Connect with us

Opinion

Ravi: What I did as Finance Minister was like running a tavern without arrack

Published

on

By Saman Indrajith

UNP Assistant Leader and former minister Ravi Karunanayake, in an interview with The Island conducted on July 30, says there is no significant threat from his party’s offshoot, the SJB, which he describes as only ‘a mere irritant factor.’ Excerpts of the interview:

Q: The country is going through very turbulent times. The economy is in the doldrums. Many developing countries, including Pakistan, have opted for requesting loan waivers from their lenders such as China, considering the impact realities of COVID-19. As a former Finance Minister do you think Sri Lanka should do likewise?

A: In the current situation we see the country’s revenue dwindling. There is a yawning gap between revenues and cost of living, and this gap has led to the widening of the budget deficit, which cannot be bridged with taxes. In the process of cushioning this impact you have to reduce either the recurrent expenditure or the country’s loan commitments. One of the two has to be reduced to make the fiscal space possible for the country’s economy to move forward. I do not see that happening. The revenue is dropping and expenditure increasing and this has caused the alarming fiscal imbalance. Economic disparities seem to be becoming more complicated by the day. In this situation, seeking loan waivers is not the answer. If you ask for waivers, you’ll lose the opportunity of getting loans in the future. The impact of loan waivers would vary on bilateral and multi-lateral loans which are a few and far between but not so on international sovereign bonds. It would lead to a negative economic outlook. When I took over the Finance Ministry, we had a negative outlook. We had to convert it into a positive outlook and we went forward. Under this government, such good work is being undone and the country is moving backwards. The World Bank has moved Sri Lanka from a medium-income earning country to a low-income earning country.

Q: What is the solution?

A: We have to navigate through these turbulent times. For that we need a strong national economic agenda, which should be able to address the issue of decreasing revenue and keep the economy afloat.

Q: The government has received encomia for handling the COVID-19 threat professionally. It is popularly thought that a UNP government would have made a mess of the battle against coronavirus and economic recovery. What would you say to this?

A: If we are elected, our immediate intention should be to restore confidence in the people, in the investors, in the local and foreign markets. We need to create a situation where people would get economic activities restarted. It is a matter of how you would be able to rekindle that confidence. For that you need consistent and coherent policies. At the moment we have policies that change by the day. When we were elected to office on Jan 8, 2015 the country’s economy was not better than this. In a way it is same with the post-COVID-19 situation.

The other factor is that the country’s economy had been in the doldrums well before the COVID-19. The impact of pandemic started on March 21, but economy had started experiencing trouble well before that. The main reason for that was because the government tried to reduce VAT from 15 to 8. And with many other things, the resultant loss was about 600 billion rupees. That amount is almost one third of the government revenue for the year 2019. When you don’t have revenue, there is no economic kick start. You lose 600 billion and the economy is going to tailspin. On the other hand, none in society would feel any relief from VAT reduction because of that increases that have taken place are so much more. With the 600 billion just thrown down the drain there has been no resultant economic gain.

Q: On the political front, the split within the UNP resulted in a confusion among UNP voters. The SJB has emerged a formidable political force. What do you think the impact of the split on the UNP’s electoral performance?

A: Our fight is with the SLPP and not any other party. This government has been in power for eight months. It’s almost one fifth of its full term. During this period, the cost of living has gone up dramatically and now it is almost 40 per cent. There have been job losses though the government promised to create many more. The SJB is a by-the-way party. Our main focus is to ensure that we are engaged with the main opponent rather than by-the-way parties. Every time when there is an election such by-the-way parties are formed by breakaway groups. It is like old leaves falling from a tree. New leaves will appear and fill the gaps. The UNP is such a strong party that it will not be affected by splits.

The people who have left the party have something in common. They are people who lost badly in their electorates at the last presidential election. Their leader lost that election. The SJB is only an irritant factor.

The UNP is a reservoir of talent. Whenever there is a slip-off we have lot of new talent to remedy it. The UNP is the oldest party in the country and it is getting stronger.

