Connect with us

Opinion

Absurd standardss on Cadmium and Lead in fertilizers

Published

on

An opposition member of parliament, Dr Harsha De Silva raised the issue of “contaminated” fertilizer stocks in the House. News reports and social media state that fertilizers “Laced with Unsafe Levels” of Lead and Cadmium have been released in Sri Lanka. Exposure to even small amounts of these heavy metals over time, mainly through the food chain, or by smoking, causes kidney, liver, bone and neurological damage in humans, leading to a variety of chronic diseases.

According to the news reports “The SLSI had suspended the release of the TSP consignment after it found that Lead and Cadmium in the imported fertilizer were higher than the maximum levels for toxic elements based on Sri Lanka standards specifications……However, following a meeting at the Presidential Secretariat, Director Senaratne authorized the release of the consignment into the market, on a strictly conditional basis, considering the food security of the country”.

Anyone reading the news would be justifiably alarmed, as both cadmium and lead are toxic substances that should not get into the food chain, even in small concentrations. However, we point out here that the fault is not in the imported fertilizer, but in the ridiculous standards stipulated by those who wrote Sri Lanka’s standards for heavy metal residues in fertilizers. This is a topic that I have addressed in newspaper articles as well as in technical studies [e.g., Dharma-wardana, Environmental Geochemistry and Health volume 40, pages 2739–2759 (2018) ].

This report must be taken in the backdrop of news about toxins in coconut oil, as well as the attempt of a TV-media host to make the SL Standards Institute (SLSI) Director Dr. Senaratne to reveal names of companies alleged to have imported contaminated coconut oil. She quite correctly stood her ground and declined to reveal names and make public accusations.

The Director of a scientific laboratory is not mandated to act as a public prosecutor. However, her answer showed that scientists are not media savvy and may give totally inappropriate answers that media outlets seek to create media hype. The fact that media hosts should try to destroy due process, and create “instant exposés” in an inappropriate manner, show the extent of the decline in public standards of justice and fair play in the country.

However, let us use this opportunity to educate ourselves regarding toxic substances in general, and heavy metals in fertilizers, in particular. Due to lack of space, here we examine only the case of cadmium, whose Sri Lankan standards are stated in SLS-812-standard-1988, amended and re-approved in 2008. This says that a kilo of TPS fertilizer cannot contain more than 5 mg of cadmium (or 10.9 mg per kg of P2O5). This is an absurd specification, which is impossibly LOW, such that there are very few mineral sources that conform to such a specification.

Let us look at this in comparison with the standards required by other countries for cadmium in fertilizer.

Each country, and sometimes each state or province of a country, sets its standards based on the naturally existing cadmium levels in its soil. Most parts of the UK have very high cadmium levels in its soil, and so inputs of Cd via fertilizers make little difference. Some parts of Western Europe (e.g, Brittany, in France, or parts of Holland) have low natural levels, while Belgium is as contaminated as the UK. So the European Union, as a whole, hopes to gradually tighten its standards and move to 20 mg/kg by 2040. But Sri Lanka has already, in 1988 itself, set its Cd limit at the impossibly low value of 5 mg/kg !

Was this very low limit set already in 1988 so as to disallow every imported batch of fertilizer, so that it can be allowed only when the right pockets are filled? Did the ring of racketeers with greased palms get broken, or did it not change with the change of government, and was this the reason why this matter had to go right up to the top for the “approval” of a perfectly safe and fine fertilizer? The fertilizer has been “condemned” as being “laced with cadmium” and other heavy metals using deliberately contrived specifications ?

How clean the food you eat depends fundamentally on the cleanliness and ecology of the soil to start with. It is only secondarily dependent on the purity of fertilizers in regard to trace metals, or the presence of traces of pesticides; even though a very different hype has been developed in the media for the consumption of a public frightened for its health and ready to even believe people like Dr. Mercola (see:

http://www.dailynews.lk/2018/11/07/features/167704/toxic-cocktail-myth-and-truth) or even “Dr”. Dhammika Bandara inspired by Kaali Amma.

