Features

Myth of unemployable arts graduates

Published

5 years ago

2021/06/1

(This is a response by a group of Sri Lankan university teachers to the audit report Propensity to tend education under the Arts stream and the unemployment of Arts Graduates. 

Recently, the Committee on Public Accounts discussed a report prepared by the audit office, entitled “Propensity to tend education under the Arts stream and the unemployment of Arts Graduates.” The somewhat awkwardly titled report attempts to connect graduate unemployment to Arts Education at secondary and tertiary levels. The report is useful in that it locates some of the problems of tertiary education in a failing secondary educational system. The recommendations made in the report are also, for the most part, salutary. However, the assumptions that inform the body of the report, the material that it uses to come to conclusion regarding arts education, and the manner in which it is committed to undervaluing Arts Education, merits comment, especially in a policy environment where Arts Education is under attack. Arguably the manner in which it conceptualizes the role of education in society is limited and reflects all current policy making on the subject. We provide this analysis, therefore, to broaden the conversation driving the policy discourse regarding higher education in the country and to move it away from its current unhelpful preoccupation with employability. We argue in this response that to formulate policy on a narrowly defined understanding of “employability” is insufficient and does not adequately encompass areas in Humanities and Social Science higher education that require strengthening through reform and support. Currently, policies driven by “employability” are, in fact, negatively impacting Humanities and Social Science programmes within the university system.

The report usefully highlights a fundamental problem in our education system – the failing secondary schools – as impacting Arts Education in general. Using a range of data, the report is able to demonstrate how the system is fundamentally unequal and makes clear that the policy of free education is failing the most marginalized members and communities in our society. The report highlights the fact that many schools do not have resources to provide Advanced Level science education. And states also that many parents are not able to support Advanced Level science education due to their inability to provide funds for extra classes. Therefore, many who are economically marginalized are unable to pursue education in STEM subjects. The report also demonstrates that the provinces, where poverty is greatest, have the largest percentages of Arts students entering university.

In terms of the numbers taking up subjects for the Advanced Level examination, the largest percentage opt for the Arts stream. The report claims that students choose Arts subjects because they are “easy” and students can enter university quickly (through their first shy). The numbers of students that choose the Arts stream for the A-Levels have ranged between 40-50 percent in 2017/2018. Other than in the Western Province, where the numbers are slightly lower, (20-35%), all other provinces had close to 50% of all A-Level students follow Arts subjects (Audit report, pp14-21). Documenting how students who are compelled to attend under-resourced secondary schools have few choices with regards to their education, the report recommends that the education system address the inequality of access and provide all secondary school students the choice of pursing either a STEM focused education or one in Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences. We support this recommendation of the report. The report, however, fails to connect how the inequality that prevails in the school system and the inability to guarantee a good basic education for all, in turn limits the impact that higher education can make when no intervention specifically addresses this problem. The report then suggests that the graduates that the current system of Arts Education produces are unemployable and emphasizes the need to reduce the numbers that opt for the Arts stream. Such a reduction of numbers was planned through the introduction of the technology stream. However, the technology stream itself has its own problems, is insufficiently resourced and has not been a success in reducing the numbers choosing the Arts stream. Unfortunately, there is no recognition in the report that most students are being taught within a severely under-funded and under-resourced Arts stream and that strengthening Arts education itself would be an option that would result in Arts graduates with a higher quality Arts education.

The report is inadequately informed of what Arts education encompasses and the current state of tertiary Arts education in the country.

What is Arts Education?

While acknowledging the need for the Arts to enrich society, the report suggests that as a “developing country”, we have to emphasize economic growth and suggests that we cannot afford to spend resources (that could be spent on Science Technology Engineering Mathematics (STEM) education) on Arts education. Making reference to “literary men, actors, musicians and cinematographers and artists” as necessary for a society, the report states that we, as a developing country, must have a greater emphasis on growing the economy. It is unfortunate that the report’s authors consider the country to be undeserving of investment in the Arts and culture until economic development is achieved and also dissociates the Arts from engagement with economic activity. The lack of greater government support for the Arts is probably a reflection of this sensibility. Unfortunately, such shortsighted positions inform the report and much of education policy today. A vibrant society where the Arts and culture can thrive should be an aspiration that we should cultivate and share.

