Connect with us

Features

Visit of Prime Minister Morarji Desai

Published

on

PM Desai

(Continued from last week)

To Shanghai

On the morning of the 4th, we were taken at 8.30, to see the Yili Food Products factory, producing chocolates, confectionery and bread. We got back thereafter and by 12.30 p.m. we were at the central railway station, Beijing. At 1.04 p.m. precisely, according -o the railway time table, we began our train journey to Shanghai, a journey of a little over 19 hours. Our carriages were quite comfortable, with comfortable sleeping bunks. The food served was also quite good.

During the night we passed over the Yellow River and the bridges over the Yangtze. Early in the morning I wanted to shave. It was quite cold and I looked for some hot water. There was none. But there was some hot green tea in a flask. So I shaved in hot green tea. On a later visit to China, again whilst, travelling to Shanghai by train I shared a berth with Mr. Lakshman De Mel Secretary to the Ministry of Trade.

Again in the morning we had only hot green tea in a flask, and when I began to shave using it, Mr. de Mel who was quite amused suggested that I immediately apply for a patent for this innovative technique! We arrived at Shanghai at 8.15 a.m. and were accommodated at the spacious Ching-Chiang hotel. At 10 a.m. we visited the Shanghai Port. It was a river port, situated on the Huangpo river. For the next two hours we toured the facilities, including warehouses; open air stacking arrangements; loading and unloading arrangements; documentation procedures; etc. What struck us was that in spite of its size it was a clean and well-maintained port. Of course under the Chinese system, they would have had their own methods of dealing with even a hint of labour indiscipline.

An interesting feature on the waterfront outside the Port was a patch of well maintained grass, chained off on the four sides, so that nobody could walk over it, bearing the notice “Chinese and dogs not allowed.” This had been a notice put up by the authorities of the Western Colonialist powers that resided, and having obtained various concessions traded, in Shanghai. Their sense of superiority impelled them to reserve the scenic waterfront to themselves.

Therefore, they did not want any Chinese to spoil the scenery by their presence. Dogs were prohibited for obvious reasons. For all they cared, Chinese and dogs could be classed together. The waterfront was an enclave within an enclave. The Chinese now preserved this notice in order to remind themselves of the humiliations they had suffered in their own country.

We got back to the hotel for a quick lunch, before leaving at 2 p.m. to visit a rice processing factory. We were back in time to attend the banquet hosted in honour of the Minister by the Vice Chairman of the Shanghai Municipal Revolutionary Committee. We continued with our field visits the next day the 6th, starting fairly early at 8.30 a.m. The visit was to a large grain storage facility, which was a complex of stores storing rice, paddy, maize, sesame and other grains.

The entire store complex was a model of cleanliness, orderliness, systematic stacking and meticulous documentation. There was also an attached laboratory for the testing of grain. We spent quite some time here, asking many questions and taking down some notes, because there were many practices, which were relevant to our situation. We came back for lunch, and thereafter at 3.15 p.m. visited a “Children’s’ Palace.

” This turned out to be a really marvelous place where hundreds of little children were engaged in doing various things from playing; to practicing music on several instruments; absorbed in handwork and drawing; learning about the working of radio and T.V. sets, and a host of other activities. Pink cheeked little children in colourful surroundings were a joy to see. On arrival, a little girl was attached to each of us as a companion and guide, and each of them led us everywhere, holding us firmly by the hand. This was something really relaxing and enjoyable, after the concentration on all the technicalities of harbours, shipping, warehousing and laboratory investigations.

We ended our visit to Shanghai on this pleasant note, and at 8 p.m. we flew out to Canton. We spent the next day the 7th in Canton, visiting a Commune and spending some time there and ending up with having lunch there. We got back in the afternoon to the state guest house where we were lodged, and at 7 p.m., attended the final official engagement in China, which was a banquet hosted by the Vice Chairman of the Canton Provincial Revolutionary Committee. The next day the 8t” we were back to Hong Kong by train, this time crossing the railway bridge in the opposite direction, and thereafter flying home a day later.