All soils have a certain amount of naturally occurring toxins, as well as toxins from human activity, e.g, earth works, mining, farming, burning of fossil fuels or forests that cause acid rain and noxious fumes, and poor disposal of garbage. Even organic farming, often believed to be clean and “natural”, produces toxins similar to those in mineral fertilizers, as composting plant matter leads to the cyclic accumulation of heavy metals like cadmium and lead found naturally in the soil, and re-concentrated in plant matter used for composting.

Mineral fertilizers like triphosphate (TPS) are mined from the ground, usually from desert locations (e.g., in Morocco, Nauri Islands in New Zealand). These mineral deposits are becoming increasingly scarce and phosphates are a threatened commodity. Mineral fertilizers applied to the soil also contribute some cadmium (and other trace metals) to the soil.

Let us take an “extremely polluted sample” of fertilizer by Sri Lanka’s specification, e.g. Nauru phosphate which has some 90 mg/kg of cadmium, i.e., 15 times more than that specified by the current absurd SL standard. We have shown (e.g., https://doi.org/10.1007/s10653-018-0140-x)

that it will still take many centuries to modify the cadmium levels in, say, Sri Lankan soil significantly by such fertilizer additions. Hence even such a so-called “bad” fertilizer, but used in Australia and New Zealand, would be perfectly safe for use in Sri Lanka too.

Sri Lanka has a deposit of phosphate minerals at Eppawala. While it is quite high in its arsenic contamination, it has very low cadmium contamination. Some people have urged the government to exploit the Eppawala deposits. I have opposed this as the conversion of the rock phosphate to usable TPS etc., is a highly polluting process that is best done far away from human habitations – i.e., unsuitable for Sri Lanka. In any case, a local production will also cost three to ten times more than what is available in the international market. Given the increasing scarcity of phosphate, the local deposit should be regarded as a national treasure that must be conserved for future use, until cleaner nano-technological methods for mineral exploitation become available.

Hence, I urge the government to change the cadmium and other heavy metal specifications used in Sri Lanka to conform to modern scientific knowledge, and align its standards with values used internationally. Having looked at the level of cadmium in Sri Lankan soils, I believe that an appropriate standard for Sri Lanka is to set its upper level for cadmium to be about 100-150 mg per kg of Phosphate, instead the current absurdly low value.

 

CHANDRE

DHARMAWARDANA

Canada

The author is currently affiliated with the National Research Council of Canada, Ottawa, and the University of Montreal. He was a past VC and Professor of Chemistry at Vidyodaya/SJP university.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Opinion

Boots on the ground,minds in the dark

Published

on

Confronting Sri Lanka’s Expanding Drug Threat

Senior security and intelligence professional with extensive experience in counter-terrorism, strategic risk assessment and law enforcement.

A Rising Tide Beneath the Surface

Sri Lanka’s recent success in intercepting large consignments of narcotics at sea is both reassuring and alarming. Reassuring, because it reflects the growing operational capability of the Sri Lanka Navy and the Police Narcotics Bureau. Alarming, because such volumes do not move without a market.

Are we merely intercepting supply, or are we ignoring a rapidly expanding demand within our own society?

· “If seizures are rising, it is not only a sign of enforcement success, it is also a signal of expanding demand.

“Boots on the Ground”: A New Meaning

In today’s Sri Lankan context, “boots on the ground” must be redefined. It is no longer limited to patrols at sea or coastal surveillance. It is about real presence intelligence-led, community-connected, and action-oriented.

Recent interdictions demonstrate a mature intelligence-to-action cycle. For this, the Sri Lanka Navy and Police deserve commendation.

Yet, behind every success lies a silent force

The Silent Shield: Intelligence Networks

Informants, analysts, and field operatives form the backbone of every successful operation.

*  They operate under risk

*  Their exposure can collapse entire networks

*  Their contribution must be recognised discreetly, not publicly

“An exposed informant today is a lost network tomorrow.”

A Market-Driven Menace

Drug trafficking is not accidental, it is profit-driven.

The scale of maritime smuggling suggests that Sri Lanka is no longer just a transit hub. It is increasingly becoming a destination market.

This transforms narcotics from a policing issue into a national social crisis.

