Opinion
Govt. succumbs to chemical fertiliser demand
By Dr. Parakrama Waidyanatha
The government has, at last, yielded to the unceasing demand of farmers for chemical fertilisers over the last several months, by its recent gazette notification, although it claims that its policy on organic agriculture remains unchanged! The farmers should, however, be elated and this is reminiscent of what happened nearly a century ago when British farmers did the reverse, shifting from organic to chemical farming! Sir John Russell (1942), a famous British soil scientist, in an article referring to transition from organic to conventional farming then, states that: “It is difficult for us in this distance in time to recapture the feelings with which the farmers received the information that a powder made in a factory and applied out of a bag at the rate of only a few hundred weights per acre could possibly act as well as farmyard manure put on the land as dressings of tons”!
Regrettably, the government totally ignored the view of the majority of scientists and academics that shifting totally to organic farming within a season is impossible, and that it should be attempted gradually. In fact, the President failed to consult the Department of Agriculture and other crop research institutes before rushing into the decision, vehemently supported by a few, including a medical doctor, who appears to be the chief advisor on the matter.
However, this advisor’s knowledge in agriculture is evidently scanty, as per his utterances, but he has been deceiving the masses, too, with numerous unsubstantiated claims, via mass media. Interestingly, his claims, one after the other, have been brilliantly and comprehensively debunked by a qualified and well-informed scientist in a video now doing the rounds, via YouTube, which everyone interested in the matter should watch!
No country has been able to totally shift to organic farming from conventional or chemical farming to date! Only 1.5 percent of total farmed land is subjected to organic farming of which 66 percent is pasture, only the balance being crop. And although returning to organic farming, which was abandoned at the beginning of the 20th century, commenced about six decades ago, only 16 countries have hitherto exceeded 10 percent in organic farming! It is expanding at a meagre rate of two percent per annum.
It would appear that Basil Rajapaksa, the new Minister of Finance is the prime mover in the policy change! Under his hand by a Gazette Notification dated 31st July 2021, under the Import and Exports Act No.1 of 1969, permission has been granted theoretically for the importation of virtually all chemical fertilisers, but under import control licenses. However, the government has vehemently claimed that there is no shift in its organic agriculture policy!
The notification, too, is confusing! It states that it has been “published in order to regulate the importation of chelated minerals and micronutrients which were previously banned”. Chelation here implies encircling of a metal nutrient by a large organic molecule. That way the metal molecules are protected from certain adverse soil reactions which reduce the availability of the micronutrient to the crop. However, apart from micronutrients chelated or otherwise, there is a provision in the gazette notification, as stated below, for the import of the following, as well under license.
“Mineral or chemical fertilisers, phosphatic; superphosphates or other
Mineral chemical fertilisers potassic
Mineral chemical fertilisers containing the above two fertilising elements
Mineral or chemical fertilisers containing the three fertiliser elements nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium
Other”
The above implies that virtually all chemical fertilisers could be theoretically imported!
The crux of the matter is how the licenses would be given? Would it be to all regular fertiliser importers or a few henchmen of the powers that be!
Although the chemical ban has been in place since April this year, farmers suffered immensely last Yala season. Some predictions made by experts of the Institute of Agriculture and others, if the policy of organic farming were to continue, reveal a profitability of paddy farming and rice consumption to decrease by 32.7 percent and 26.7 percent respectively or imports to increase by Rs 10 billion. Similarly, a reduction in tea productivity and loss of foreign export earnings by Rs 85 billion per annum and a decline in coconut yields by Rs 18 billion per annum are predicted. Further, the decline in productivity of field crops such as vegetables are predicted to be large. More specifically, a reduction in GDP by 2.65 percent owing to a 20 percent yield loss in crop agriculture sectors is predicted. Overall, the economic growth will be retarded with adverse implication on employment, rural economic activity, food security, poverty and vulnerabilities. Let us hope that sanity will prevail and the government will implement a realistic fertiliser policy.
The reason for the shift to organic agriculture is the myth that agrochemicals are the cause of non-communicable diseases, especially the chronic kidney disease of Rajarata. It is now established with substantial evidence that the cause is hard water in conjunction with fluoride present in many wells in Rajarata, especially on high ground. Apparently, there are some 176,000 such wells. A study by none other than the Coordinator of work on the kidney disease in the Health Ministry, Dr. Asanga Ranasinghe and others published in 2019 (BMC Nephropathy Vol 20) reveals clearly that with people learning that the disease is caused by bad water and consequently refraining from drinking such water, from about 2016, has resulted in a substantial decrease in patient numbers. Regrettably, the Health Ministry or Department has not made a firm pronouncement on this finding to date. The consequence has been that the Ministers of Health, Agriculture, many others and even the President continue to blame agrochemicals as the causal agent for the kidney disease! There has been no evidence at all to implicate causation of any non-communicable diseases by agrochemicals.
