Prime Minister Modi is visiting Sri Lanka this weekend, from Friday, April 4th to Sunday, April 6th. This is Modi’s third official visit as Prime Minister, and the first since Anura Kumara Dissanayake became President and led the NPP to form a new government with a massive electoral victory. The official welcoming ceremony will be at the Independence Square on Saturday April 5th, 54 years to the day after the April 1971 insurrection launched by the JVP, the political progenitor of the present Sri Lankan government. Whether the historical irony of the occasion, if not the underlying coincidence, will be mentioned or memorialized at the official ceremony is unknown at the time of writing to meet the printer’s Friday evening deadline.

Anura Kumara Dissanayake was five years old in 1971 and, if my memory serves me well, Vasudeva Nanyakkara and Mahinda Rajapaksa might be the only living politicians from the 1971 parliament. They were both elected to parliament as young first time MPs in 1970. And quite by coincidence, there will be another wholly nostalgic gathering tomorrow in Colombo to remember Kumar David as comrade, professor and friend. In the 1970s, Vasudeva Nanayakkara, Wickramabahu Karunaratne and Kumar David were young LSSP Turks who were critical of both the JVP and the United Front Government of the SLFP, the LSSP and the Communist Party.

Vasudeva Nanayakkara has the singular distinction of being perhaps the only parliamentarian to be detained by the government both in 1971, in the wake of the first JVP insurrection, and after 1983 that ultimately precipitated the JVP’s second coming. In the now long historical perspective, the JVP campaigned for the United Front parties in the 1970 election and then took guns against them in 1971. The government’s ruthless put-down of the JVP in 1971 created a new template for state repression in Sri Lanka. And to round off the political circle, the 1971 repression helped the UNP to return to power in 1977, free the JVP leaders from jail, and then have its own violent tryst with the JVP in 1988/89. So, history repeated itself, but, pace Marx, both times as fake and both times as tragedy.

The LTTE added a third dimension to this otherwise two dimensional encounters, and by the time it was finished off in 2009, the JVP was emerging as parliamentary political force that at one time another formed governing alliances with the two SLFPs (first in its Horagolla version under Chandrika Kumaratunga and later in its Hambantota version under Mahinda Rajapaksa), as well as the UNP during its atrophying phase under Ranil Wickremesinghe. The Old Left itself, rather what was left of it, divided along the same three ways, and a cluster of them warmed up to JVP’s possibilities under Anura Kumara Dissanayake and his NPP umbrella. Kumar David himself became a prominent testifier for the new JVP/NPP possibilities using his weekly columns in the Sunday Island and the Colombo Telegraph to good effect. Indeed, in the last article he wrote before his passing, Kumar David congratulated Anura Kumara Dissanayake for his magnificent political achievement and expressed cautious optimism for the prospects under an NPP government.

Nostalgia aside, the serious political point here is that it would be a fool’s errand to trace the present JVP/NPP’s political lineage to the embryos of the 1971 or 1988/89 JVP. There is no unmutated political lineage in Sri Lanka. The political circumstances are also wholly different. The political reality over the last several decades has seen multiple scrambling of many eggs, including rotten eggs, to produce different governing omelettes at different times. The one that is obtaining now is a better product than most and one that is without the rotten eggs of the past. So, while there is historical irony in the NPP government’s April 5th official welcome to Prime Minister Modi, it would be incorrect and unproductive to read too much into it.

Trump’s Mad Old World

Far more than domestic realities, there is literally a world of difference in world politics between now and the 1970s. Donald Trump has seen to it this week with his globally sweeping reciprocal tariffs. He has put the planet’s trading system on edge, calling it America’s liberation day. He is not liberating anything, only reverting to the old ways of protectionism an in an insane manner. His forays are a belated assertion of outdated economic idiosyncrasies that he has been harbouring for all his pre-political life when no one took note of him politically speaking.

In the 1970s, Trump was a brash, young, New York upstart. And Modi in India was an RSS activist and made his first larger political mark in organizing protests against Indira Gandhi’s Emergency Rule. He was understudy to the flamboyant George Fernandes, later India’s foreign minister, and a socialist comrade of LSSP exiles in India who contributed their own mite to Mahatma Gandh’s mighty Quit India movement. Now Trump and Modi are at the pinnacles of national power in their respective countries. So is Anura Kumara Dissanayake, much younger and also far more composed and self-controlled.