Inside the Network: A Structured Ecosystem

The drug trade operates through layered chains:

*  International syndicates

* Maritime couriers

*  Local facilitators

* Urban distributors

* Street-level peddlers

Each layer is insulated. Each link is replaceable.

“Break one link, and the chain adapts. Break the system, and the threat collapses.”

Demand Is Engineered

A critical reality:

Drug networks do not wait for demand; they create it.

* Free or low-cost initial access

* Targeting youth and vulnerable groups

* Expansion through peer networks

* Stealth distribution networks

Addiction is often designed, not accidental.

Awareness: Prevention or Promotion?

Sri Lanka’s awareness programmes show mixed results.

While well-intentioned:

* Overexposure can trigger curiosity

* Fear-based messaging is ineffective

* Generic campaigns lack relevance

“Poorly designed awareness can introduce what it seeks to prevent.”

The Missing Link: Awareness + Recovery

Awareness alone is insufficient.

A modern approach must include:

*  Simple, relatable communication

* Focus on life consequences

* Clear access to rehabilitation

Shift the message:

From: “Say no to drugs”

To: “If trapped, there is a way out”

When Success Creates Strain: The Justice System Under Pressure

An often-overlooked consequence of increased drug detections is the pressure it places on the justice and prison systems.

A large number of drug-related offences are non-bailable, leading to a steady rise in remand populations. This has resulted in:

*  Severe prison overcrowding

* Heightened tension among inmates

* Increased confrontation between prisoners and prison authorities

Overcrowded prisons are not only a humanitarian concern they are an escalating security risk.

The Forensic Bottleneck: Delays in Government Analyst Reports

At the centre of this strain lies a critical dependency the Government Analyst Department.

Every detection requires scientific confirmation. However, the system is under significant pressure:

* High volume of samples

* Shortage of trained personnel

* Limited availability of chemicals and laboratory materials
·

*  Multiple deadlines imposed by courts

These constraints have led to delays in submitting reports, which in turn:

*  Extend remand periods

*  Increase court backlogs

*  Fuel frustration among inmates

“Justice delayed in narcotics cases becomes both a legal failure and a security threat.”

A Sensitive Concern: Accuracy of Detections

Another emerging concern is that a number of samples sent for analysis reportedly do not contain narcotics.

If substantiated, this raises serious issues:

*  Are arrests being made on insufficient preliminary evidence?

* Are field testing methods reliable?

* Is there undue pressure to increase detection statistics?

The implications are profound:

*  Wrongful detention

*  Loss of public trust

* Weakening of legitimate enforcement efforts

Each inaccurate detection undermines the credibility of the entire system.

A Dangerous Imbalance

Sri Lanka now faces a structural imbalance:

*  Strong enforcement

*  Increasing arrests·

*  Limited forensic capacity·

*  Overburdened courts·

*  Overcrowded prisons

This imbalance creates a chain reaction of institutional stress.

The Strategic Gap: Where Is the Research?

Despite strong enforcement, Sri Lanka lacks a research-driven response.

The Police Narcotics Bureau and National Dangerous Drugs Control Board must be strengthened with:

*  Dedicated research units

*  Data on usage trends·

*  Behavioural analysis·

*  Evaluation of awareness programmes

Supported by international collaboration.

“Without research, strategy becomes a reaction.”

From Sea to Society

“Boots on the ground” must extend beyond enforcement:

*  Religious leaders·

*  Teachers and schools·

*  Parents·

*  Community networks·

The real battle is not only at sea but within society.

A National Priority

The consequences are severe:

* Loss of youth potential·

* Rising crime·

* Family breakdown·

* Long-term public health burden

This is a national security issue with generational consequences.

STRATEGIC CONCLUSION

OFFENSIVE FRAMEWORK (SUPPLY DISRUPTION)

INTERNATIONAL PARTNERS

NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE

SRI LANKA NAVY / COAST GUARD

POLICE NARCOTICS BUREAU

STF / POLICE OPERATIONS

ARRESTS & SEIZURES

JUDICIAL SYSTEM

Focus: Intelligence-led interdiction, maritime dominance, legal enforcement

PREVENTIVE FRAMEWORK (DEMAND REDUCTION)

GOVERNMENT POLICY & RESEARCH

NDDCB / PNB COORDINATION

EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS

TEACHERS / COUNSELLORS

RELIGIOUS & COMMUNITY LEADERS

PARENTS

YOUTH

Focus: Awareness, early detection, social resilience, rehabilitation

INTEGRATED NATIONAL STRATEGY

(OFFENSIVE) (PREVENTIVE)

Sri Lanka has proven its ability to intercept drugs.