Visit of Prime Minister Morarji Desai

In the early part of 1979, Prime Minister Morarji Desai of India visited Sri Lanka, and we as Secretaries were invited by President Jayewardene, to the reception he was hosting in his honour at Kings Pavilion in Kandy. Some Secretaries, I was later told, reflecting on a visit to Kandy and back, just for the sake of a two hour reception had politely inquired from Mr. Menikdiwela, Secretary to the President, whether it was absolutely necessary for them to attend, to which the laconic reply had been, “If you wish to continue as Secretaries, yes.” I did not ask the question, because of my previous experience in the Prime Minister’s office and the Ministry of Defence and Foreign Affairs.

The acceptance of an invitation by the head of state is mandatory unless one is seriously ill, or abroad. All of us therefore attended the reception in the cool of the evening on the well-manicured and spacious lawns of Kings Pavilion.

The President enjoyed excellent relations with the Indian Prime Minister. Both were elderly persons, who had known each other for a long period. Both were Finance Ministers of their countries, and had met each other and developed a firm friendship over the course of many official meetings. The rapport between the two would have been close to the excellent relations between Mrs. Gandhi and Mrs. Bandaranaike.

Sometimes, for some unknown reason; the mind registers and remembers some inconsequential point. Accordingly, what I remember to this day is the iron grip of the Indian Prime Minister, then in his eighties, when I shook hands with him. The Prime Minister, who was a vegetarian, was reputed to drink a glass of his own urine first thing in the morning. If the strength of his grip was anything to go by, there seemed much to recommend in both practices.

There was an interesting issue that arose during the Prime Minister’s visit. The High Commissioner for India had organized a reception for his Prime Minister at “India House” – his official residence. The Secretaries to Ministries were invited by him. But almost no one including myself had accepted. The reason for this was the code of conduct promulgated by the new government. Secretaries were prohibited from attending cocktail parties or receptions.

They could only attend an official lunch or dinner and that too only if absolutely necessary. This prohibition extended to National day receptions. Even Ministers were forbidden to attend, and the Cabinet decided on a Minister for the month, to represent the government at these receptions.

There were good reasons for these stern measures. Many Ministers, politicians and public servants had become very lax in their behaviour at these parties and receptions. Some of them got drunk on the liquor that flowed. Others became loose tongued and seriously inappropriate in their behaviour. Protocol and dignity were forgotten. There were pictures of Ministers holding glasses at parties given by third Secretaries of Embassies. The correction when it came may have been somewhat over strict.

But a correction was necessary. It was as a result of this blanket prohibition that the Secretaries declined the Indian High Commissioner’s invitation. He had hastily brought this to the attention of government, since he had been quite surprised at all the Secretaries boycotting his reception in honour of his Prime Minister.

The next thing we knew was that the Secretary to the Ministry of Public Administration, Mr. DBI Siriwardhana was instructed by the President himself that all Secretaries should attend the reception, and that he should personally ring up each Secretary and tell him so. So, the matter was resolved. D.B.I’s call to me gave us the opportunity to engage in our usual banter. “Bring your wife also,” said DBI “That won’t be possible,” I said. “There’s nothing in the contract I signed with her at our marriage, that would oblige her to go to receptions which she usually doesn’t like to go to.” “Give your mind to amending the contract,” he replied. “Not likely,” I said. “This contract seems likely to outlive both President Jayewardene and Prime Minister Moraji Desai.” We ended on that note.

Parliamentary Consultative Committees

During the early part of 1979, the Parliament of Sri Lanka took the progressive step of establishing Parliamentary Advisory Committees, later renamed Parliamentary Consultative Committees. These committees set up under the standing orders were to be chaired by the Ministers of each Ministry and were to consist of the Deputy Ministers of such Ministries, as well as selected members from both the government and opposition sides. The intention was that these committees would dwell on important national policy issues pertaining to each Ministry, and help to forge a degree of bi-partisanship in their resolution. Unfortunately, these expectations were belied.