Arts Faculties also provide degrees in the social sciences, such as sociology, psychology, economics and geography, and in applied or “professional” fields such as education, archeology, and library sciences, as well as humanities subjects such as history, philosophy and literature, and modern and classical languages. Nowhere does the report name the wide variety of subjects that are categorized under Arts education or recognize the importance of such subjects. Other than pointing out in one instance that developed countries use their system of education to create “skilled persons”, while we in Sri Lanka create “academic persons,” the report only recognizes Arts subjects insofar as they are not Science Mathematics or Technology subjects. The skills and perspectives provided by the Humanities and Social Sciences (Arts subjects) are essential to a holistic understanding of any social problem, such as poverty or education, or even any “technical” problem, such as water scarcity. The ability to understand the philosophical and ideological bases of such problems, and identify the social, cultural, and human consequences of proposed solutions, is provided by the skillset cultivated by an Arts education. In fact, this is the very reason that multidisciplinary perspectives are frequently called upon for policy research. It is important then that we recognize the contribution that a good quality Arts education can offer to society. We as a country are suffering today from a lack of attention to the perspectives that social science and humanities education can provide. This is also why those with little or no exposure to the above fields feel qualified to drive policy in various sectors that have substantial social consequences. This situation does not bode well for our future.

As indicated in the quotation above where the Sri Lankan system is accused of producing “academic persons” as opposed to skilled individuals, the report assumes that academically-oriented programmes are somehow antithetical to programmes that provide employment-oriented “skills.” Such a perspective mischaracterizes both the nature of academic engagement and the essence of job-oriented training. A strong academic programme that focuses on critical thought, substantive engagement with course material, independent learning, good writing, presentation and debate skills, will enable graduates to think independently, express themselves and work towards creating meaningful change in whatever surrounding they find themselves in, including their jobs. An effective programme of this nature would simultaneously result in the development of English skills, “soft skills”, and IT skills as part of the curriculum. The World Bank loan funded AHEAD programme, currently being implemented across the university system, has integrated elements of such a perspective and Bank loan supported initiatives are no longer insisting—as they did in earlier cycles– that we carry out stand-alone programmes to cultivate English, IT and “soft skills.”

The contention of the report as stated earlier is that Arts education is the subject area into which the largest numbers of the country’s students flock, and is also the repository of the country’s poorest students. The report then sweepingly suggests that arts programmes draw “weak” students and are themselves “weak” and are of little societal value. This seems to be the preferred policy position with regards to Arts Education. The report notes that the Technology Stream was introduced with the goal of reducing the number of Arts students to less than 25 percent and increasing the number of students pursuing Maths, Science and Technology. The report establishes, however, that the demand for Arts subjects among the student population has increased despite government efforts to decrease the number. The report’s lack of interest in understanding what positive elements of Arts education might be attracting the large student numbers (other than perhaps the ability to become a lawyer) and what elements of Arts education are worth supporting and developing, is quite telling of its general devaluing of Arts education.

The report provides little insight into the content of Arts programmes that are offered by the Sri Lankan university system and its assessment of the efficacy of the programmes is limited to employment numbers provided by the UGC Tracer Study of 2016/17. The report also states that no statistical information is available on unemployed graduates although insights from the Unemployed Graduates Union were obtained. Its critique of the programmes is based on two criteria – the number of programme revisions that have been reported and the introduction of new programmes of study. Outside of the above criteria, the study does not recognize the many differences among Arts degree programmes. For one, not all Arts programmes are the same across the country’s university system. There are internal and external degree programs, three-year general arts degree programmes following different subject combinations and Study Stream degree programmes that offer specialization within a three-year period, and four-year honours degree programmes involving a research component. While the subject areas covered by Arts programmes are also diverse, the content of programmes across the many universities differ as well. Thus, Arts students demonstrate a wide and disparate range of abilities and skills. Addressing Arts Education as a non-disaggregated whole is unhelpful when analyzing the skills and capabilities of Arts graduates and numbers that refer only to programme review and the introduction of new programmes does not adequately capture the status of those programmes. Disaggregating between Arts programmes is essential in order to recognize and develop the new and evolving programmes and provide support for the areas that require reforms.

Arts Faculties currently cater to a large number of students and relative to other faculties, their student body is more diverse and are likely to have differing and greater challenges and require greater support in transitioning to university education. Their student to staff ratios are larger, they tend to offer a large number of degree programmes that are delivered in different language media, and their per student funding is lesser than for other degree programmes. This creates a number of unique difficulties for arts faculties. These problems require systematic investigation in order for universities to provide the type of enriching education that an arts graduate requires.

These concerns that plague arts education cause difficulties in giving the arts graduate the type of education that they require and deserve. In the Commission’s report, these complex problems are not adequately presented or discussed.

Arts Education and Employment.