But interception alone is not victory.

If enforcement is strong but society is weak, the problem will return.

If both are strong, the threat can be contained.”

Conclusion

Sri Lanka is no longer confronting a distant or isolated narcotics threat it is facing a deeply embedded, evolving ecosystem that stretches from international waters to the minds of its youth.

The recent surge in maritime interceptions is not merely a success story. It is also a warning.

Every shipment seized at sea is a reflection of a demand that exists on land.

We must therefore move beyond the comfort of operational victories and confront the harder truth: this battle cannot be won by enforcement alone.

“Boots on the ground” must now mean more than patrol vessels and tactical units. It must represent a nationwide presence of awareness, vigilance, intelligence, and responsibility from coastal radar stations to classrooms, from intelligence cells to family homes.

At the same time, we must protect what protects us from the intelligence networks that operate in silence. Their strength lies in their invisibility. Their recognition must remain measured, discreet, and strategic.

The drug economy is adaptive. It creates demand where none exists, exploits vulnerability where it finds it, and thrives where systems are disconnected. If left unchecked, it will not only fuel crime it will reshape society, erode institutions, and compromise future generations.

What Sri Lanka needs now is not a fragmented response, but a coordinated national doctrine:

*  Strong at sea

*  Smart in policy

*  Deep in research

*  Present in societyBecause the real battleground is no longer just geography it is generational.

What is required now is not just stronger enforcement but smarter systems, balanced capacity, and a unified national response. Because this is no longer just about drugs. It is about the future of the nation.

Mahil Dole is a retired senior police officer and former Head of the Counter-Terrorism Division of Sri Lanka’s State Intelligence Service. With over four decades in policing and intelligence, he has interviewed more than 100 suicide cadres linked to extremist movements. He is a graduate of the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies in Hawaii and has received specialist training on terrorist financing in Australia and India.

By Mahil Dole

Continue Reading

Opinion

Sri Lanka has policy, but where is the data?

Published

on

In recent months, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake has repeatedly expressed a concern that the government does not have the accurate data it needs to make good decisions.

At meetings with senior officials from ministries ranging from health and agriculture to education and infrastructure, the President has reportedly lamented that the government often lacks reliable information on what its projects are achieving, how funds are being spent, and whether public investments are producing results. The meeting on December 6th at the Matale District Secretariat was a case in point. The President emphasised the need for most accurate data to award compensation for damaged agricultural lands before the month’s end. He recalled that the Department of Agriculture’s data showed an excess of rice in the country, but the nation has faced a rice shortage.

For a country attempting economic recovery after the most severe crisis in its post-independence history, absence of accurate data is a dangerous position to be in.

Without data, decisions become guesswork. Without evidence, policy becomes speculation.

Ironically, Sri Lanka already possesses the policy architecture required to solve this problem. The National Evaluation Policy (2018) and the National Evaluation Policy Implementation Framework (2023) were created precisely to ensure that public spending is guided by evidence, results, and accountability. Yet today, despite these policies and the presence of a dedicated government agency tasked with monitoring development projects, the country still lacks the integrated digital monitoring and evaluation system needed to turn policy into practice. Until that gap is closed, Sri Lanka will continue to struggle with inefficient public investment, delayed projects, and policy decisions made without reliable evidence.

The scale of the problem

The Department of Project Management and Monitoring (DPMM), operating under the Ministry of Finance, is the central institution responsible for overseeing development projects implemented by government ministries. According to its 2024 Annual Performance Report, the department monitored 226 large-scale development projects across various ministries during the year. These projects collectively had an allocated budget of LKR 705 billion, but the actual expenditure amounted to only LKR 401.96 billion, representing about 56.9% utilization of the allocated funds.

In other words, nearly half of the planned development spending did not materialize.