I have seen these committees functioning from the vantage point of several Ministries of which I was Secretary. From the beginning what came up for discussion were parocnial issues of appointments, transfers and what benefits a particular member of Parliament could obtain for his electorate through the Ministry. Not that these were unimportant. They were, to particular individuals, or a number of them. But obtaining a focus on important policy issues was next to impossible. In a large Ministry 60 to 70 officers had to participate at these meetings given the rules of attendance.

It was unfortunate, that practically everyone thought that it was a lost morning or a lost afternoon. Probably, the sustained discussion concentrating and focussing on the relevant that a debate on policy requires cannot be undertaken in a fairly large committee of mixed skills, backgrounds, experience and attitudes. There is also the not unimportant issue that we set up various mechanisms, but do not seem to have a procedure for evaluating their efficiency and effectiveness, or for that matter as to whether they fulfill their original objectives and expectations.

In this light, it would I think be necessary to evaluate as to whether the Parliamentary Consultative Committee has not become, with some occasional exceptions, a modified version of the Public Petitions Committee.

At the end of May 1979, the Minister organized a senior team from the Ministry and all the departments and agencies under the Ministry to go to Jaffna, and spend a few days there attending to peoples’ needs and problems. We left on the 31st of May by car. The Minister and some of us stayed at the President’s lodge. We began our programme on the 1st of June, with a morning visit to the Naga Vihare. This was followed by a conference of Members of Parliament and officials at the Kachcheri.

After lunch, we met the Presidents of Multi-Purpose Co-operative Societies and other Co-operative representatives at Veerasingham Hall. The morning of next day, the 2nd was taken up with the opening of some new food stores at Kankesanturai. After lunch, we spent the afternoon and part of the evening visiting some of the Textile Unions and Power Loom Centres.

The 3rd of June, was a Sunday, and in the morning, we visited the Ceynor Project at Karainagar. We were hosted to dinner that night by the Jaffna Harbour Workers Union. During the following two days, we visited Kayts; Pungudutivu; Delft; the Nagadeepa Buddhist Temple and the Amman Kovil. We ended the visit by going to see the Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation Station at Mandativu. Some of these visits were by boats. This was only my second visit to Jaffna and I found it quite fascinating.

The first visit had been brief, and mainly to K.K.S. and the Food Stores at Navatkuli. This was a comprehensive one, where we stayed long, visited many places, and met lots of people. We were very well received, and the hospitality was warm and genuine. The people appreciated the fact that we came in such numbers and also the fact that we stayed for a number of days.

(Excerpted from In the Pursuit of Governance, autobiography of MDD Pieris) ✍️



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

Sri Lanka’s vanishing wetlands put elusive otter under growing threat

Published

on

International Eurasian Otter Workshop-Colchester, United Kingdom

The world marked World Otter Day 2026 recently. Conservationists are warning that Sri Lanka’s rapidly disappearing wetlands, polluted waterways and unplanned development are placing increasing pressure on one of the island’s most elusive freshwater predators, the Eurasian otter (Lutra lutra).

The species, locally known as “Diya Balla”, is the only otter found in Sri Lanka and is regarded as a key indicator of healthy freshwater ecosystems. Yet despite its ecological importance, experts say the animal remains poorly studied and largely overlooked in national conservation planning.

Naturalist and conservationist Chaminda Jayasekara, who has spent years documenting otters in Sri Lanka, said the species is facing mounting environmental pressures across the island.

Speaking to The Island, Jayasekara said habitat destruction, chemical pollution, road kills, sand mining, and increasing human disturbance are fragmenting the waterways on which otters depend.

“Otters are extremely sensitive animals. When wetlands are degraded or rivers become polluted, they disappear very quickly. Their survival is directly linked to the health of freshwater ecosystems,” he said.

Jayasekara, who specialised in MSc Environmental Management at the University of Hertfordshire, noted that while the species has been recorded across Sri Lanka’s wet zone, dry zone and coastal wetlands, scientific data on population numbers and distribution remain limited.