Q: Speculation is rife that the SJB members will join the UNP after the election. Some UNPers have said they will never allow them to return to the party’s fold. In your case, you were with Lalith Athulathmudali and Gamini Dissanayake when they left the UNP to form the DUNF and contest under the Eagle symbol. The DUNF was a splinter of the UNP like the SJB. Years later, DUNF members returned to the UNP’s fold. So, what’s wrong with the SJB members coming back to the UNP?

A: You cannot compare the two events. The bravest in the UNP at that time such as Lalith Athulathmudali and Gamini Dissanayake challenged what they saw as wrongs within the party. So, they were virtually thrown out of the party as a result of their struggle for democracy. In the present instance, some disgruntled party members have left the UNP as they could not achieve their ambitions.

I beg you not to compare the two events for it’s unfair by Lalith, Gamini and others of their calibre, who formed the DUNF.

The final outcome of an event is determined by the performance of a team. If you are a member of a cricket team, you have to be led. You cannot be led by the spectators outside the field. You can’t win the match by singing hosannas for his father or grandfather. Your success hinges on your performance.

The SJB lied to the people and they lied to the judiciary. That is why it lost the case. When it appealed to Court of Appeal and they had to pay Rs 25,000 fine as well. So, now the people can understand that their version of what happened at the Working Committee meeting of the party was not true.

With regard to the rumours of their return after the election, I must say the UNP is not a rest house where you come and go as you please.

Q: Some opposition parties have criticized the government’s handling of the COVID-19 crisis. Do you subscribe to this criticism?

A: COVID situation is something unprecedented. We would give our support to the government to face any such crisis for the sake of the people. I believe the government is doing its best, given the situation. But I cannot say the same about its handling of the economy.

Winning the COVID-19 war and winning the economic war are two different things. You cannot justify losing the economic war in post-COVID situation even if you fare well in your fight against COVID.

Q: The yahapalana government failed to prevent the Easter Sunday carnage. Don’t you think those terror attacks will have an impact on the outcome of the upcoming election as well?

A: If you say the Easter bombing had an impact on the then government’s electoral performance, then the COVID-19 pandemic will have a similar impact on this government. If people are guided by their emotions in casting their votes, then they will vote against this government. The economy is in tatters, companies are closing, cash flows are threatened and it is these major problems that will have an impact on the outcome of the upcoming election.

Q: The Easter Sunday carnage took place under a UNP government and the presidential election results show that people are concerned about national security and their safety. What would you say?

A: Well, it is unfair to say it happened on our watch because basically all security matters were in the hands of a single person, who is not in the government when this disaster occurred. It happened during the time of our government but everybody knows that the Prime Minister was not even invited to the national Security Council meetings. Everything was handled by the Presidential Secretariat. It was virtually one man show going on. We see the same now as investigations are on for eight months, but nothing new has been found out.

Q: What do you have to say about the disastrous MCC agreements with the US? Some opposition parties have already accused the government of duplicity?

A: They promised to dump the MCC agreement if they were elected. Have they thrown the MCC agreement? What a fuss they made prior to the presidential election. They said that the country would be under the dictates of America; the country would be divided and we would have to get visas to enter parts of our own country beyond Anuradhapura. We call upon the government to state its standpoint. If they reject the MCC agreement then they could tear it off and, if not, they have to admit that we did the right going ahead with it. It first started under the Mahinda Rajapaksa government; we went forward ahead because it was a grant in appreciation of good governance. What’s wrong with that?

Q: The SLPP is seeking a two-thirds majority to do away with the 19th Amendment to the Constitution. How do you propose to counter this campaign?

A: The 19th amendment was brought to do away with the 18th Amendment to the Constitution. The 18th amendment allowed the President to act according to his whims and fancies. So, the 19th Amendment had to be brought in. It was the will of the people.

At the time the 19th Amendment was introduced there were two opinions — either to do away with the presidential system or reduce its executive powers. I believed that we should do away with the executive presidency and give more powers to parliament. The 19th Amendment was introduced to pave the way for scrapping the executive presidency. People since 1988, have voted for its abolition but none of the governments care to respect their will.