While fiscal constraints and external factors contributed to this outcome, the data nevertheless highlights a deeper systemic issue: weak monitoring and decision-making structures that fail to identify and resolve implementation problems early.

The report also indicates that many projects face delays due to procurement issues, coordination failures, cost escalations, and operational bottlenecks. What makes the situation more troubling is that information about these problems is often fragmented and slow to reach decision-makers.

The government does monitor projects through reports and field visits, but the information flow remains largely manual and scattered across ministries. In the digital age, such a system is simply inadequate.

A policy that already foresaw the solution

Sri Lanka’s National Evaluation Policy (NEP), approved by the Cabinet in 2018, recognised this problem years ago. The policy aims to ensure that public investment decisions are guided by reliable evidence, efficiency, and measurable development results.

The NEP outlines several key goals:

· strengthening evidence-based decision making,

· improving efficiency in resource utilisation,

· ensuring transparency and accountability in public expenditure,

· promoting learning from successes and failures of past projects, and

· creating a national culture of evaluation.

To operationalise the policy, the government introduced the National Evaluation Policy Implementation Framework (NEPIF) in 2023. This framework explicitly calls for the creation of integrated information systems capable of gathering and analyzing data across the project cycle—from planning and budgeting to implementation and evaluation. In fact, NEPIF specifically proposes the establishment of a web-based integrated public investment management and evaluation information system to store project data and evaluation reports.

Such a system would allow decision-makers to access reliable information quickly, improving accountability and policy planning. Unfortunately, despite the clarity of this vision, the digital infrastructure necessary to implement it at a national scale is still largely absent.

A revealing moment at a Colombo seminar

The urgency of this gap became strikingly clear at a recent seminar in Colombo organized by a national NGO. The organization demonstrated its cloud-based monitoring and evaluation system which was comprehensive and updated by multiple layers of personnel, to a group of university students. On a large screen, a dashboard displayed real-time information on the organization’s twenty development projects across the country. Each project appeared as a branch of a digital tree, connected to activities, budgets, locations, and beneficiaries. With a few clicks, staff could generate reports showing the status of any project at national, district, or local levels, both of data and graphics. Updated data was available up to the previous day.

What would normally take weeks of manual compilation could be done in less than a minute.

Among the audience was a university academic who observed something obvious but powerful. ‘If a small NGO can run a system like this,’ he asked, ‘why can’t the Government?’ Another participant responded and told that the non-introduction of a digitalized Monitoring and Evaluation mechanism was due to some bureaucrats’ resistance. ‘I heard the Evaluation Reports of several projects of the government was not published because the respective Project Managers had opposed, fearing their failure would be exposed’, another academic commented. Those comments deserve serious reflection on the situation, I believe.

The digital revolution in monitoring and evaluation

Around the world, governments are increasingly adopting digital monitoring and evaluation platforms to track public investments in real time. These systems combine several elements:

· project databases

· geospatial mapping

· financial monitoring tools

· citizen feedback mechanisms

· performance dashboards for decision-makers.

Countries such as Estonia, South Korea, Rwanda, and Chile have integrated such systems into national governance structures. In these systems, ministers and senior officials can see instantly:

· which projects are progressing

· which projects are delayed

· how funds are being spent

· whether outputs and outcomes are being achieved.

More importantly, such platforms enable early intervention. Problems can be identified before they become crises. For Sri Lanka, which must now manage scarce fiscal resources with extreme care, such tools are no longer optional luxuries.

They are necessities.

The cost of not knowing

The absence of integrated data systems carries real economic consequences. Public investment decisions affect everything from roads and irrigation schemes to hospitals and schools. When these investments fail or underperform, the cost is not merely financial. It affects the daily lives of citizens.

A hospital without doctors. An irrigation scheme without water. A school building without teachers.

These are not simply implementation failures; they are information failures.

Without reliable monitoring systems, governments often learn about problems too late. By the time corrective action is taken, budgets have been spent and opportunities lost.

The NEPIF recognises precisely this challenge. It emphasises that evaluation should be an integral part of the entire development cycle—from project design to implementation and feedback for future planning.

But such evaluation cannot occur without reliable data systems.

