NEXT factory closure in Katunayake ominous sign: Trade Exprt

One-time Director General of Commerce, Gomi Senadhira, has warned that the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) between India and the United Kingdom, signed on 06 May, could cause a significant drop in Sri Lanka garment exports to the UK.

The FTA is expected to take effect in January 2026. In an exclusive article to The Island––carried in today’s edition––Senadhira has said that the FTA will provide India with a nearly 10 percent tariff advantage. India would gain at the expense of other exporters, including Sri Lanka, Sri Lanka’s former Permanent Representative to the World Trade Organisation, from January 2004 to December 2006, said.

Senadhira

The trade expert, contacted for comment, following the sudden closure of the NEXT Katunayake production unit, said it was an ominous sign. NEXT is the largest apparel retailer in the UK and perhaps NEXT factories are the only manufacturing plants owned by a British retailer in Sri Lanka.

Senadhira also chaired the WTO Committee on Trade and Development (2005). Prior to his appointment in Geneva, he served as the Minister (Commercial and Economic Affairs) in the Sri Lanka Mission to European Communities in Brussels (2001 – 2003) and the Embassy of Sri Lanka, Washington D.C. (1998 – 2001).

Senadhira has found fault with the government for its failure to address the issues at hand while underscoring the importance of public discussions with trade chambers, think tanks, exporters and the media.

The independent trade consultant has explained how Sri Lanka’s exports to the UK eroded over the years, primarily due to our failure to face competition from Bangladesh, Cambodia, Pakistan, Pakistan and Vietnam.

Illankai Tamil Arasu Kachchi (ITAK) MP Shritharan recently condemned continued genocide denial by senior Sri Lankan politicians, the Tamil Guardian reported.

The lawmaker was addressing a remembrance event held in Neduntheevu to mark the 40th anniversary of the Kumuthini massacre.

“The Sinhala supremacists who claim that no genocide was committed against the Eelam Tamils are attempting to blind the eyes and conscience of the world,” Shritharan said, denouncing ongoing state-sponsored historical revisionism.

On the occasion, which commemorated the massacre of Tamil civilians aboard the Kumuthini vessel in 1984, Shritharan conveyed his gratitude to international actors who have supported Tamil efforts for justice and recognition.

In particular, he extended thanks to the Canadian Prime Minister and the Mayor of Brampton for their role in recognising the Tamil genocide.

Reflecting on the long arc of massacres carried out across the Tamil homeland, Shritharan stated:

“From the boat of Kumuthini, the seas of Gurunagar, Kokkilai, Chathurukondan, Vakarai, Navali, and Nagercoil, all the way to Mullivaikkal—massacres were carried out in waves, systematically annihilating Tamils one group at a time.”

He sharply criticised members of Sri Lanka’s current political leadership, stating:

“Even today, Sri Lanka’s Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath, along with Namal Rajapaksa and Ali Sabry, continue to shamelessly deny that a genocide took place in Tamil Eelam.”

Such statements, Shritharan said, constitute a blatant insult to the world’s conscience and reflect the deep-seated Sinhala hegemonic racism embedded within the ruling establishment.

In contrast to this denialism, Shritharan hailed the recent unveiling of a Tamil Genocide Memorial in Brampton, Canada, as a landmark in the global recognition of Tamil suffering and resistance.

“Amid such open racism from Sri Lanka’s ruling establishment, the establishment of a Genocide Memorial in Brampton serves as international testimony to the undeniable truth that what happened in Eelam was indeed genocide,” he declared.

Speaker Dr. Jagath Wickramaratne yesterday warned MPs against deliberately wasting parliamentary time by raising irrelevant questions and engaging in disruptive behaviour.

Making a special statement at the commencement of parliamentary sittings, Speaker Wickramaratne reminded all MPs of the proper procedures for raising questions under Standing Order 27(2), stressing the need for strict adherence to established parliamentary protocols.

Citing recent concerns about time mismanagement and procedural violations, the Speaker urged party leaders to ensure that questions submitted under this provision are confined to matters of genuine public importance and follow the prescribed format. He warned that non-compliance could result in procedural action.

Following is the full statement by the Speaker:

In a country where a representative parliamentary system operates, the primary responsibilities of a Member of Parliament, as a representative of the people, include representation, law-making, public finance control, and oversight. Of these, the responsibility of representation is particularly significant, as it enables MPs to draw the attention of Parliament to public concerns and seek resolutions through the executive using various mechanisms. These include questions requiring oral answers, questions not requiring oral answers, questions raised during adjournment debates, and motions raised during such debates. Also significant are questions raised under Standing Order 27(2), where—after giving formal notice to the relevant minister—a question may be asked by the Leader of the Opposition or a leader of a recognised political party on a matter of public importance.

Accordingly, I am prepared to clarify the issues that have arisen from time to time in the House regarding questions raised under Standing Order 27(2), particularly with reference to the situation that occurred in this House on May 9, 2025, and to inform the House of my decision on the matter.

The opportunity granted under Standing Order 27(2) is meant for obtaining answers—via brief prior notice to the relevant ministers—on specific matters of public importance. Therefore, it is essential that the issue be one of clear public significance and suitable for a short response.

Furthermore, such questions must be limited to a single, specific issue and must fall within the jurisdiction of a single minister. In keeping with longstanding tradition, such questions should be submitted to the relevant minister before 12 noon on the preceding day to allow sufficient time for a prompt response.

However, since the beginning of the 10th Parliament, many questions submitted under this provision have deviated from these principles. They have often lacked public importance, included multiple sub-questions, required highly detailed data, extended beyond a single minister’s purview, or been repeatedly submitted in similar formats. Additionally, although the Standing Orders do not permit supplementary questions in this context, MPs frequently present follow-up queries under the guise of seeking clarification. I have observed that even MPs other than the party leader submitting the question attempt to participate, often disrupting proceedings.

I would also like to emphasise that many such issues could be more appropriately raised as oral or written questions, or during adjournment debates or motions.

As a result of the current situation, a significant amount of time is consumed by raising, answering, and following up on questions—leading to delays that prevent completion within the allocated time. This has consistently disrupted the main business of the House and deprived scheduled speakers of their allotted time.

The issue of questions under Standing Order 27(2) was discussed extensively at the Parliamentary Business Committee meeting held on March 21, 2025. Based on the relevant Standing Orders, existing traditions, and rulings by the Speaker, it was agreed by both the government and the Opposition to proceed according to these norms.

Nevertheless, the continued failure to comply with these guidelines has caused numerous time management issues. I therefore emphasise the urgent need for all future questions under Standing Order 27(2) to strictly conform to the prescribed procedures.

Taking all these circumstances into consideration, I urge all party leaders to ensure that future questions under this provision adhere to the proper format. I also inform the House that I will be compelled to take action in accordance with the Standing Orders regarding any questions submitted outside of these rules.

Accordingly, I direct the attention of all party leaders to these concerns and look forward to your full cooperation in conducting the business of the House without disruption, in line with the Standing Orders.