Connect with us

News

Speaker reaffirms rejection of no-faith motion against Deputy Minister of Defence

Published

on

Speaker Dr. Jagath

Speaker Dr. Jagath Wickramaratne yesterday (25) informed the Houset that he was not in a position to accept the no-confidence motion submitted by the Opposition against Deputy Minister of Defence, Major General (retd.) Aruna Jayasekara by a group of MPs. He claimed parliament procedures did not provide for such a motion.

The motion was signed by the Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa and 31 other members representing the opposition.

At the commencement of the House sittings yesterday, Speaker Wickramaratne said he had already announced his decision pertaining to the no-confidence motion and his decision could not be challenged according to Standing Order 76(1).

 The Speaker said he had decided to clarify his decision on the motion again.

Text of the Speaker’s statement: “I wish to make this announcement in furtherance to the announcement made by me on 08.09.2025 on the Motion titled the ‘No-Confidence Motion’, submitted by a group of 32 Members of Parliament in the Opposition including the Leader of the Opposition in Parliament, on 12.08.2025 against Major General (retd.) Aruna Jayasekera, MP, Deputy Minister of Defence.

“At the outset, I wish to remind this House the Standing Order 76(1) which states that the Speaker in Parliament shall be responsible for the observance of the rules of order in Parliament and his/her decision upon any point of order shall not be open to appeal and shall not be reviewed by Parliament except upon a substantive motion made after notice.

“However, considering the queries raised in Parliament, I wish to further substantiate the factors highlighted in the previous announcement for ruling the said Motion out of Order.

“The 1978 Constitution of Sri Lanka and the Standing Orders of Parliament are silent on moving a No-Confidence Motion against an individual Cabinet Minister, Deputy Minister or any other holder of portfolios. The only existing provision on No-Confidence Motions is the Article 49(2) of the Constitution which provides only to move a No-Confidence Motion against a Government.

“However, No-Confidence Motions have been moved against the Prime Minister, Individual Ministers of the Cabinet of Ministers, notwithstanding the said silence in the Constitution and the Standing Orders, thus questioning the legal basis of such precedence.

“It is noted that, in the parliamentary context, the Speaker, Deputy Speaker, Deputy Chairman of Committees, Leader of the House of Parliament, Chief Government Whip, Leader of the Opposition, and Chief Opposition Whip are considered Parliamentary office-bearers, and that a substantive Motion of this nature may appropriately be brought against them.

“I wish to emphasize that in the international context, No-Confidence Motions have been allowed only in respect of the Government/ Council of Ministers as a whole (Erskine May, ‘Treatise on the Law, Privileges, Proceedings and Usage of Parliament’, 25th Ed. and M.N. Kaul and S.L. Shakdher, ‘Practice and Procedure of Parliament’, 8th Ed.). Further M.N. Kaul and S.L. Shakdher highlight that a Motion of No-Confidence can be moved only against the Council of Ministers as a whole and not against any individual Minister as per the Indian constitutional provisions regarding the collective responsibility of the Council of Ministers to the Lok Sabha.

“Similarly, the Articles 42, 43 and 44 of the Constitution of Sri Lanka, provides for the collective and individual ministerial responsibility of the Cabinet of Ministers.

“In Sri Lanka at present, Deputy Ministers have been appointed under Article 46(1) of the Constitution to assist the Ministers of the Cabinet of Ministers. However, the Ministers of the Cabinet of the present Government acting under Article 46(2) of the Constitution, have not delegated any power or duty pertaining to any subject or function to the Deputy Ministers. Nevertheless, I wish to place on record that the Deputy Ministers function in terms of Standing Order 32(2) on behalf of the Ministers, in compliance of Article 46(1) of the Constitution and read with Article 74 of the Constitution.

“Due to aforesaid reasons, I rule that the Motion is out of order in terms of Standing Order 27(3).

“In the alternate, I wish to note that incidental criticism of conduct of Members of Parliament or particularly to Members in their capacity as office holders in the House of Commons including the Speaker is permitted only through a substantive Motion (Erskine May, ‘Treatise on the Law, Privileges, Proceedings and Usage of Parliament’, 25th Ed.), and in the UK practice censure Motions can be tabled criticizing a Government policy or a Minister. M.N. Kaul and S.L. Shakdher (‘Practice and Procedure of Parliament’, 8th Ed.) states that Censure Motions can be moved against the Council of Ministers or an individual Minister or a group of Ministers for their failure to act or not to act or for their policy and may express regret, indignation or surprise of the House at the failure of the Minister or Ministers.

“Accordingly, I wish to inform this House to explore the possibility of submitting a substantive Motion instead of the current Motion in issue, in view of the national importance of the matters relating to the Easter Sunday Attack stated therein and as opined by the Attorney General, the specific facts in the Motion has no direct bearing to the cases pending before Courts.”



News

Steps are taken to accelerate the recovery efforts following Cyclone Ditwah despite Global Economic Challenges

Published

on

By

A discussion on accelerating recovery measures and providing relief to those affected by the Cyclone Ditwah was held on March 28 at Temple Trees, with the participation of Prime Minister Dr. Harini Amarasuriya and civil society organizations.

During the meeting, a brief report on the current status of government measures including compensation payments through District Secretariats and information related to safety camps was presented to the Prime Minister by the Chief of Staff to the President and Commissioner General of Essential Services,  Prabath Chandrakeerthi.

Special attention was given to the concerns of the estate sector Estate sector Malaiyaha Tamil community affected by the cyclone, particularly those without legal land ownership, in accessing government relief and compensation. Attention was also drawn to the need for a policy decision in coordination with the Ministry of Plantation and Community Infrastructure regarding this matter.

