Features
Problems that crop up when ministers wear two hats
Minister of Agricuture was also Minister of Food – a question of rice imports Agriculture Minister resisted
When a Minister has to handle two Ministries with different mandates and different sets of responsibilities, it is by no means an easy task. There are occasions where responsibilities become mutually contradictory. This happened in the case of the two Ministries of Agriculture and Food. The Ministry of Agriculture was a production oriented Ministry with an emotional culture of achieving self-sufficiency in rice in particular, and stopping imports. The Food Ministry on the other hand had a mandate to maintain predetermined levels of national buffer stocks, supplementing domestic purchases with imports when necessary.
At this time, generally we used to import 100 to 200 thousand metric tons of rice annually. On one particular occasion the Food Commissioner, the Chairman, Paddy Marketing Board and I, supported by other senior officials had carefully analyzed our future rice requirements for the buffer and decided that we needed to import about 100 thousand metric tons in the first instance, catching the brief period, when rice was available in the world market and prices in decline. When I mentioned this to the Minister, he reacted very emotionally. He was speaking in his role as Minister of Agriculture. He had completely forgotten that he was also Minister of Food.
He said that he would not import “a grain of rice;” quoted local paddy production statistics; said that local production was quite sufficient and condemned “an import lobby.” It was stirring and attractive rhetoric but our experience and analysis showed that if we did not import, retail rice prices would go through the “ceiling,” during the traditional period of shortage in the market towards the end of the year and the first two months of the new year. The Minister however was adamant. I was now faced with a dilemma. I could have taken his decision and kept quiet knowing for certain that disaster loomed ahead. I was also aware that when disaster occurred the scapegoat would be the Secretary and not the Minister.
The question often asked is “Didn’t the Secretary advice the Minister properly?” That is how the system works. On the other hand, I could try to do something about it, which meant canvassing the Minister’s decision. This, I felt bad about doing. It smacked of a degree of disloyalty. Having pondered the question, I decided to seek the advice of the Secretary to the Cabinet, Mr. G.V.P. Samarasinghe. He was very senior and respected all round. I also enjoyed a good working relationship with him and even a considerable degree of personal friendship. I was also aware that he and Minister Gamani Jayasuriya were good friends. Therefore, in all respects he was the ideal person to consult.
I sought an appointment and went to see him. I took all the necessary papers, and our analysis along with me. Mr. Samarasinghe looked through everything carefully and said, “My friend, if you don’t import you are going to be in serious trouble.” I asked him “what do I do?” He said, “I will have to find some way to bring this to the attention of the old man, without upsetting anybody.” “The old man,” referred to was the President. Then, he said something very significant. “Gamani Jayasuriya is a friend of mine, and one of the nicest people you could meet. But at the end of the day, don’t forget he is also a politician. If something goes wrong, don’t expect him to take the rap for it. The whole thing will come on you. The old man will not ask the Minister. He will ask you. Then, are you going to say the Minister told you? He will say that Secretaries are there to advice their Ministers properly. And there will be nothing in writing. It will be very awkward for you to ask your Minister to put his order down in writing. So my friend, do you see the mess you could get into?”
I said, that by and large, I understood the troubling implications, and that is why I came to him for advice. In the end Mr. Samarasinghe got the President to raise the issue of buffer stocks in Cabinet, and the Cabinet decided to appoint a Committee of officials Chaired by the Cabinet Secretary, and consisting of the Secretaries to the Ministries of Agriculture and Food, as well as the Food Commissioner and the Chairman, Paddy Marketing Board to review the stock position and make necessary recommendations to Cabinet. The Committee having gone through al I the material afresh, unanimously recommended to import. The Cabinet approved the recommendations of the committee. The matter was thus resolved.
But the whole exercise showed the genuine difficulties involved in taking decisions given certain conditions, and a particular environment. Everybody acts bona fide, but that alone is not enough to reach a correct decision. This is but one of the many problems involved in governance.
“Any other business”
Cabinets in Sri Lanka, from time to time take all kinds of weird decisions under the omnibus and expansive agenda item of “Any other business.” I have already referred to the decision to abolish the Ceylon Overseas Service under this item. During this time, I was faced with another one of these, although not of the same magnitude. In a batch of Cabinet decisions which arrived on my table one day, there was one which said that since sugar prices in the world market had “come down significantly,” the Cabinet was of the view that we should buy forward no w and stock up.