According to him, the decline of wetlands has become one of the most serious environmental issues facing Sri Lanka. Marshes, mangroves, irrigation tanks and riverine habitats are increasingly being altered by urban expansion, tourism infrastructure, encroachment and agricultural runoff.

He warns that the loss of these habitats not only threatens otters, but also weakens flood control systems, freshwater security and biodiversity resilience at a time when climate-related disasters are becoming more frequent.

Jayasekara said otters play a vital ecological role by helping maintain balanced fish populations and healthy aquatic ecosystems.

“When otters thrive, it tells us the river system is functioning properly. Their presence is a sign that water quality, fish diversity and habitat conditions remain healthy,” he explained.

One of the best-known locations for otter sightings in Sri Lanka is Aranga Pond, within the Horton Plains National Park, where the species has adapted to the island’s cold montane ecosystem.

However, conservationists stress that even protected areas are not immune to broader environmental degradation occurring outside park boundaries.

Jayasekara’s own work on otters gained prominence through long-term conservation efforts at Jetwing Vil Uyana, where a former degraded chena landscape was restored into a functioning wetland ecosystem.

The restored habitat eventually attracted Eurasian otters, fishing cats, grey slender lorises and numerous wetland bird species.

Over 14 years, Jayasekara carried out field observations, camera trapping and awareness programmes involving hotel staff, surrounding schools and local communities.

“What happened at Vil Uyana clearly showed that habitat restoration works. If degraded ecosystems are given time to recover, wildlife can return naturally,” he said.

He added that wetland restoration should become a central component of Sri Lanka’s environmental policy, particularly as climate change intensifies droughts, floods and biodiversity loss.

Chaminda collecting scat for research purposes in Sigiriya

He says wetlands are among the planet’s most productive ecosystems, functioning as natural water filters and carbon sinks while providing breeding grounds for fish, amphibians and aquatic mammals.

Yet globally, wetlands are disappearing at an alarming rate, and Sri Lanka is no exception.

Conservation groups have repeatedly warned that illegal waste disposal, pesticide contamination and poorly planned infrastructure projects are severely affecting freshwater ecosystems throughout the country.

Jayasekara also highlighted the importance of stronger environmental education and community participation in conservation.

“Awareness is still very limited. Many people living close to wetlands do not realise the ecological importance of otters or the threats they face,” he said.

According to him, involving local communities in conservation monitoring is essential if Sri Lanka hopes to safeguard the species in the long term.

He also pointed to the growing international interest in otter conservation.

In November 2025, Jayasekara represented Sri Lanka at the International Eurasian Otter Conservation Workshop held at Colchester Zoo and organised by the International Otter Survival Fund.

The workshop brought together nearly 100 researchers, conservationists and wildlife experts from 33 countries to discuss emerging threats facing Eurasian otter populations.

Jayasekara presented Sri Lanka’s experience under the theme Rewilding Through Hospitality, focusing on how habitat restoration and sustainable tourism practices at Vil Uyana contributed to otter conservation.

“The international response was extremely encouraging. Many delegates were surprised that a tourism property in Sri Lanka had quietly carried out wetland conservation work for more than a decade,” he said.

Discussions at the workshop also examined wider environmental concerns including river pollution, declining fish stocks, illegal killings and habitat fragmentation affecting otter populations across Europe and Asia.

New conservation technologies such as AI-assisted wildlife tracking and environmental DNA surveys were also highlighted as emerging tools for monitoring elusive species.

Jayasekara said Sri Lanka urgently requires more scientific surveys, stronger environmental law enforcement and greater investment in freshwater conservation research.

He warned that unless wetlands and waterways are protected, several lesser-known freshwater species could face severe decline in the coming decades.

Environmentalists say otter conservation should not be viewed in isolation but as part of a broader effort to protect entire freshwater ecosystems that millions of Sri Lankans depend on for drinking water, irrigation and livelihoods.

He further noted that healthy wetlands also strengthen climate resilience by absorbing floodwaters, reducing soil erosion and supporting groundwater recharge.

As Sri Lanka experiences increasingly erratic weather patterns linked to climate change, conservationists argue that protecting wetlands is becoming both an ecological and economic necessity.

