, tabs, and mobile phones.

Says Kumar: “It is the French language I speak that opened the world of television to me, 40 years ago. It was ‘Bonsoir’ alone, and so to my French teacher at Wesley College, Mrs. BA Fernando, to ‘Bonsoir’, and to the Embassy of France in Sri Lanka, I am eternally grateful”.

Promoting the French language, and culture, in Sri Lanka, in a big way

Kumar went on to say that on the heels of ‘Bonsoir” came ‘Fanclub’, on ITN, describing it as yet another resounding success story which saw him as a music DJ on TV.

His inherent talent saw him handle a range of contrasting programmes across ITN, TNL, Prime TV and SLRC with consummate ease – from News Reading, Business Talk Shows, Celebrity Chats, to Dhamma discussions, on Poya Days, to name a few.

Kumar – the 1986 look

Trained in Paris in television production and presentation, the Government of France, in 2012, conferred on him the title of ‘Chevalier dans l’Ordre des Arts et Lettres’ (Chevalier in the Order of Arts and Letters) in recognition of his contribution to promoting the French language, and culture, in Sri Lanka.

In celebration of his four decades on the small screen, Kumar recently launched ‘Bonsoir Katha’, the Sinhala translation (by Ciara Mendis) of his English book ‘Bonsoir Diaries’ (2013), at a gala soiree. at the Alliance Francaise de Colombo, under the distinguished patronage of the French Ambassador in Sri Lanka, Remi Lambert, and francophone President Chandrika Kumaratunga.

He’s now excited about launching the French version of this book, ‘Les Coulisses de Bonsoir’, in Paris, in autumn this year. It is currently being translated by Guilhem Beugnon, a former Deputy Director of the Alliance Francaise de Colombo. This will, co-incidentally, also be Kumar’s 30th visit to Paris.

Chief Guest French Ambassador in Sri
Lanka Remi Lambert

Says Kumar: “The word GRATITUDE means a lot to me and so I always make it a point to spend time with two very special French people every time I go to France. One is Madame Josiane Thureau, formerly of the French Foreign Ministry, who began ‘Bonsoir’ in Sri Lanka. way back in the mid-1980s. The other is Madame Aline Berengier, the lady who designed the ‘Bonsoir’ logo – the Sri Lankan elephant in the colours of the French national flag”.

Kumar is also a much-sought-after Personal Development and Corporate Etiquette Coach in Colombo’s corporate world. Over the past 15 years, tens of thousands of corporates, have been through the different modules of his interactive training sessions. There have also been thousands of school leavers and undergraduates from national and private universities, many of whom will constitute the corporates of tomorrow.

Guest of Honour francophone President Chandrika Kumaratunga at the gala soiree
at the Alliance Francaise de Colombo

The multi-talented Kumar turns 65 next year, and his journey on the small screen still continues – you see him on the (monthly) ‘Rendez-Vous with Yasmin and Kumar’ on the French Embassy’s YouTube Channel, and (every Friday) on ‘Fame Game with Rozanne and Kumar’ on Daily Mirror Online, Hi Online and The Sun Online.

There’s yet another podcast in the pipeline, he indicated, but diplomatically declined to give us details. All he said, with a glint in his eye, was, “It will hit your screens soon.”

Whatever he has in mind, one can be certain that the new programme will continue to showcase Kumar de Silva’s enduring presence in Sri Lanka’s entertainment scene.

Continue Reading

Trending