We recognize that some students who follow an arts education may have difficulties in finding work. As the report points out these difficulties stem partly from the immense social and economic disparities that influence student educational pathways and subsequent employment paths. The report suggests a number of solutions through which employment related problems that Arts students face may be addressed. These solutions proposed in the report require aligning educational paths with employment paths, through coordination among educational and employment providing institutions and greater funding for secondary and tertiary education. We pose, however three issues that the report has failed to address in making this case:

1. Framing recommendations with a rigorous analysis of the labour/job markets and their forecasts. The report neglects to include analyses of the job market or forecasts of the labour force. It does not address national policy to attract and create jobs, which are consistent with national trends in human capital. In short, the report does not link jobs and employment to broader policies to create good quality jobs that are secure and safe to all employees (see for instance, ILO, 2004). As a result, how the report construes where graduates will be placed once they graduate is unclear. Such an analysis should now be sensitive to changes caused by the Covid 19 pandemic, which likely hit youth and women particularly hard (ILO, 2020). Problems of the employment of arts graduates are especially salient to youth and women.

2. Justifying the linkages between employment and university education. The report rests on the assumption that students who follow a university education will become an “economic good”, meaning that their education will be transformed into some tangible, national, and tradable good. Yet the nature of this good is unclear, particularly considering that the labour market is in flux (see Blenkinsopp, 2011). For instance, with the rise in automation, jobs themselves are transforming in all sectors (see Oliver, 2015, Rothwell & Rothwell, 2016). These trends are likely to drastically reduce the number of jobs available and change how work is carried out. Skillsets, particularly those that are narrowly defined and context-specific, which are relevant and desired today, may have no importance in years to come. Thus, an analysis of jobs specific skills training, required of young people for employment in the future, should begin with an analysis of job markets of the future. Whether providing these skills should be the primary role of universities and whether the country has the jobs required for such trained individuals are also questions that will need to be addressed.

3. The report also rests on the assumption that learning activities that specifically target narrowly defined soft skills and skills in ICT and English language will result in the economic good mentioned in #2. This assumption has no basis. For instance, a strong humanities or social science education can provide invaluable skills in thinking critically (see Fahim & Masouleh, 2012) that are very much relevant to jobs. Within the study of job-related competencies, conceptual and thinking skills that are adaptable across job contexts and Reinforce a desire and ability to learn for oneself are particularly important (Snow & Snell, 1993). Cultivating these types of foundational skills require a curriculum that is built on a gradual and sustained process of developing them (see Fahim & Masouleh, 2012) rather than one-off courses that teach students a narrow skill set.

Education, Work and Economic Development

For most university graduates, employment means to be employed in the government sector. When graduates report unemployment, they do not necessarily mean they are not engaged in other income-generating activities or a private sector job. (One of the reasons for unemployment noted in the report is to be waiting for a government job.) Defining a “job” as a government job alone may be understood as part of a cultivated culture of patronage and entitlement. Such a position also draws from a realization that the working conditions, job security, and benefits of a government position far outweigh those in the private sector, regardless of claims to creativity, job satisfaction, higher pay, etc. Additionally, most private sector jobs are only available in and around urban areas. The report recognizes many of these issues and recommends raising awareness on the benefits of private sector jobs among undergraduates and urges the government to address the working conditions in the private sector.

The report points out that the majority of unemployed Arts graduates are women, but does not explore the gendered reasons as to why university educated women may be unemployed or opt out of employment. The Labour Demand Survey of 2017 provides insights on this matter. According to the Survey results, employers expressed negative attitudes towards hiring women owing to their “family commitments,” “security concerns”, and “maternity leave.” Employers’ reluctance to accommodate women’s unpaid care responsibilities and fear of sexual harassment and violence point to yet another societal malaise that is not reducible to a factor of university education alone. Not only are women overburdened with care work and at risk of violence in society, employers neither recognize nor provide support to women to work despite these challenges. Recent discussions on the unpaid care economy and women’s unaccounted labour at home are relevant here.

Many women opt out of formal employment or engage in informal work to accommodate the demands of care work in the home. Additionally, workplace sexual harassment and risk of the same when traveling home late after work are factors that contribute to women’s low labour force participation. These issues must be taken into account to arrive at a complete picture of graduate unemployment.

The audit report highlights the fact that we, as a “developing country”, must concentrate on economic advancement. However, there is no acknowledgement that one of the factors that have directly impacted the Sri Lankan economy and continues to do so has been ethno religious conflict. Over 30 years of war, and after the end of the war increasing numbers of organized violent attacks against Muslims, and the Easter Sunday bombings carried out by Muslims channelling the rhetoric of global Islamic terrorism to respond to local problems have destroyed lives and livelihoods and decimated the Sri Lankan economy. There is no analysis of how universities could provide a space to imagine alternatives to conflict and hostility and how such alternatives can be nurtured.