Jayasekara believes Sri Lanka still has an opportunity to become a regional example in balancing tourism, biodiversity conservation and habitat restoration.

“The otter teaches us an important lesson,” he said. “If rivers are protected and wetlands are respected, nature has an incredible ability to recover.”

This year’s observance of World Otter Day 2026 is, therefore, serving not only as a celebration of one of the world’s most charismatic mammals, but also as a reminder of the urgent need to conserve the fragile freshwater ecosystems upon which both wildlife and human communities ultimately depend.

Eurasian otter

By Ifham Nizam

Continue Reading

Features

Malaiyaha Tamil people: Healing the Oldest Wound of Independence

Published

on

Hands of a Maliayaha tea estate worker

In their Vesak messages this year, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake and Prime Minister Harini Amarasuriya highlighted the values of reconciliation, coexistence and justice as essential to Sri Lanka’s future. President Dissanayake emphasised that Buddhism’s teachings remain deeply relevant to contemporary society and described Vesak as a symbol of “mutual understanding, unity and coexistence among all communities” and of reconciliation itself. Prime Minister Amarasuriya similarly called for the building of a society in which justice is assured to all irrespective of caste, race or religion. These messages were not merely religious aspirations, they were a direct challenge to the most serious failures in Sri Lanka’s post-independence history. These include the three-decade-long war, its human rights violations and the inability to implement a political solution.

These have been and continue to be the challenges that have prevented Sri Lanka from reaching its full potential. Added to this have been the persistence of social and economic inequalities that continue to marginalise communities at the bottom of the social hierarchy. One of the most enduring examples of such injustice is the experience of the Malaiyaha Tamil community. The scale of the original exclusion is worth understanding clearly. According to the 1946 Census, the Malaiyaha Tamil community numbered approximately 780,600 persons and constituted 11.73 percent of the country’s population making them the second largest ethnic community, larger than the Sri Lankan Tamil community who numbered 733,700 or 11.02 percent of the population at the time

The denial of citizenship and voting rights to the Malaiyaha Tamil community was the first major injustice inflicted on an ethnic minority in post-independence Sri Lanka. The consequences were devastating and long-lasting. A community that had contributed enormously to the country’s economy through its labour on the plantations was excluded from political participation and denied basic rights. This was a political and moral failure that cast a long shadow over the country’s post-independence history. Responsibility for that injustice needs to be shared widely. Political leaders across ethnic lines failed to resist it. The result was the marginalisation of a community whose contribution to national prosperity far exceeded the recognition it received. Today, nearly eight decades later, Sri Lanka has an opportunity to correct that historic wrong but only if economic reform is matched by genuine social inclusion.

Longstanding Grievances

The NPP government has repeatedly acknowledged the need to address the longstanding grievances of the Malaiyaha Tamil people. In its election manifesto, the NPP pledged to improve living conditions in plantation areas, strengthen land and housing rights, ensure equal access to education and public services, and integrate plantation communities more fully into national development. The NPP’s Nuwara Eliya Declaration of 2023 similarly recognised that the plantation community had suffered generations of exclusion and promised measures to address disparities in housing, land ownership, infrastructure, education and economic opportunity. The need for such action is plain to see. While citizenship issues have largely been resolved over time, the socio-economic consequences of decades of exclusion remain deeply entrenched and continue to shape daily life in plantation communities.  A conference organised by the Institute of Social Development to mark International Tea Day on May 21 at the BMICH brought out this and many other salient issues.  Headed by P Muthulingam the organisation has advocated for the rights of the Malaiyaha Tamil people for the past 35 years to be equal citizens who enjoy social and economic justice.