The decision referred to a price in pounds sterling as being the prevailing world market price, and directed the Secretary Ministry of Food to place orders immediately to purchase 40 to 50 thousand tons of sugar at this price. This was a staggering decision. Someone who spoke on this subject in Cabinet had make the cardinal mistake of mixing pounds and dollars. The direction was for me to purchase the sugar at so many Pounds Sterling per metric ton, whereas we always bought sugar quoted in dollars by the world’s sugar traders. Giving effect to the Cabinet decision would have meant deliberately paying much more for the sugar.
The decision also had completely ignored the fact that in order to maintain buffer stocks, we place orders well in advance, making some allowance for delays in shipments. If we now ordered such a large quantity, we would have more than a glut which would require extra storage space, as well as the probability of serious deterioration and waste of stocks. I took a copy of the decision and spoke to the Cabinet secretary. He said “Look, I have to record the decision of the Cabinet, and this was the decision. Take it up with your Minister and let him canvas this in Cabinet.”
This is what ultimately happened. I discussed matters with the Minister and gave him a note. The earlier decision was rescinded. I am sure other Secretaries too would have had similar experiences. The entire episode highlights the dangers of Cabinets taking ad hoc decisions without the benefit of formal Cabinet papers.
(Excerpted from In Pursuit of Governance, autobigraphy of MDD Pieris) ✍️
Features
Ranking public services with AI — A roadmap to reviving institutions like SriLankan Airlines
Efficacy measures an organisation’s capacity to achieve its mission and intended outcomes under planned or optimal conditions. It differs from efficiency, which focuses on achieving objectives with minimal resources, and effectiveness, which evaluates results in real-world conditions. Today, modern AI tools, using publicly available data, enable objective assessment of the efficacy of Sri Lanka’s government institutions.
Among key public bodies, the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka emerges as the most efficacious, outperforming the Department of Inland Revenue, Sri Lanka Customs, the Election Commission, and Parliament. In the financial and regulatory sector, the Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL) ranks highest, ahead of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Public Utilities Commission, the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission, the Insurance Regulatory Commission, and the Sri Lanka Standards Institution.
Among state-owned enterprises, the Sri Lanka Ports Authority (SLPA) leads in efficacy, followed by Bank of Ceylon and People’s Bank. Other institutions assessed included the State Pharmaceuticals Corporation, the National Water Supply and Drainage Board, the Ceylon Electricity Board, the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation, and the Sri Lanka Transport Board. At the lower end of the spectrum were Lanka Sathosa and Sri Lankan Airlines, highlighting a critical challenge for the national economy.
Sri Lankan Airlines, consistently ranked at the bottom, has long been a financial drain. Despite successive governments’ reform attempts, sustainable solutions remain elusive.
Globally, the most profitable airlines operate as highly integrated, technology-enabled ecosystems rather than as fragmented departments. Operations, finance, fleet management, route planning, engineering, marketing, and customer service are closely coordinated, sharing real-time data to maximise efficiency, safety, and profitability.
The challenge for Sri Lankan Airlines is structural. Its operations are fragmented, overly hierarchical, and poorly aligned. Simply replacing the CEO or senior leadership will not address these deep-seated weaknesses. What the airline needs is a cohesive, integrated organisational ecosystem that leverages technology for cross-functional planning and real-time decision-making.
The government must urgently consider restructuring Sri Lankan Airlines to encourage:
=Joint planning across operational divisions
=Data-driven, evidence-based decision-making
=Continuous cross-functional consultation
=Collaborative strategic decisions on route rationalisation, fleet renewal, partnerships, and cost management, rather than exclusive top-down mandates
Sustainable reform requires systemic change. Without modernised organisational structures, stronger accountability, and aligned incentives across divisions, financial recovery will remain out of reach. An integrated, performance-oriented model offers the most realistic path to operational efficiency and long-term viability.
Reforming loss-making institutions like Sri Lankan Airlines is not merely a matter of leadership change — it is a structural overhaul essential to ensuring these entities contribute productively to the national economy rather than remain perpetual burdens.
By Chula Goonasekera – Citizen Analyst
Features
Why Pi Day?
International Day of Mathematics falls tomorrow
The approximate value of Pi (π) is 3.14 in mathematics. Therefore, the day 14 March is celebrated as the Pi Day. In 2019, UNESCO proclaimed 14 March as the International Day of Mathematics.
Ancient Babylonians and Egyptians figured out that the circumference of a circle is slightly more than three times its diameter. But they could not come up with an exact value for this ratio although they knew that it is a constant. This constant was later named as π which is a letter in the Greek alphabet.