Building an evaluation culture

Another important goal of the National Evaluation Policy is to create a culture of evaluation within the public sector. This requires a shift in mindset. Evaluation should not be seen as a fault-finding exercise. Instead, it should function as a learning mechanism that helps improve policy design and implementation.

The NEPIF stresses that evaluation findings should inform planning, budgeting, and future project selection. However, without systematic information systems, evaluation results often remain scattered across reports that few decision-makers read. Digital platforms can transform this situation by making information visible, accessible, and actionable. They turn data into knowledge. And knowledge into better decisions.

What a national digital system could look like

Sri Lanka does not need to start from scratch. The institutional building blocks already exist:

· the Department of Project Management and Monitoring (DPPM)

· the National Evaluation Policy

· the National Evaluation Policy Implementation Framework

· various sector-specific monitoring systems across ministries.

What is missing is integration.

A national digital monitoring and evaluation platform could include:

1. A centralised project database:

All government development projects recorded with budgets, timelines, outputs, and implementing agencies.

2. Real-time progress dashboards:

Accessible to the President, Cabinet, ministry secretaries, and provincial administrators.

3. Geographic mapping:

Showing where projects are located and how they benefit communities.

4. Automated reporting:

Reducing paperwork and enabling faster decision-making.

5. Citizen transparency portals:

Allowing the public to see how public funds are used.

Such a system would dramatically strengthen transparency, accountability, and efficiency.

The opportunity before Sri Lanka

Sri Lanka today has a rare opportunity. Economic crises often force governments to rethink outdated systems. The country cannot afford inefficient public investments any longer. Every rupee spent must produce measurable results. The National Evaluation Policy and its implementation framework already provide the intellectual foundation for this transformation. What remains is political commitment. A bold decision to build the digital infrastructure of evidence-based governance.

A call to action

The President’s concern about the lack of reliable data in government is both accurate and urgent. But the solution does not require new policies. The policies already exist. What Sri Lanka needs now is implementation. A national digital monitoring and evaluation system would give policymakers something they currently lack: a clear, real-time picture of the country’s development efforts. Such a system would empower leaders to identify problems early, allocate resources wisely, save billions of rupees from wasting and ensure that development projects truly benefit citizens.

In short, it would give Sri Lanka what every modern state needs: a digital nervous system connecting policy, data, and decision-making. The question is no longer whether the country needs such a system.

The question is simply this: how soon Sri Lanka is willing to build it.

by Tilak W. Karunaratne

Continue Reading

Opinion

Tribute to a distinguished BOI leader

Published

on

Mr. Tuli Cooray, former Deputy Director General of the Board of Investment of Sri Lanka (BOI) and former Secretary General of the Joint Apparel Association Forum (JAAF), passed away three months ago, leaving a distinguished legacy of public service and dedication to national economic development.

An alumnus of the University of Colombo, Mr. Cooray graduated with a Special Degree in Economics. He began his career as a Planning Officer at the Ministry of Plan Implementation and later served as an Assistant Director in the Ministry of Finance (Planning Division).

He subsequently joined the Greater Colombo Economic Commission (GCEC), where he rose from Manager to Senior Manager and later Director. During this period, he also served at the Treasury as an Assistant Director. With the transformation of the GCEC into the BOI, he was appointed Executive Director of the Investment Department and later elevated to the position of Deputy Director General.

In recognition of his vast experience and expertise, he was appointed Director General of the Budget Implementation and Policy Coordination Division at the Ministry of Finance and Planning. Following his retirement from government service, he continued to contribute to the national economy through his work with JAAF.

Mr. Cooray was widely respected as a seasoned professional with exceptional expertise in attracting foreign direct investment (FDI) and facilitating investor relations. His commitment, leadership, and humane qualities earned him the admiration and affection of colleagues across institutions.

He was also one of the pioneers of the BOI Past Officers’ Association, and his passing is deeply felt by its members. His demise has created a void that is difficult to fill, particularly within the BOI, where his contributions remain invaluable.

Mr. Cooray will be remembered not only for his professional excellence but also for his integrity, humility, and the lasting impact he made on those who had the privilege of working with him.

The BOI Past Officers’ Association

jagathcds@gmail.com

Continue Reading

Trending