The central problem facing many plantation workers is the low level of income they receive. Daily wages remain among the lowest in the country relative to the difficulty and intensity of the work. Plantation labour continues to depend heavily on methods that have changed little over generations. Productivity remains low compared to competing tea-producing countries — not because workers lack capability, but because sustained investment in their welfare, skills and economic mobility has been withheld. Workers consequently remain trapped in a cycle of low wages and limited economic mobility. Their housing situation compounds these difficulties. Many plantation families continue to live in housing owned either by plantation companies or the state. Lack of secure ownership limits their ability to accumulate assets, access credit or make independent decisions regarding their future. When Cyclone Ditwah damaged plantation housing, it exposed the inability of those living in that housing to access state compensation as they did not own the housing in which they lived.

The problems extend beyond the central highlands. Plantation workers living in private estates and smallholdings in other parts of the country face similar challenges. A recent Amnesty International report documented serious abuses affecting Malaiyaha Tamil workers in private tea estates in the Southern Province.  These include wage withholding, debt dependency, restrictions on movement and intimidation and practices the report argued correspond to internationally recognised indicators of forced labour. These findings are not peripheral. They reveal that the structural exclusion of the Malaiyaha Tamil community is not a relic of the past but an active, ongoing condition. Economic vulnerability and social marginalisation continue to leave many plantation workers without effective protection or access to justice. It is against this backdrop that the government’s recent plantation reform initiative assumes special significance.

Second Phase

The government has announced the second phase of a programme to make underutilised plantation lands and assets available for investment. The objective is to transform underperforming assets into productive enterprises capable of generating employment, attracting investment and revitalising regional economies. The programme seeks to modernise the plantation sector, improve productivity and create new opportunities in tourism, renewable energy and export-oriented industries. These objectives are necessary and welcome. However, economic reform alone will not be sufficient and Sri Lanka’s own history provides the warning. Previous rounds of plantation modernisation pursued productivity gains without addressing the structural disempowerment of the people at the centre of the industry. The result was investment that generated wealth without distributing it.  The workers who produced the wealth were once again treated as labour inputs rather than as beneficiaries. If the current reform follows the same logic, it risks reproducing the same failure.

For reform to succeed, plantation workers must be recognised not merely as a labour force but as stakeholders with rights, aspirations and a legitimate claim to share in the benefits of development. Housing ownership, secure land tenure, quality education, vocational training and entrepreneurship need to be built into the reform process from the outset. The government’s commitments to the Malaiyaha Tamil community therefore need to be incorporated into every stage of the reform process. On the contentious question of land, the government should consider establishing an independent national land commission. Such a body should include respected government officials, professionals and representatives from all ethnic and religious communities. It should review land policy comprehensively, develop transparent principles for allocation and use, ensure fairness in decision making and provide a trusted mechanism for resolving disputes. A credible land commission would help build public confidence that land reforms are being undertaken in the national interest rather than for the benefit of particular groups.

The correction of historic injustices should not be viewed as a concession to one community. It should be understood as an investment in national unity, because societies do not become stronger by maintaining the exclusion of those they have wronged.  On the contrary, they become stronger by ending it. The first great injustice committed against an ethnic minority after independence cannot be undone. But its consequences can be addressed, and doing so would strengthen reconciliation, enhance social cohesion and bring Sri Lanka closer to the vision of a country in which all communities live with equal dignity and equal hope. This is what the Vesak messages of the President and Prime Minister promised. The plantation reform now underway is the moment to make good on that promise not in words alone, but in sustained policy that endures beyond any single government and reaches the people who have waited longest for it.

by Jehan Perera

Continue Reading

Features

IMF relief is not economic recovery: Sri Lanka’s real test begins now

Published

on

The IMF’s latest decision to release approximately US$695 million to Sri Lanka provides an important measure of financial relief, but it should not be mistaken for full economic recovery. While the approval reflects progress in stabilisation, fiscal discipline, and reform implementation, the country still faces deep structural weaknesses, social pressures, and external risks. The real test begins now: whether Sri Lanka can convert this temporary breathing space into lasting reform, productive growth, stronger institutions, and national resilience. This moment should not be used for political celebration, but for serious national reflection and responsible action. Sri Lanka must now resolve to support a clear policy direction, a practical reform programme, and a long-term national development path — not merely an individual, a party, or a political camp.