It was the Greek mathematician Archimedes (250 BC) who was able to find an upper bound and a lower bound for this constant. He drew a circle of diameter one unit and drew hexagons inside and outside the circle such that the sides of each hexagon touch the sides of the circle. In mathematics the circle passing through all vertices of a polygon is called a ‘circumcircle’ and the largest circle that fits inside a polygon tangent to all its sides is called an ‘incircle’. The total length of the smaller hexagon then becomes the lower bound of π and the length of the hexagon outside the circle is the upper bound. He realised that by increasing the number of sides of the polygon can make the bounds get closer to the value of Pi and increased the number of sides to 12,24,48 and 60. He argued that by increasing the number of sides will ultimately result in obtaining the original circle, thereby laying the foundation for the theory of limits. He ended up with the lower bound as 22/7 and the upper bound 223/71. He could not continue his research as his hometown Syracuse was invaded by Romans and was killed by one of the soldiers. His last words were ‘do not disturb my circles’, perhaps a reference to his continuing efforts to find the value of π to a greater accuracy.
Archimedes can be considered as the father of geometry. His contributions revolutionised geometry and his methods anticipated integral calculus. He invented the pulley and the hydraulic screw for drawing water from a well. He also discovered the law of hydrostatics. He formulated the law of levers which states that a smaller weight placed farther from a pivot can balance a much heavier weight closer to it. He famously said “Give me a lever long enough and a place to stand and I will move the earth”.
Mathematicians have found many expressions for π as a sum of infinite series that converge to its value. One such famous series is the Leibniz Series found in 1674 by the German mathematician Gottfried Leibniz, which is given below.
π = 4 ( 1 – 1/3 + 1/5 – 1/7 + 1/9 – ………….)
The Indian mathematical genius Ramanujan came up with a magnificent formula in 1910. The short form of the formula is as follows.
π = 9801/(1103 √8)
For practical applications an approximation is sufficient. Even NASA uses only the approximation 3.141592653589793 for its interplanetary navigation calculations.
It is not just an interesting and curious number. It is used for calculations in navigation, encryption, space exploration, video game development and even in medicine. As π is fundamental to spherical geometry, it is at the heart of positioning systems in GPS navigations. It also contributes significantly to cybersecurity. As it is an irrational number it is an excellent foundation for generating randomness required in encryption and securing communications. In the medical field, it helps to calculate blood flow rates and pressure differentials. In diagnostic tools such as CT scans and MRI, pi is an important component in mathematical algorithms and signal processing techniques.
This elegant, never-ending number demonstrates how mathematics transforms into practical applications that shape our world. The possibilities of what it can do are infinite as the number itself. It has become a symbol of beauty and complexity in mathematics. “It matters little who first arrives at an idea, rather what is significant is how far that idea can go.” said Sophie Germain.
Mathematics fans are intrigued by this irrational number and attempt to calculate it as far as they can. In March 2022, Emma Haruka Iwao of Japan calculated it to 100 trillion decimal places in Google Cloud. It had taken 157 days. The Guinness World Record for reciting the number from memory is held by Rajveer Meena of India for 70000 decimal places over 10 hours.
Happy Pi Day!
The author is a senior examiner of the International Baccalaureate in the UK and an educational consultant at the Overseas School of Colombo.
by R N A de Silva
Features
Sheer rise of Realpolitik making the world see the brink
The recent humanly costly torpedoing of an Iranian naval vessel in Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone by a US submarine has raised a number of issues of great importance to international political discourse and law that call for elucidation. It is best that enlightened commentary is brought to bear in such discussions because at present misleading and uninformed speculation on questions arising from the incident are being aired by particularly jingoistic politicians of Sri Lanka’s South which could prove deleterious.
As matters stand, there seems to be no credible evidence that the Indian state was aware of the impending torpedoing of the Iranian vessel but these acerbic-tongued politicians of Sri Lanka’s South would have the local public believe that the tragedy was triggered with India’s connivance. Likewise, India is accused of ‘embroiling’ Sri Lanka in the incident on account of seemingly having prior knowledge of it and not warning Sri Lanka about the impending disaster.
It is plain that a process is once again afoot to raise anti-India hysteria in Sri Lanka. An obligation is cast on the Sri Lankan government to ensure that incendiary speculation of the above kind is defeated and India-Sri Lanka relations are prevented from being in any way harmed. Proactive measures are needed by the Sri Lankan government and well meaning quarters to ensure that public discourse in such matters have a factual and rational basis. ‘Knowledge gaps’ could prove hazardous.
Meanwhile, there could be no doubt that Sri Lanka’s sovereignty was violated by the US because the sinking of the Iranian vessel took place in Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone. While there is no international decrying of the incident, and this is to be regretted, Sri Lanka’s helplessness and small player status would enable the US to ‘get away with it’.