Unfortunately, education institutions have so far served to produce, reproduce and sustain Sinhala-Buddhist hegemonic narratives and to glorify ‘Sinhala-Buddhist’ culture at the expense of the stories and the culture of the country’s minority communities. These political efforts to divide and pit communities against each other encounter little or no ideological resistance. It is ironic that policy makers choose to see no connection between the country’s long history of ethnoreligious conflict and the system of education. Instead of playing a vital role in building trust in the post-war context among our communities, the education system has served to perpetuate structural violence along class, gender, ethnic and other lines. It is time that policy makers and political leaders discuss the manner in which education will help nurture a polity that can imagine collective engagement that is not overdetermined by conflict.

No doubt education has to cater to the economic needs of society, but the world has come a long way since ‘development’ was reduced to the ‘economy’. Contemporary approaches to development are much broader with far-reaching goals and meanings beyond the economy. Education should be a vehicle for achieving larger social goals through the development of creative capabilities and peaceful co-existence, which could, in turn, facilitate realizing economic goals within a society that is not plagued by violence.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Addressing the problems that plague Arts education in Universities, will strengthen not only Arts education in the University system but education in general. By framing the problem more widely, we propose the following:

The Education System:

1. The salutary goals that were envisioned when a free education system was introduced to the country still remain relevant. The social transformation that education continues to promise to countless Sri Lankan citizens is currently under severe strain. Therefore it is important that the challenges to the free education system be recognized and addressed in a manner that strengthens its foundational principles of universality and equality of access.

2. Broaden the understanding of the problems of the education system. Employability—narrowly defined– should not be the only framework from which reform of education should be approached. Education as a democratic endeavor must be recognized and questions must be raised as to whether the education system succeeds in strengthening democracy.

3. Ensure that education at both the secondary and tertiary levels is designed to overturn ethno-religious tensions and prejudices related to class, caste gender, gender identity and sexual orientation.

4. Provide solutions to address the inequalities in access to secondary education options, and minimize disparities in resources, facilities, and teachers.

Arts Education:

5. Provide arts faculties with the option of having foundation courses that will better equip students to perform well in degree programmes.

6. Have a better understanding of the different Arts degree programmes in the country, conduct a holistic analysis of the problems facing arts education and provide support when needed and reform where needed.

7. Increase spending on Arts Education. Recognize the contribution that Humanities and Social Sciences can make to society and provide support for such programmes.

8. Recognize and support the unique environments of the Arts Faculties as arguably consisting of the most diverse student bodies and serving the largest number of under privileged students.

9. Resist the formulation of one- size-fits-all policies for the improvement of Humanities and Social Science Education.

Technology Stream:

10. Ensure that students are guided into such streams through provision of services at both secondary and tertiary levels.

11. Provide trained teachers for technology education, revisit curricula, and improve infrastructure facilities.

Employment and employment markets:

12. Look into the job requirement of the country and the policies in place for job creation.

13. Ensure laws are in place to provide the necessary support services for women to enter the labour force.

14. Provide greater state support for the Creative Arts (as a job creation strategy that will strengthen the economy).

15. Ensure that the benefits and work conditions in the private sector match those of the public sector and remain attractive to university graduates

All News Advertisement

Features

US-CHINA RIVALRY: Maintaining Sri Lanka’s autonomy

Published

19 hours ago

2025/12/19

Thilina Walpola

During a discussion at the Regional Center for Strategic Studies (RCSS) in Sri Lanka on 9 December, Dr. Neil DeVotta, Professor at Wake Forest University, North Carolina, USA commented on the “gravity of a geopolitical contest that has already reshaped global politics and will continue to mould the future. For Sri Lanka – positioned at the heart of the Indian Ocean, economically fragile, and diplomatically exposed- his analysis was neither distant nor abstract. It was a warning of the world taking shape around us” (Ceylon Today, December 14, 2025).

Sri Lanka is known for ignoring warnings as it did with the recent cyclone or security lapses in the past that resulted in terrorist attacks. Professor De Votta’s warning too would most likely be ignored considering the unshakable adherence to Non-Alignment held by past and present experts who have walked the halls of the Foreign Ministry, notwithstanding the global reshaping taking place around us almost daily. In contrast, Professor DeVotta “argued that nonalignment is largely a historical notion. Few countries today are truly non-aligned. Most States claiming neutrality are in practice economically or militarily dependent on one of the great powers. Sri Lanka provides a clear example while it pursues the rhetoric of non-alignment, its reliance on Chinese investments for infrastructure projects has effectively been aligned to Beijing. Non-alignment today is more about perceptions than reality. He stressed that smaller nations must carefully manage perceptions while negotiating real strategic dependencies to maintain flexibility in an increasingly polarised world.” (Ibid).