It was further stated by the Secretary to the Ministry of Housing, Construction and Water Supply, Engineer L. Kumudu Lal Bogahawatta , that plans have been made to accelerate the recovery process related to damages caused by the disaster in 2025. These include the construction of 20,000 new houses, the renovation of 115,000 partially damaged houses, and the provision of financial assistance amounting to Rs. 5 million for individuals who already possess safe land to build a house. Additionally, there are plans to construct apartment complexes with public facilities in major urban areas.

Officials further emphasized that the physical, psychological, and social well-being of affected communities especially women, children, and persons with special needs will continue to assess through civil society organizations, special committees, and sub-committees.

The Prime Minister emphasized that the efforts to rebuild damaged housing have focused on constructing homes in locations that are more suitable and equipped with urban public facilities over the past four months, stressing the importance of maintaining continuous communication with communities and ensuring that reconstruction takes place in safer locations that are less vulnerable to future disasters.

The discussion was attended by Secretary to the Prime Minister Pradeep Saputhanthri, Chief of Staff to the President and Commissioner General of Essential Services Prabath Chandrakeerthi, Secretary to the Ministry of Housing, Construction and Water Supply Engineer L. Kumudu Lal Bogahawatta, Additional Secretary to the Ministry of Defence K.C. Dharmathilaka, and representatives from civil society organizations.

[Prime Minister’s Media Division]

Continue Reading

News

Burning of low-grade coal at N’cholai plant increases pollution: Parliament

Published

on

Parliament yesterday (30) said the use of inferior quality coal at Norochcholai Lak Vijaya coal-fired power plant caused environmental pollution.

The Opposition has accused the Energy Ministry of importing low quality coal and the CEB has directly blamed the developing crisis in coal imported from South Africa.

The Parliament is scheduled to debate a no-confidence motion moved by SJB-led Opposition against Energy Minister Kumara Jayakody on 10 April.

The Sectoral Oversight Committee on Environment, Agriculture and Resource Sustainability has instructed officials to immediately prepare a plan for the environmentally friendly disposal of ash emitted from the Norochcholai Lak Vijaya Power Plant.

These instructions were given at a recent meeting of the Committee held in Parliament, under the Chairmanship of Member of Parliament Hector Appuhamy.

It was revealed during the meeting that due to issues related to the quality of coal imported to Sri Lanka for power generation, the volume of ash emitted during electricity generation had increased significantly. Officials were directed to formulate a plan under the leadership of the District Secretary of the Puttalam District, to take the necessary measures.

It was also proposed that the possibility of reusing the coal ash for production purposes be studied, and that any revenue generated from such products be utilised for welfare projects benefiting the communities affected by the power plant.

In addition, the Committee instructed the Central Environmental Authority to submit a comprehensive report on whether water and air pollution have occurred as a result of the Norochcholai Power Plant. Furthermore, the North Western Provincial Environmental Authority was also instructed to provide responses within two weeks regarding the questionnaire and related matters submitted by the Committee in connection with the Norochcholai Power Plant.

Officials of the North Western Provincial Environmental Authority stated that although the volume of ash emitted from the plant had increased, the filtration system in use at the plant was sufficient to absorb it. Several matters, including the issuance of environmental protection licenses for the power plant, were discussed at the committee meeting.

Continue Reading

News

Tariff shock from 01 April as power costs climb across the board

Published

on

By Ifham Nizam

Electricity consumers will face a fresh financial jolt from 01 April, with the Public Utilities Commission of Sri Lanka (PUCSL) approving a countrywide tariff increase that will push up monthly bills across all consumption categories, with the heaviest burden falling on high-end users.

The decision follows a proposal by the Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB), which sought a 13.56 percent upward revision for the second quarter of the year, citing mounting operational costs and financial pressures within the power sector.

Under the new tariff structure, even the lowest-income households will not be spared, though the increases at the bottom tiers remain relatively modest. Consumers using between 0–30 units will see a 4.3 percent rise, adding approximately Rs. 15 to their monthly bill. Those in the 31–60 unit bracket will experience a 6.9 percent increase, translating to an additional Rs. 45.

For middle-tier users, the impact becomes more pronounced. Households consuming 61–90 units will pay around Rs. 120 more per month, following a 6.9 percent hike, while those in the 91–120 unit range will face a sharper increase of 7.1 percent, pushing their monthly costs up by about Rs. 420.

However, the steepest escalation is reserved for heavy electricity users. Consumers exceeding 180 units will be hit with a staggering 25 percent increase — the highest adjustment under the latest revision — raising serious concerns over affordability, particularly for urban households and small businesses already grappling with rising living costs.

Energy sector analysts warn that the latest revision signals deeper structural issues within the power sector, including reliance on costly thermal generation, currency pressures, and inefficiencies in energy procurement.

“The burden is gradually shifting toward consumers as the sector struggles to maintain financial stability,” a senior power sector analyst said, noting that repeated tariff adjustments could further strain public tolerance.

The PUCSL maintained that the revision was necessary to ensure the sustainability of electricity supply and to prevent a recurrence of crises that previously led to widespread outages and load shedding. The regulator has also indicated that cost-reflective pricing remains a key policy direction, particularly as global energy markets remain volatile.

The move comes at a time when many households are still adjusting to broader economic pressures, including high food prices and transport costs, raising fears that the tariff hike could have a cascading effect on the cost of living.

Small and medium enterprises, already operating on thin margins, are also expected to feel the pinch, with higher electricity costs likely to feed into production expenses and retail prices.

Despite the increases, questions remain over whether the tariff revision alone will be sufficient to stabilise the financially strained power sector, or if further adjustments — or reforms — may be inevitable in the months ahead.

With electricity demand steadily rising and generation costs remaining unpredictable, consumers now brace for yet another phase of higher utility bills, underscoring the fragile balance between energy security and economic resilience.

Continue Reading

Trending