Q: Treasury bond controversy had a huge impact on the UNP. Allegations have been levelled against you as well. What kind of impact this issue will have on the upcoming election?

A: This is a miscarriage of justice. I happened to be the Finance Minister, but the Central Bank was under the Prime Minister and other commercial banks were under Kabir Hashim. It was not the Prime Minister but his deputy Minister Harsha de Silva who did all the work at the Central bank. Both of them have been kept out of this issue while people who are not relevant were dragged into it.

There were five committees on the matter. First there was the Pitipana committee. There is nothing against me. Then there was DEW Gunsekera Committee. He was in the opposition then. His report does not say I was involved. Then there was Sunil Hadunnetti-led COPE investigation. They found nothing against me or the party. Then there was a presidential commission. There is nothing mentioned in their report about me with the issue at hand. They also found that Central Bank officials are responsible for this. Have any of them been questioned? Then there is another report of which 108 pages are missing. Why are they missing? Why hasn’t it been published? These were the things in the hands of the then President. It was a political witch-hunt. It was aimed at character assassination. Then there was a forensic audit report. It shows very clearly what happened during the period of 2005 to 2015. Why is that report not brought out and why action has not been taken on its findings? They have clearly stated that losses have occurred since 2005 onwards and that Central Bank had not got relevant approval for the implementation of private placements. When this question arose, I, as the finance minister, asked the Auditor General to compare what had been happening since 2005 to 2015. All are silent. They are trying to kill the messenger and distract public attention. That is an absolute national crime. At the moment those investigations have got nowhere, found nothing at all, and why are 108 pages missing? Why is that, not a single Central Bank official has been even basically mentioned? Because these are the guys- the central bank officials, not all of them but seven or eight people. They live luxurious lives. They are earning 2.5 or 3 million salary and dictate terms to people who get by on 25,000 to 30,000 a month. It is said that the monetary policy is being pursued by the Central Bank. The government’s or the financial minister’s role is to handle the fiscal policy. But the central bank was always at loggerheads with the government. We believe that the innocent people should have low interest rates on their borrowings, so that you could bring about an economic upturn, but the Central Bank officials pursue a high interest rate where they basically think that would ward off inflation. This is the problem that exists. And this menace must come to an end. These are the people who created it. Once again, I say I was not in charge of the Central Bank; I was not in charge of the commercial banks. Then why am I being accused of something I did not do? This is simple case of character assassination. That has to be corrected. When I was the Finance Minister, what I did was like running a tavern without arrack.

I was the Finance Minister but I did not have the banks under me. Even then we were able to bring economic stability. We were able to bring in financial discipline. We established the focus on right financial directions. That was during the three years I was in charge of the finance ministry. Some of them who are engaged in character assassination have left the party. They were responsible for the footnotes of the Sunil Handunnetti COPE report. Why do they hold me accountable for this? It was they who involved in it. People within the country did not recognize us, but outside world recognized us and that was how the Bankers’ Institution in the UK, which is highly respected one, voted me the best finance minister Asia Pacific for 2017.

Q: What plans does the UNP have for the future of the younger generation of the country?

A: Not that you cannot develop this country. It’s a matter of whether you want to develop this country or not. The talent is there, the opportunity is there and we do not apply ourselves in order to get to that. My best comparison is Sri Lanka in the time we got Independence 72 years ago, we had a per capita income of $ 49 and Japan had $ 48. Japan got battered in the Second World War and without any natural resources, they are basically today enjoying a per capita of 55,000 dollars while in Sri Lanka its 4,000 dollars.

Q: The UNP is doomed in the opinion of its critics. How do you counter this view?

A: Before talking of the party’s future, I should say we should talk of the present. We should handle it very dexterously. The UNP is very hierarchy-oriented, very seniority-oriented and competency-oriented party. In election times you hear various things from people who cannot even stand on their own feet. In the UNP, we have a leader in the party and our emphasis is on discipline. As for the party hierarchy Mr. Ranil Wickremesinghe is the senior most and next to him is John Amaratunga and I come next to him in order of seniority. I guess competency, discipline, loyalty, comradeship all would be put together and at the right time we will come as the right team.