Could anything be done by the international community to hold the US to account over the act of lawlessness in question? None is the answer at present. This is because in the current ‘Global Disorder’ major powers could commit the gravest international irregularities with impunity. As the threadbare cliché declares, ‘Might is Right’….. or so it seems.
Unfortunately, the UN could only merely verbally denounce any violations of International Law by the world’s foremost powers. It cannot use countervailing force against violators of the law, for example, on account of the divided nature of the UN Security Council, whose permanent members have shown incapability of seeing eye-to-eye on grave matters relating to International Law and order over the decades.
The foregoing considerations could force the conclusion on uncritical sections that Political Realism or Realpolitik has won out in the end. A basic premise of the school of thought known as Political Realism is that power or force wielded by states and international actors determine the shape, direction and substance of international relations. This school stands in marked contrast to political idealists who essentially proclaim that moral norms and values determine the nature of local and international politics.
While, British political scientist Thomas Hobbes, for instance, was a proponent of Political Realism, political idealism has its roots in the teachings of Socrates, Plato and latterly Friedrich Hegel of Germany, to name just few such notables.
On the face of it, therefore, there is no getting way from the conclusion that coercive force is the deciding factor in international politics. If this were not so, US President Donald Trump in collaboration with Israeli Rightist Premier Benjamin Natanyahu could not have wielded the ‘big stick’, so to speak, on Iran, killed its Supreme Head of State, terrorized the Iranian public and gone ‘scot-free’. That is, currently, the US’ impunity seems to be limitless.
Moreover, the evidence is that the Western bloc is reuniting in the face of Iran’s threats to stymie the flow of oil from West Asia to the rest of the world. The recent G7 summit witnessed a coming together of the foremost powers of the global North to ensure that the West does not suffer grave negative consequences from any future blocking of western oil supplies.
Meanwhile, Israel is having a ‘free run’ of the Middle East, so to speak, picking out perceived adversarial powers, such as Lebanon, and militarily neutralizing them; once again with impunity. On the other hand, Iran has been bringing under assault, with no questions asked, Gulf states that are seen as allying with the US and Israel. West Asia is facing a compounded crisis and International Law seems to be helplessly silent.
Wittingly or unwittingly, matters at the heart of International Law and peace are being obfuscated by some pro-Trump administration commentators meanwhile. For example, retired US Navy Captain Brent Sadler has cited Article 51 of the UN Charter, which provides for the right to self or collective self-defence of UN member states in the face of armed attacks, as justifying the US sinking of the Iranian vessel (See page 2 of The Island of March 10, 2026). But the Article makes it clear that such measures could be resorted to by UN members only ‘ if an armed attack occurs’ against them and under no other circumstances. But no such thing happened in the incident in question and the US acted under a sheer threat perception.
Clearly, the US has violated the Article through its action and has once again demonstrated its tendency to arbitrarily use military might. The general drift of Sadler’s thinking is that in the face of pressing national priorities, obligations of a state under International Law could be side-stepped. This is a sure recipe for international anarchy because in such a policy environment states could pursue their national interests, irrespective of their merits, disregarding in the process their obligations towards the international community.
Moreover, Article 51 repeatedly reiterates the authority of the UN Security Council and the obligation of those states that act in self-defence to report to the Council and be guided by it. Sadler, therefore, could be said to have cited the Article very selectively, whereas, right along member states’ commitments to the UNSC are stressed.
However, it is beyond doubt that international anarchy has strengthened its grip over the world. While the US set destabilizing precedents after the crumbling of the Cold War that paved the way for the current anarchic situation, Russia further aggravated these degenerative trends through its invasion of Ukraine. Stepping back from anarchy has thus emerged as the prime challenge for the world community.
-
News5 days agoRepatriation of Iranian naval personnel Sri Lanka’s call: Washington
-
Features5 days agoWinds of Change:Geopolitics at the crossroads of South and Southeast Asia
-
News4 days agoProf. Dunusinghe warns Lanka at serious risk due to ME war
-
Sports3 days agoRoyal start favourites in historic Battle of the Blues
-
Sports2 days agoThe 147th Royal–Thomian and 175 Years of the School by the Sea
-
News2 days agoHistoric address by BASL President at the Supreme Court of India
-
News3 days agoCEBEU warns of operational disruptions amid uncertainty over CEB restructuring
-
Business6 days agoSeven decades of sartorial excellence: The legacy of Linton Master Tailors in Kandy