The latest twist to non-alignment is Balancing. Advocates of such policies are under the delusion that the parties who are being “Balanced” are not perceptive enough to realise that what is going on in reality is that they are being used. Furthermore, if as Professor DeVotta says, it is “more about perception than reality”, would not Balancing strain friendly relationships by its hypocrisy? Instead, the hope for a country like Sri Lanka whose significance of its Strategic Location outweighs its size and uniqueness, is to demonstrate by its acts and deeds that Sri Lanka is perceived globally as being Neutral without partiality to any major powers if it is to maintain its autonomy and ensure its security.

DECLARATION OF NEUTRALITY AS A POLICY

Neutrality as a Foreign Policy was first publicly announced by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa during his acceptance speech in the holy city of Anuradhapura and later during his inauguration of the 8th Parliament on January 3, 2020. Since then Sri Lanka’s Political Establishment has accepted Neutrality as its Foreign Policy judging from statements made by former President Ranil Wickremesinghe, Prime Minister Dinesh Gunawardena and Foreign Ministers up to the present when President Dissanayake declared during his maiden speech at the UN General Assembly and captured by the Head Line of Daily Mirror of October 1, 2025: “AKD’s neutral, not nonaligned, stance at UNGA”

The front page of the Daily FT (Oct.9, 2024) carries a report titled “Sri Lanka reaffirms neutral diplomacy” The report states: “The Cabinet Spokesman and Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath yesterday assured that Sri Lanka maintains balanced diplomatic relations with all countries, reaffirming its policy of friends of all and enemy of none”. Quoting the Foreign Minister, the report states: “There is no favouritism. We do not consider any country to be special. Whether it is big or small, Sri Lanka maintains diplomatic relations with all countries – China, India, the US, Russia, Cuba, or Vietnam. We have no bias in our approach, he said…”

NEUTRALITY in OPERATION

“Those who are unaware of the full scope and dynamics of the Foreign Policy of Neutrality perceive it as being too weak and lacking in substance to serve the interests of Sri Lanka. In contrast, those who are ardent advocates of Non-Alignment do not realize that its concepts are a collection of principles formulated and adopted only by a group of like-minded States to meet perceived challenges in the context of a bi-polar world. In the absence of such a world order the principles formulated have lost their relevance” (https://island.lk/relevance-of-a neutral-foreign-policy).

“On the other hand, ICRC Publication on Neutrality is recognized Internationally “The sources of the international law of neutrality are customary international law and, for certain questions, international treaties, in particular the Paris Declaration of 1856, the 1907 Hague Convention No. V respecting the Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers and Persons in Case of War on Land, the 1907 Hague Convention No. XIII concerning the Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers in Naval War, the four 1949 Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol I of 1977 (June 2022)” (Ibid).

“A few Key issues addressed in this Publication are: “THE PRINCIPLE OF INVOILABILITY of a Neutral State and THE DUTIES OF NEUTRAL STATES.

“In the process of reaffirming the concept of Neutrality, Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath stated that the Policy of Neutrality would operate in practice in the following manner: “There is no favoritism. We do not consider any country to be special. Whether it is big or small, Sri Lanka maintains diplomatic relations with all countries – China, India, the US, Russia, Cuba or Vietnam. We have no bias in our approach” (The Daily FT, Oct, 9, 2024).

“Essential features of Neutrality, such as inviolability of territory and to be free of the hegemony of power blocks were conveyed by former Foreign Minister Ali Sabry at a forum in Singapore when he stated: “We have always been clear that we are not interested in being an ally of any of these camps. We will be an independent country and work with everyone, but there are conditions. Our land and sea will not be used to threaten anyone else’s security concerns. We will not allow military bases to be built here. We will not be a pawn in their game. We do not want geopolitical games playing out in our neighbourhood, and affecting us. We are very interested in de-escalating tensions. What we could do is have strategic autonomy, negotiate with everyone as sovereign equals, strategically use completion to our advantage” (the daily morning, July 17, 2024)

In addition to the concepts and expectations of a Neutral State cited above, “the Principle of Inviolability of territory and formal position taken by a State as an integral part of ‘Principles and Duties of a Neutral State’ which is not participating in an armed conflict or which does not want to become involved” enabled Sri Lanka not to get involved in the recent Military exchanges between India and Pakistan.

However, there is a strong possibility for the US–China Rivalry to manifest itself engulfing India as well regarding resources in Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone. While China has already made attempts to conduct research activities in and around Sri Lanka, objections raised by India have caused Sri Lanka to adopt measures to curtail Chinese activities presumably for the present. The report that the US and India are interested in conducting hydrographic surveys is bound to revive Chinese interests. In the light of such developments it is best that Sri Lanka conveys well in advance that its Policy of Neutrality requires Sri Lanka to prevent Exploration or Exploitation within its Exclusive Economic Zone under the principle of the Inviolability of territory by any country.