 



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Opinion

Emerging narrative of division: Intellectual critique of NPP following presidential appointment

Published

on

President Dissanayake

In the wake of Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s appointment as President, an unsettling narrative has emerged from a small but vocal group of intellectuals within the Sri Lankan society. This faction seems intent on portraying the National People’s Power (NPP) as a social entity burdened with history of violence, a portrayal that is not only misleading but also dangerous in its potential repercussions for national unity.

The intellectual critique in question often draws upon past events from Sri Lanka’s turbulent history—specifically the insurrections of 1971 and 1988. These events, which were marked by political unrest and significant bloodshed, are being referred to create a negative image of the NPP, depicting it as an organisation with a legacy of violence.

While these incidents undoubtedly left deep scars on the national psyche, the selective emphasis on these periods, while glossing over other equally important historical contexts, is concerning. Most notably, the narrative ignores the three-decade-long terrorism perpetuated by the LTTE, which claimed thousands of lives and posed an existential threat to the country’s sovereignty. This omission, whether deliberate or inadvertent, raises questions about the motives behind such critiques.

Interestingly, this narrative is not confined to private intellectual circles. It has found its way into the mainstream media, including television programmes where a small section of the elite has voiced these concerns. Their views, though presented under the guise of objective analysis, appear to be rooted in specific historical grievances rather than a balanced understanding of the NPP’s present-day policies and leadership.

The portrayal of the NPP as a violent faction is not only misleading but also problematic for the broader national discourse. By continuously referring to past insurrections without addressing the socio-political context in which the NPP operates today, these intellectuals risk fostering division, rather than promoting constructive dialogue about the country’s future.

What is particularly troubling is the potential impact of these narratives on the minds of the innocent populations in the North and East of Sri Lanka. These regions, already burdened by decades of conflict, are especially vulnerable to manipulations of historical narratives. The attempt to seed fear and distrust through selective memories of the past could widen ethnic and political divides, reversing the hard-won progress made in reconciliation and peacebuilding efforts.

The implications of these actions are profound. If left unchecked, this manipulation of historical facts could fuel distrust, especially in communities that are still healing from the traumas of war. Such divisive rhetoric, which paints certain political movements in broad, negative strokes, undermines efforts to foster national unity, which is critical at this juncture in Sri Lanka’s development.

It is imperative that both the government and the informed public remain vigilant in the face of these developments. While free speech and intellectual discourse are essential in any democracy, the dissemination of false or misleading information must be addressed with caution. The current administration, along with media outlets and thought leaders, must prioritise the accurate representation of political parties and movements, ensuring that all voices are heard in an atmosphere of respect and truth.

Furthermore, the intellectual elite must recognise their responsibility in shaping public opinion. Rather than perpetuating narratives rooted in selective memory and old political rivalries, they should engage in constructive dialogue about how Sri Lanka can move forward—socially, politically, and economically. Only by acknowledging the complexities of the past and focusing on the present can the country achieve the progress and development it desperately needs.

In conclusion, the emerging portrayal of the NPP as a faction tainted by historical violence is a dangerous oversimplification of a more complex reality. It is crucial that all stakeholders, from the government to the intellectual elite, approach political discourse with a sense of responsibility and an eye toward the future. Only then can Sri Lanka continue its path toward reconciliation, unity, and sustainable development.

K R Pushparanjan

Canada

Continue Reading

Opinion

Towards a more profitable and sustainable agriculture

Published

on

One of the key happenings in human history, is the so-called “Industrial Revolution,” that originated about two centuries ago, (principally in Europe, North America and Japan), as the focal points. These are now broadly defined as “Developed Countries.” They distinguish themselves as having higher per capita incomes, and thereby offering their citizens better living conditions than do the “Developing” or “Less developed” ones.