1. IMF Relief: A Necessary Step, but Not a Final Solution

The IMF Executive Board recently completed the combined Fifth and Sixth Reviews under Sri Lanka’s Extended Fund Facility, allowing the country immediate access to SDR 508 million, approximately US$695 million. This decision represents an important step in Sri Lanka’s ongoing economic recovery process following the severe crisis that led to sovereign debt default, shortages of essential goods, high inflation, and the collapse of foreign reserves in 2022.

However, this decision must be understood with great sensitivity. IMF relief is not the same as full economic recovery. It gives Sri Lanka temporary breathing space, helps rebuild a certain level of international confidence, and supports the continuation of the reform programme. However, this relief is not a magic solution that can automatically resolve the country’s deep-rooted economic problems. Fundamental challenges such as the debt burden, weak productive capacity, low export earnings, poor public revenue performance, weak fiscal management, excessive dependence on imports, corruption, and inefficient state-owned enterprises still remain unresolved. Addressing these challenges requires domestic reforms, disciplined policies, stronger production and export capacity, and a long-term national development programme. Therefore, the IMF decision should not be treated as a political victory or as proof of complete economic success. Rather, it should be seen as a reminder that Sri Lanka still has a long and difficult journey ahead.

2. Sri Lanka’s Progress Recognised by the IMF and Its Limits

The IMF’s approval indicates that Sri Lanka has made progress in several important areas. Inflation has been brought under control compared to the extreme levels experienced during the crisis. Foreign reserves have improved, the exchange rate has shown greater stability, and fiscal management has become more disciplined. The government has also continued to implement reforms in taxation, public finance, energy pricing, and debt restructuring.

According to the IMF assessment, performance under the programme has generally been strong. Several quantitative performance targets have been met, while many structural benchmarks have either been achieved or implemented with some delay. This shows that Sri Lanka has remained broadly committed to the reform path agreed under the IMF-supported programme.

Yet this progress remains fragile. Stability achieved through external support must now be converted into genuine economic strength.

3. Conditions and Responsibilities Attached to the IMF Programme

IMF support does not come merely as financial relief; it comes with a set of important reform conditions and responsibilities that Sri Lanka must fulfil. Key among them are maintaining fiscal discipline, improving government revenue, continuing cost-reflective pricing for fuel and electricity, strengthening public financial management, restructuring state-owned enterprises, protecting institutional independence, and preventing the accumulation of new external payment arrears.

The main objective of these conditions is to restore macroeconomic stability, strengthen fiscal credibility, and rebuild international confidence in Sri Lanka. However, these reforms also carry social and political consequences. Higher taxes, market-based utility pricing, and strict expenditure controls can place a heavy burden on ordinary citizens, especially low-income families, small businesses, pensioners, and salaried workers. Therefore, in implementing reforms, economic discipline alone is not enough. Fairness, transparency, and social sensitivity towards vulnerable groups must also be treated as essential priorities.

4.The Impact of IMF Conditions on People and the Economy

One major social consequence of the IMF programme is the increased pressure it can place on household incomes and living standards. When electricity, fuel, and other essential services are priced on a cost-recovery basis, people may have to face a higher cost of living. Although such reforms are necessary to reduce the losses of state-owned enterprises and maintain fiscal discipline, they can weaken the purchasing power of ordinary citizens if strong social protection programmes are not in place.

Another important consequence is the pressure placed on the operating costs and stability of small and medium-sized enterprises. Higher taxes, increased utility costs, fuel and electricity expenses, and the rising cost of borrowing can affect business survival, job creation, and new investment decisions. If reforms are implemented without sufficient attention to production, exports, and small businesses, the country may achieve short-term fiscal stability, but long-term economic growth could remain weak.

There is also a political risk that cannot be ignored. If people feel that the burden of reform is not being shared fairly, reform fatigue and public frustration may emerge. If ordinary citizens are expected to make sacrifices while corruption, waste, and political privileges continue, public confidence in the reform process will decline. Therefore, for IMF-supported reforms to succeed, fairness, transparency, and social sensitivity must be firmly ensured alongside economic discipline.