Opinion
Ministerial resignation and new political culture
The resignation of Energy Minister Kumara Jayakody comes after several weeks of controversy over his ministerial role. The controversy sharpened when the minister was indicted by the Commission on Bribery and Corruption for a transaction he was involved in ten years ago as a government official in the Fertiliser Corporation. The other issue was the government’s purchase of substandard coal from a new supplier. Minister Jayakody’s resignation followed the appointment of a Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry to investigate coal and petroleum purchases. The minister who resigned, along with the Secretary to the Ministry of Energy, Udayanga Hemapala, stated that they did not wish to compromise the integrity of the investigation to be undertaken by the Commission of Inquiry.
The government’s initial resistance to holding the minister accountable for the costly purchase was based on the argument that the official procedure had been followed in ordering the coal. However, the fact that the procedure permitted a disadvantageous purchase which has come to light on this occasion suggests a weakness in the process. The government’s appointment of the Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry to examine purchases as far back as 2009 follows from this observation. In this time 450 purchases are reported to have been made, and if several of them were as disadvantageous as this one, the cost to the country can be imagined. The need to investigate transactions since 2009 also arises from the possibility that loopholes in official government procedures in the past would have permitted private enrichment at a high cost to the country.
Concerns have been expressed in the past that the purchase of coal and petroleum, often on an emergency basis, enabled the use of emergency procurement processes which do not require going through the full tender procedures. The government has pledged to eradicate corruption as its priority. As a result, the general population would expect it to do everything within its power to correct those systems that permitted such corruption. Accountability is not only forward looking to ensure non-corrupt practices in the present, it is also backward looking to ensure that corrupt practices of the past are discontinued. This would be a matter of concern to those who headed government ministries and departments in previous governments. Those who have misapplied the systems can be expected to do their utmost to resist any investigation into the past.
Politically Astute
One of the main reasons for the government’s continuing popularity among the general population, as reflected in February 2026 public opinion poll by Verité Research, has been its willingness to address the problem of corruption. Public opinion studies have consistently shown that corruption remains one of the top concerns of citizens in Sri Lanka. The arrests and indictments of members of former governments have been viewed with general satisfaction as paving the way to a less corrupt society. At the same time, the resignations of Minister Kumara Jayakody and Secretary Udayanga Hemapala are an indication that not even government members will be spared if they are found to have crossed red lines. This is an important signal, as public confidence depends not only on holding political opponents to account but also on demonstrating fairness and consistency within one’s own ranks.
There appears to be a strategy on the part of the opposition to target government leaders and allege corruption so that ministers will be forced to step down. Organised protests against other ministers, and demonstrations outside their homes, are on the rise. The government appears not to want to give in to this opposition strategy and therefore delayed the resignation of Minister Jayakody until it had itself established the Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry. It enabled the minister to step down without it seeming that the government was yielding to opposition pressure. In political terms, this was a calibrated response that sought to balance the need for accountability with the need to maintain authority and coherence in governance.
The demand by opposition parties to focus attention on the coal problem could also be seen as an attempt to shift the national debate from the corruption of the past to controversies in the present. The opposition’s endeavour would be to take the heat off themselves in regard to the corruption of the past and turn it onto the government by making it the focus of inquiries into corruption. The decision to set up a Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry accompanied by the resignation of the minister and the ministry secretary was a politically astute way of demonstrating that the government will have no tolerance for corruption. It will also help to remind the general public about the rampant corruption of past governments which prevents the opposition’s corruption accusations against the government from gaining traction amongst the people.
New Practice
The resignation of a government minister who faces allegations but has not been convicted is still a relatively new practice in Sri Lanka. The general practice in Sri Lanka up to the present time has been for those in government service, if found to be at fault, to be transferred rather than removed from office. This is commonly seen in the case of police officers who, if found to have used excessive force or engaged in abuse, are transferred to another station rather than subjected to more serious disciplinary action. A similar pattern was seen in the case of former minister Keheliya Rambukwella, who faced allegations of corruption in the health field but was reassigned to a different portfolio rather than removed from government.
Against this background, the present resignation assumes greater importance. It signals a willingness to break with past practices and to establish a higher standard of conduct in public office. However, a single instance does not in itself create a lasting change. What is required is the consistent application of the same principle across all cases, irrespective of political affiliation or convenience. This is where the government has an opportunity to strengthen its credibility. By ensuring that the same standards of accountability are applied to its own members as to those of previous governments, it can demonstrate that its commitment to good governance is not selective.
The establishment of the Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry, the willingness to accept ministerial resignation, and the recognition of systemic weaknesses in procurement are all steps in the right direction. The challenge now is to ensure that these steps are followed through with determination and consistency. If the investigations are conducted impartially and lead to meaningful reforms, the present controversy could mark a turning point. The resignation of the minister should not be seen as an isolated event but as the beginning of a new practice. If it becomes part of a broader pattern of accountability, it can contribute to a new political culture and to restoring public trust in government.
by Jehan Perera
Opinion
Shutting roof top solar panels – a crime
The Island newspaper’s lead news item on the 12th of April 2026 was on the CEB request to shut down rooftop solar power during the low demand periods. Their argument is that rooftop solar panels produce about 300 MW power during the day and there is no procedure to balance the grid with such a load.