It is tempting yet erroneous, to believe that what prevailed two centuries ago, can be transposed today to other countries including Sri Lanka, presently classified among the “Developing Countries.”

Typically, the industrial era manifested as a movement away from farming and towards machinery driven enterprises. The unspoken corollary is that what worked for them then, should do for us now.

This is a presumption that is unlikely to happen. Although a small tropical country within the Monsoon belt, we are fortunate in being spared weather-related atmospheric perturbations such as hurricanes, cyclones and tsunamis, that assail other similar countries and locations.

Overall, we are fortunately blessed with largely favourable climatic conditions and reasonably fertile soils, to ably support a sustainable, diversified and a seemingly unique mosaic of farming, livestock and forestry. This is worthy of protection.

By virtue of our geography, climate, tradition and aptitude, we are well positioned to be a dominant base for a vibrant Agrarian Economy.

A composite of the sectors deriving from plants and animals, best suits our natural strengths. This leads us logically to seek economic advancement through this sector, with a blend of farming, livestock and forestry, to best support environmental stability as our long-term goal.

Two factors that are poised to impact on Worldwide agriculture, are “global warming” and a looming water crisis. These will affect different regions with differing severity. This has aroused much international concern. Sri Lanka would do well to prepare itself for this eventuality.

In the particular context of Sri Lanka, the priority considerations in the agricultural sector, calling for close and timely attention are as follows:

(i) Correcting weaknesses in the Extension Services which are primarily blamed for under- performance. All officers concerned, would benefit from periodic exposure to training that is designed for upgrading knowledge and sharpening requisite skills.

(ii) The Sri Lankan Agricultural Sector divides into two components, –namely, the Export and Local Crop sectors. Animal farming is set apart, and historically has received less attention. However, the recently expanding poultry industry, has resulted in greater attention to livestock expansion.

(iii) In Ceylon’s colonial history, it was the British, who exercised their sovereignty over the whole island, succeeding the Portuguese and Dutch, who were confined to the coastal regions. Cinnamon was the first crop that attracted the colonizers, this was followed sequentially by Cinchona (Pyrethrum, on a small scale) and Coffee. In the 1840’s, the invasion by the Coffee Rust (Hemileia vastatrix) laid waste the Coffee plantations. Tea took over and rapidly expanded, mainly by encroaching into Highland Forest areas. Little attention was given to environmental and social consequences. Meantime, Rubber plantations dominated in the wetter Lowlands. A while later, attention was directed towards coconut.

Research Institutes – TRI, RRI and CRI were established to cater to the needs of the fast-developing Plantation Crops.

The introduction of Plantation Crops had far-reaching and lasting Economic, Political, Social, Environmental and Cultural consequences. The recently established Minor Export Crops, mainly serviced the Spice Crops Cinnamon, pepper, Nutmeg and Cardamom. Also, Cocoa and Coffee. Sugar, Cashew and Palmyra are crops that are developing their own support structures.

All others are catered for by the Department of Agriculture, whose main efforts are focused on the Paddy sector. This is a sector that had received scant attention from the colonial British, who had an understandable preference for importation of rice from colonial Burma and Thailand.

(v) This cleavage (into export and local sectors), while having several operational advantages, also created problems. These include social and citizenship complexities, arising from the large importation of labour from South India, to develop the rapidly increasing new plantation areas. The early tea estates were in the Central Hills, and also resulted in widespread expropriation of private and peasant- owned lands. This is still a silent concern.

(v) Since it is impossible to balance the requirements and production of agricultural produce, scarcities and gluts are not uncommon. Scarcities are met by imports, while surpluses largely result in wastage. This can be as high as 35% in the case of perishable vegetables and fruits. To deal with such surpluses, obvious remedies include providing better storage facilities with protection from insects, fungi, rodents and other marauders. Such storage could suit Paddy, maize, pulses, peanuts and some fruits.

In the case of vegetables, much fruit and other perishable produce,

post-harvest handling and transport are key needs.

Where appropriate, preservation by simply drying (by Sun, ovens or other equipment), freezing, canning, bottling and packaging are means of coping with surpluses and in most cases, also as a means of value addition.