Another sphere where Sri Lanka’s Policy of Neutrality would be compromised is associated with Infrastructure Development. Such developments are invariably associated with unsolicited offers such as the reported $3.5 Billion offer for a 200,000 Barrels a day Refinery at Hambantota. Such a Project would fortify its presence at Hambantota as part of its Belt and Road Initiative. Such offers if entertained would prompt other Global Powers to submit similar proposals for other locations. Permitting such developments on grounds of “Balancing” would encourage rivalry and seriously threaten Sri Lanka’s independence to exercise its autonomy over its national interests.

What Sri Lanka should explore instead, is to adopt a fresh approach to develop the Infrastructure it needs. This is to first identify the Infrastructure projects it needs, then formulate its broad scope and then call for Expressions of Interest globally and Finance it with Part of the Remittances that Sri Lanka receives annually from its own citizens. In fact, considering the unabated debt that Sri Lanka is in, it is time that Sri Lanka sets up a Development Fund specifically to implement Infrastructure Projects by syphoning part of the Foreign Remittances it receives annually from its citizens . Such an approach means that it would enable Sri Lanka to exercise its autonomy free of debt.

CONCLUSION

The adherents of Non-Alignment as Sri Lanka’s Foreign Policy would not have been pleased to hear Dr. DeVotta argue that “non-alignment is largely a historical notion” during his presentation at the Regional Center for Strategic Studies in Colombo. What is encouraging though is that, despite such “historical notions”, the political establishment, starting with President Gotabaya Rajapaksa and other Presidents, Prime Ministers and Ministers of Foreign Affairs extending up to President AKD at the UNGA and Foreign Affairs Minister, Vijitha Herath, have accepted and endorsed neutrality as its foreign policy. However, this lack of congruence between the experts, some of whom are associated with Government institutions, and the Political Establishment, is detrimental to Sri Lanka’s interests.

If as Professor DeVotta warns, the future Global Order would be fashioned by US – China Rivalry, Sri Lanka has to prepare itself if it is not to become a victim of this escalating Rivalry. Since this Rivalry would engulf India a well when it comes to Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEC), Sri Lanka should declare well in advance that no Exploration or Exploitation would be permitted within its EEC on the principle of inviolability of territory under provisions of Neutrality and the UN adoption of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace.

As a measure of preparedness serious consideration should be given to the recommendation cited above which is to set up a development fund by allocating part of the annual dollar remittances to finance Sri Lanka’s development without depending on foreign direct investments, export-driven strategies or the need to be flexible to negotiate dependencies; A strategy that is in keeping with Sri Lanka’s civilisational values of self-reliance. Judging from the unprecedented devastation recently experienced by Sri Lanka due to lack of preparedness and unheeded warnings, the lesson for the political establishment is to rely on the wisdom and relevance of Self-Reliance to equip Sri Lanka to face the consequences of the US–China rivalry.

by Neville Ladduwahetty ✍️

Features

1132nd RO Water purification plant opened at Mahinda MV, Kauduluwewa

Published

19 hours ago

2025/12/19

Thilina Walpola

Sponsors (senior management from M/S Perera and Sons), Principal and SLN officials at Opening of RO Plant

A project sponsored by Perera and Sons (P&S) Company and built by Sri Lanka Navy

Petroleum Terminals Ltd
Former Managing Director Ceylon Petroleum Corporation
Former High Commissioner to Pakistan

When the 1132nd RO plant built by the Navy with funds generously provided by M/S Perera and Sons, Sri Lanka’s iconic, century-old bakery and food service chain, established in 1902, known for its network of outlets, numbering 235, in Sri Lanka. This company, established in 1902 by Philanthropist K. A. Charles Perera, well known for their efforts to help the needy and humble people. Helping people gain access to drinking water is a project launched with the help of this esteemed company.

The opening of an RO plant

The Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) started spreading like a wildfire mainly in North Central, North Western and Eastern provinces. Medical experts are of the view that the main cause of the disease is the use of unsafe water for drinking and cooking. The map shows how the CKD is spreading in Sri Lanka.

School where 1132nd RO plants established by SLN

In 2015, when I was the Commander of the Navy, with our Research and Development Unit of SLN led by a brilliant Marine Engineer who with his expertise and innovative skills brought LTTE Sea Tigers Wing to their knees. The famous remote-controlled explosive-laden Arrow boats to fight LTTE SEA TIGER SUCIDE BOATS menace was his innovation!). Then Captain MCP Dissanayake (2015), came up with the idea of manufacturing low- cost Reverse Osmosis Water Purification Plants. The SLN Research and development team manufactured those plants at a cost of one-tenth of an imported plant.