5. The Real Test Before Sri Lanka

Sri Lanka’s real test begins now. Beyond temporary financial relief, the country must now prove that it can build a strong economy that generates income and can withstand external shocks. Therefore, our objective should not be limited to securing the next IMF tranche. While an IMF tranche may provide short-term breathing space, it does not guarantee long-term economic independence or stability. The real objective should be to create an economy that does not have to return to the IMF repeatedly during every crisis, but can stand on its own productive strength, export earnings, and fiscal discipline.

This requires fiscal discipline. However, discipline alone is not enough; economic growth is also necessary. Taxation is necessary. But increasing taxes alone is not a solution; production, investment, and exports must also be expanded. Debt restructuring is necessary. But beyond reducing the debt burden, Sri Lanka must also build an economic foundation that does not depend excessively on borrowing in the future. Sacrifices may be asked of the people. But for those sacrifices to be fair, accountability, transparency, and exemplary conduct from leaders are also essential.

Economic recovery cannot be sustained in the long term through financial assistance alone. Such support can provide breathing space during a crisis, but a country is rebuilt on the strength of its own institutions, productive capacity, export competitiveness, and public trust. Therefore, what Sri Lanka needs today is strong institutions, income-generating industries, a broader export base, food security, energy security, and a system of governance that people can trust.

6. Policy Priorities for Sustainable Recovery

Sri Lanka must now move from crisis management to national transformation. First, fiscal discipline should continue, but it must be fair. Revenue mobilisation should not rely only on increasing taxes on the same groups of people. The tax base must be broadened, tax administration must be improved, and tax evasion must be reduced.

Second, social protection must be strengthened. The most vulnerable groups should be protected through well-targeted assistance. Reforms will be more acceptable if people feel that the poor, elderly, disabled, and low-income families are not abandoned.

Third, state-owned enterprise reform should be carried out with transparency and public accountability. The objective should not merely be privatisation, but efficiency, professionalism, financial discipline, and better service delivery.

Fourth, Sri Lanka must prioritise export-led growth. The country cannot build a stable future by depending mainly on borrowing, remittances, and consumption. Agriculture, tourism, manufacturing, IT services, logistics, education, and value-added exports must become central pillars of national development.

Fifth, governance reform is essential. Without reducing corruption, political interference, wasteful expenditure, and weak implementation, no IMF programme can create lasting recovery. Economic reform and governance reform must move together.

7. From Temporary Relief to Lasting Recovery

The IMF decision gives Sri Lanka an important opportunity. It provides the country with space to strengthen economic stability, rebuild international confidence, and move forward with essential reforms. However, it is not a guarantee of success. It is only a step that gives the country some breathing space. It is now Sri Lanka’s responsibility to use that space wisely, with discipline and accountability to the people.

The country must now decide whether it will continue the old cycle of crises, debt, temporary relief, and political blame, or whether it will build a new national programme based on discipline, productive capacity, fairness, and accountability.

At this moment, true success cannot be measured by the amount of money received. It must be measured by whether Sri Lanka can build an economy that produces more, exports more, saves more, is governed better, and protects its people more effectively. The real victory is not receiving IMF relief, but building a strong national economy that will not depend excessively on such relief in the future.

Public Appeal: Let Us Choose a Programme, Not a Personality

This US$695 million will not solve every problem in our country. It may provide temporary financial relief and support the continuation of reforms, but it cannot replace the hard work required to build a productive, disciplined, inclusive, and self-reliant economy.

Therefore, this is the right time for all Sri Lankans to rise above narrow political loyalties and support a clear policy direction, a practical reform programme, and a long-term national development agenda — not merely an individual, a party, or a political camp. What Sri Lanka needs today is not the victory of a personality, but the victory of a responsible national programme that can restore confidence, protect the vulnerable, promote production, strengthen exports, ensure accountability, and secure a better future for the next generation. The question before us is simple but decisive: are we ready to make that choice?

by Prof. Ranjith Bandara,
PhD (Qld.,)

Continue Reading

Trending