These are the considerations paramount in developing a profitable and sustainable Agriculture – which will continue to play a key role in the National Economy.

Dr. Upatissa Pethiyagoda

Continue Reading

Opinion

The passing away of a great cellist

Published

on

Rohan de Seram

by Satyajith Andradi

The Oxford Dictionary of Music compiled by Michael Kennedy is an invaluable source of reference material on the whole gamut of western classical music. Its 1994 second edition has the following entry on Rohan De Saram, in its usual telegraphic language : “De Saram, Rohan ( b Sheffield, 1939 ). Sri Lankan cellist. Studied in Florence with Cassado and later with Casals in Puerto Rico. After European recitals made Amer. Debut in NY, 1960. Settled in Eng. 1972, joining teaching staff of TCL. Wide repertory from Haydn to Xenakis, specializing in contemp. works. Cellist of *Arditti String Quartet.” Rohan De Saram is certainly one of the greatest musicians Sri Lanka has ever produced. He passed away in the UK on 29th September 2024 at the age of 85.

I had the good fortune to see this great musician perform in two occasions. The first was way back in 1975, when my parents took me to see his cello recital, which was given at the newly opened BMICH on 16th August that year. The second was when I took my daughter to his concert at the British Council auditorium on 27th February 2007. There was a marked difference in the type of music he performed at the two recitals. The 1975 programme was dominated by the music of Rachmaninov, Schubert, and Shostakovich, with the first movement of Zoltan Kodaly’s Sonata for Solo Cello added as a sort of outlier. It belonged to the traditional western music repertoire, if you like. In contrast, the 2007 concert was dominated by more contemporary music, although it included pieces by Bach, Beethoven, Rimsky Korsakov, Gabriel Faure, Saint Sean, and Benjamin Britten. The highlights of the evening were Luciano Berio’s Sequenza 14 for solo cello, a through and through avant garde work, and the last two movements of Kodaly’s Sonata for Solo Cello. Needless to say, the two programmes reflected the tremendous change in Rohan De Saram’s artistic orientation from being a performer of classics to that of avant garde music by composers such as Iannis Xenakis and Luciano Berio.

Rohan De Saram was born in the UK on 9th March 1939. He belonged to a well-to-do cultured family. Due to the outbreak of the Second World War, he had to spend much of his early childhood in Sri Lanka. As he showed a special gift for cello playing, he was taken to Europe for his musical education. Initially he studied cello under the renowned Spanish cellist and composer Gaspar Cassado in Florence, Italy. His first appearance as a soloist at the Royal Festival Hall in London was at the age of sixteen. This was followed by performances as soloist at London’s Wigmore Hall and Royal Albert Hall. Winning the Guilhermina Suggia award, enabled him to take master classes from the great Spanish cellist and composer Pablo Casals, who wrote of him: “There are few of his generation who have such gifts” and ” Rohan is already a remarkable cellist of fine technique and musical taste. I can predict for him a brilliant career.”

Casals’ prophesies were to come true. Rohan De Saram had his Carnegie Hall debut at the age of 20. He went on to perform as a soloist with many of the world’s leading orchestras such as the London Symphony Orchestra, the London Philharmonic Orchestra, the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra, and the New York Philharmonic Orchestra under the leadership of renowned conductors such as Adrian Boult, Malcolm Sargent, John Barbirolli, Colin Davis, and Zubin Mehta. During this early period of his career, he was essentially a virtuoso performer of the classics. However, joining the Arditti Quartet in he late 70s as its cellist signaled a turning point in his musical orientations. This quartet specialized in contemporary avant garde music. Henceforth, the main focus of Rohan De saram was on the works of avant garde composers such as Iannis Xenakis and Luciano Berio. He was a member of the Arditti Quartet from 1979 to 2005. As a virtuoso cellist of international renown, he introduced contemporary music to numerous musical audiences throughout the world. His passing away leaves a void in the musical firmament.

Continue Reading

Trending