The writer with his PSO’s daughter

Gaurawa Sasthrawedi Panditha Venerable Devahuwe Wimaladhamma TheroP/Saraswathi Devi Primary School, Ashokarama Maha Viharaya, Navanagara, Medirigiriya

The Navy established FIRST such plant at Kadawatha-Rambawa in Madawachiya Divisional Secretariat area, where the CKD patients were the highest. The Plant was opened on 09 December 2015, on the 65th Anniversary of SLN. It was an extremely proud achievement by SLN

Areas where the RO plants are located

First, the plants were sponsored by officers and sailors of the Sri Lanka Navy, from a Social Responsibility Fund established, with officers and sailors contributing Rs 30 each from their salaries every month. This money Rs 30 X 50,000 Naval personnel provided us sufficient funds to build one plant every month.

Observing great work done by SLN, then President Maithripala Sirisena established a Presidential Task Force on eradicating CKD and funding was no issue to the SLN. We developed a factory line at our R and D unit at Welisara and established RO plants at double-quick time. Various companies/ organisations and individuals also funded the project. Project has been on for the last ten years under six Navy Commanders after me, namely Admiral Travis Sinniah, Admiral Sirimevan Ranasinghe, Admiral Piyal de Silva, Admiral Nishantha Ulugetenna, Admiral Priyantha Perera and present Navy Commander Vice Admiral Kanchana Banagoda.

Each plant is capable of producing up to 10,000 litres of clean drinking water a day. This means a staggering 11.32 million litres of clean drinking water every day!

The map indicates the locations of these 1132 plants.

Well done, Navy!

On the occasion of its 75th Anniversary celebrations, which fell on 09 December 2025, the Navy received the biggest honour. Venerable Thero (Venerable Dewahuwe Wimalarathana Thero, Principal of Saraswathi Devi Primary Pirivena in Medirigiriya) who delivered the sermons during opening of 1132nd RO plant, said, “Ten years ago, out of 100 funerals I attended; more than 80 were of those who died of CKD! Today, thanks to the RO plants established by the Navy, including one at my temple also, hardly any death happens in our village due to CKD! Could there be a greater honour?

Features

Poltergeist of Universities Act

Published

19 hours ago

2025/12/19

Thilina Walpola

The Universities Act is back in the news – this time with the present government’s attempt to reform it through a proposed amendment (November 2025) presented by the Minister of Education, Higher Education and Vocational Education, Harini Amarasuriya, who herself is a former academic and trade unionist. The first reading of the proposed amendment has already taken place with little debate and without much attention either from the public or the university community. By all counts, the parliament and powers across political divisions seem nonchalant about the relative silence in which this amendment is making its way through the process, indicative of how low higher education has fallen among its stakeholders.

The Universities Act No. 16 of 1978 under which Sri Lankan universities are managed has generated debate, though not always loud, ever since its empowerment. Increasing politicisation of decision making in and about universities due to the deterioration of the conduct of the University Grants Commission (UGC) has been a central concern of those within the university system and without. This politicisation has been particularly acute in recent decades either as a direct result of some of the provisions in the Universities Act or the problematic interpretation of these. There has never been any doubt that the Act needs serious reform – if not a complete overhaul – to make universities more open, reflective, and productive spaces while also becoming the conscience of the nation rather than timid wastelands typified by the state of some universities and some programs.

But given the Minister’s background in what is often called progressive politics in Sri Lanka, why are many colleagues in the university system, including her own former colleagues and friends, so agitated by the present proposed amendment? The anxiety expressed by academics stem from two sources. The first concern is the presentation of the proposed amendment to parliament with no prior consultative process with academics or representative bodies on its content, and the possible urgency with which it will get pushed through parliament (if a second reading takes place as per the regular procedure) in the midst of a national crisis. The second is the content itself.

Appointment of Deans

Let me take the second point first. When it comes to the selection of deans, the existing Act states that a dean will be selected from among a faculty’s own who are heads of department. The provision was crafted this way based on the logic that a serving head of department would have administrative experience and connections that would help run a faculty in an efficient manner. Irrespective of how this worked in practice, the idea behind has merit.

By contrast, the proposed amendment suggests that a dean will be elected by the faculty from among its senior professors, professors, associate professors and senior lecturers (Grade I). In other words, a person no longer needs to be a head of department to be considered for election as a dean. While in a sense, this marks a more democratised approach to the selection, it also allows people lacking in experience to be elected by manoeuvring the electoral process within faculties.

In the existing Act, this appointment is made by the vice chancellor once a dean is elected by a given faculty. In the proposed amendment, this responsibility will shift to the university’s governing council. In the existing Act, if a dean is indisposed for a number of reasons, the vice chancellor can appoint an existing head of department to act for the necessary period of time, following on the logic outlined earlier. The new amendment would empower the vice chancellor to appoint another senior professor, professor, associate professor or senior lecturer (Grade I) from the concerned faculty in an acting capacity. Again, this appears to be a positive development.