We as well as a large academic and industrial consortium members have been trying to promote solar energy as a viable and sustainable power source since the early 1990’s. We formed the Solar Energy Society and made representations to Government politicians about the need to have solar power generation. This continuous promotional work contributed to the rapid increase in PV solar companies from three in the early 1990’s to over 650 active PV solar companies established today in the country. These companies have created tens of thousands of high-quality jobs, as well as moving in the right direction for sustainable development.
However, all these efforts appear to have been in vain since the CEB policy makers have continuously rejected solar energy as a viable alternative. Their power generation plans at that time did not include solar energy at all but only relied on imported coal power plants and diesel power generation. Even at the meetings where CEB senior staff were present, we emphasised the importance of installation of battery storage facilities and grid balancing for which they have done nothing at all over the past three decades. Now they have grudgingly accepted the need to include solar energy, which was an election promise of the present government. The government policy is that Sri Lanka should go for renewables to satisfy 70% of its energy needs by 2030 and soon move towards the green hydrogen technology by using solar and wind energy.
The question is why the diesel generators and hydropower stations cannot be shut off one by one to accommodate the solar power generated during the daytime. Unlike a coal-fired plant, diesel generators and hydro power plants can be shut off in a relatively shorter period of time. Norochchalai Lakvijaya power plant produces around 900 MW of power while the total country requirement is 2500 MW on a daily basis. The remainder is provided by diesel generators, hydro and other renewable energy sources.
The need for work to achieve this goal of grid balancing should be the primary responsibility of the CEB. Modern grid balancing systems are in operation in countries such as Germany where around 56% of its energy come from renewable sources. They also plan to increase this to reach 80% of the energy required through renewables by 2030. Our CEB is hell bent on diesel power plants. Who benefits from such emergency power purchases is anybody’s guess?
The Government and the CEB should realise that all roof top solar plants are privately financed through personal funds or bank loans with no financial burden on the Government. It is a crime to request them not to operate these solar panels and get the necessary credits for the power transmitted to the national grid. It appears that the results of CEB’s lack of grid balancing experience and unwillingness to learn over three decades have now passed to the privately-funded rooftop solar panel owners. It is unfortunate that the Government is not considering the contributions of ordinary individuals who provide clean power to the national grid at no cost to the Government. Over 150,000 rooftop solar panels owners are severely affected by these ruthless decisions by the CEB, and this will lead to the un-popularity of this new government in the end.
by Professors Oliver Ileperuma and I M Dharmadasa
Opinion
Nilanthi Jayasinghe – An Appreciation
It was with shock that I realized that the article in the Sunday Island of April 5 about the winsome graduate gazing serenely at her surroundings was, in fact, an obituary about Nilanthi Jayasinghe, a former colleague who I had held in high esteem. I had lost touch with Nilanthi since my retirement and this news that she had passed away, saddened me deeply
I knew and had worked with Nilanthi – Mrs Jayasinghe as we used to call her – at the Open University of Sri Lanka in the 1990s. As Director, Operations, she was a figure that we as heads of academic departments, relied on; a central bastion of the complex structure that underpinned academic activities at Sri Lanka’s major distance education provider. Few people realize what it takes to provide distance education in an environment not geared to this form of teaching/learning – the volume of Information that has to be created, printed and delivered; the variety of timetables that have to be scheduled; the massive amount of continuous assessment assignments and tests that have to be prepared and sent out; the organization of a multitude of face-to face teaching sessions; the complex scheduling of examinations and tests – all this needed to be attended to for a student population of more than 20,000 and for 23 centres of study dotted across Sri Lanka.
It was an unenviable task but Nilanthi Jayasinghe with her flair for organization, handled it all with aplomb and a deep sense of commitment. If there were delays and inconclusive action on our part, she never reprimanded but would work with us to sort things out. Her work as Director, Operations brought her into contact with staff across the spectrum-from the Vice-Chancellor to the apprentice in the Open University’s Printing Press. Nilanthi treated everyone with dignity and as a result, was respected by all at the university. She was sensitive, kind-hearted, a good friend who would readily share problems and help to solve them. The year NIlanthi retired, I was out of the island. When I came back to the Open University, I felt bereft without the steadfast support of her stalwart presence .
The article in the ‘Sunday Island’ describes her life after retirement, looking after family members and enjoying the presence of a granddaughter.
After a lifetime of commitment to others, Nilanthi Jayasinghe truly deserved this happiness.
May she be blessed with peace.
Ryhana Raheem
Professor Emeritus
Open University of Sri Lanka.
-
Business4 days agoHarnessing nature’s wisdom: Experts highlight “Resist–Align” path to resilience
-
News6 days agoPNS TAIMUR & ASLAT set sail from Colombo
-
News24 hours agoRs 13 bn NDB fraud: Int’l forensic audit ordered
-
News4 days agoGratiaen Trust announces longlist for the 33rd Annual Gratiaen Prize
-
News3 days agoFrom Nuwara Eliya to Dubai: Isha Holdings markets Agri products abroad
-
Opinion2 days agoShutting roof top solar panels – a crime
-
News4 days agoHeroin haul transported on 50-million-rupee contract
-
Latest News5 days agoSingapore Zoo’s first Sri Lankan leopard cubs make their public debut