Appointing Heads of Department

Under the current Act heads of department have been appointed from among professors, associate professors, senior lecturers or lecturers appointed by the Council upon the recommendation of the vice chancellor. The proposed amendment states the head of department should be a senior professor appointed by the Council upon the recommendation of the vice chancellor, and in the absence of a senior professor, other members of the department are to be considered. In the proposed scheme, a head of department can be removed by the Council. According to the existing Act, an acting head of department appointment can be made by the vice chancellor, while the proposed amendment shifts this responsibility to the Council, based upon the recommendation of the vice chancellor.

The amendment further states that no person should be appointed as the head of the same department for more than one term unless all other eligible people have already completed their responsibilities as heads of department. This is actually a positive development given that some individuals have managed to hang on to the head of department post for years, thereby depriving opportunities to other competent colleagues to serve in the post.

Process of amending the Universities Act

The question is, if some of the contents of the proposed amendment are positive developments, as they appear to be, why are academics anxious about its passing in parliament? This brings me to my first point, that is the way in which this amendment is being rushed through by the government. This has been clearly articulated by the Arts Faculty Teachers Association of University of Colombo. In a letter to the Minister of Education dated 9 December 2025, the Association makes two points, which have merit. First, “the bill has been drafted and tabled in Parliament for first reading without a consultative process with academics in state universities, who are this bill’s main stakeholders. We note that while the academic community may agree with its contents, the process is flawed because it is undemocratic and not transparent. There has not been adequate time for deliberation and discussion of details that may make the amendment stronger, especially in the face of the disaster situation of the country.”

Second, “AFTA’s membership also questions the urgency with which the bill is tabled in Parliament, and the subsequent unethical conduct of the UGC in requesting the postponement of dean selections and heads of department appointments in state universities in expectation of the bill’s passing in Parliament.”

These are serious concerns. No one would question the fact that the Universities Act needs to be amended. However, this must necessarily be based on a comprehensive review process. The haste to change only sections pertaining to the selection of deans and heads of department is strange, to say the least, and that too in the midst of dealing with the worst natural calamity the country has faced in living memory. To compound matters, the process also has been fast-tracked thereby compromising on the time made available to academics to make their views be known.

Similarly, the issuing of a letter by the UGC freezing all appointments of deans and heads of department, even though elections and other formalities have been carried out, is a telling instance of the government’s problematic haste and patently undemocratic process. Notably, this action comes from a government whose members, including the Education Minister herself, have stood steadfastly for sensible university reforms, before coming to power. The present process is manoeuvred in such a manner, that the proposed amendment would soon become law in the way the government requires, including all future appointments being made under this new law. Hence, the attempt to halt appointments, which were already in the pipeline, in the interim period.

It is evident that rather than undertake serious university sector reforms, the government is aiming to control universities and thereby their further politicization amenable to the present dispensation. The ostensible democratis0…..ation of the qualified pool of applicants for deanships opens up the possibilities for people lacking experience, but are proximate to the present powers that be, to hold influential positions within the university. The transfer of appointing powers to the Councils indicates the same trend. After all, Councils are partly made up of outsiders to the university, and such individuals, without exception, are political appointees. The likelihood of them adhering to the interests of the government would be very similar to the manner in which some vice chancellors appointed by the President of the country feel obligated to act.

All things considered, particularly the rushed and non-transparent process adopted thus far by the government does not show sincerity towards genuine and much needed university sector reforms. By contrast, it shows a crude intent to control universities at any cost. It is extremely regrettable that the universities in general have not taken a more proactive and principled position towards the content and the process of the proposed amendment. As I have said many times before, whatever ills that have befallen universities so far is the disastrous fallout of compromises of those within made for personal gain and greed, or the abject silence and disinterest of those within. These culprits have abandoned broader institutional development. This appears to be yet another instance of that sad process.

In this context, I have admiration for my former colleagues in the Faculty of Arts at the University of Colombo for having the ethical courage to indicate clearly the fault lines of the proposed amendment and the problems of its process. What they have asked is a postponement of the process giving them time to engage. In this context, it is indeed disappointing to see the needlessly conciliatory tone of the letter to the Education Minister by the Federation of University Teachers Association dated December 5, 2025, which sends the wrong signal.

If this government still believes it is a people’s government, the least it can do is give these academics time to engage with the proposed amendment. After all, many within the academic community helped bring the government to power. If not and if this amendment is rushed through parliament in needless haste, it will create a precedent that signals the way in which the government intends to do business in the future, abusing its parliamentary majority and denting its credibility for good.