Trump is unleashing disruption throughout the world, unilaterally upending the postwar world order that was set up under American leadership to oversee global trade and financial transactions. On balance, it has more than served its purpose of stabilizing world capitalism while releasing the human potential and resource endowments of many non-western countries, especially Asian countries, to emerge as robust economies and adding a long needed balance to the lopsided world economy hitherto dominated by the old industrial countries of the west. But these changes by themselves have not weakened the western economies and the European Union and most Americans other than Trump have to come to terms with them in a positive way.

Trump is abhorrent of these changes but not owing to any rational political reasons or objective economic considerations. Those who try to make sense of Trump’s erratic two months in office are beginning to see his obsessive egotistical compulsion to go down in history as America’s greatest president by simultaneously pursuing three unprecedented objectives: physically expand America’s boundaries – to wit his rantings over Panama, Greenland and Canada; make America great again by reverting to the 19th century mechanism of tariffs and dismantling the late 20th century framework of free trade; and by constantly musing about running for a third term in calculated disregard of the clear constitutional provision since 1947 limiting presidents only to two terms in office.

Underlying these pursuits are Trump’s crass racism, his lack of empathy for those who are structurally kept behind in the economy, and his envy towards those and against whom he measures himself and feels culturally inferior. The highs and lows of Trump’s universal tariff structure are reflective more of his biases than of any economic strategy. It is not by accident that Europe and Asia are set apart for special punishment, especially the ASEAN countries, and of course China. Putin’s Russia is not on the list.

At 44%, Sri Lanka is among the 15 worst hit countries in the world, and all of them are countries with small to medium size populations and at varying levels of economic development. At less than USD 3 billion, Sri Lanka’s share of US imports is less than 0.5%, but the US accounts for 23% of Sri Lanka’s exports – the single largest country share. The increased revenue to the US treasury from the increased tariffs on Sri Lankan goods would be less than a drop, while the consequences for Sri Lankan exports, especially the apparel sector, could be potentially disastrous. But there may not be a loss of market for apparel products in the US depending on their current price levels and consumer preferences.

The reciprocal tariff levels are generally 50% of what US has calculated to be the general tariff level against US imports by different countries. But this method of calculation has been criticized because it is based on trade deficit and is not a weighted average of tariffs on individual goods. There is madness even in the method of the Trump Administration. So, for Sri Lanka, the US reciprocal tariff of 44%, and it could be interpreted by a Trump official as generous 50% of the 88% tariff that Sri Lanka is unfairly applying to each imported good from the US. Never mind US imports to Sri Lanka amount to about USD 500 million. At the bottom end of the food chain, Sri Lanka apparently exploits America by a huge trade deficit! The same argument is writ across every country from Canada to China.

By these tokens, India has one of the lower reciprocal tariff levels at 27% in Asia and South Asia, while Bangladesh is slapped with 37% reciprocal tariff and Pakistan with 30%. More importantly, among the larger economies, India is taking a reportedly measured response to Trump’s tariffs as part of its preferred alignment with the Trump Administration. India appears to be keen on avoiding a confrontation with the US, while looking to expand its export mix to the US by taking advantage of the high tariffs imposed on other countries. For example, India is apparently looking to expand its export of electronic goods to US by taking advantage of the high 46% reciprocal tariffs applied to Vietnam which has a well established export sector in electronic goods.

To get back to where I started, Trump’s tariff turbulence bears a more crucial backdrop to Prime Minister Modi’s visit this weekend than the April 5th anniversary that falls on Saturday. Even the set agenda for talks between the Indian Prime Minister and Sri Lanka’s President could be overshadowed by Trump’s announcement of reciprocal tariffs. Not a single country is bent on retaliating to Trump’s tariffs for the sake of retaliation. Every country other than the US is keen to get rid of the tariffs, Trump willing.

The US accounts for 13% of global trade, and if the countries that account for 87% of world trade can deal only with the US without descending into tariff slaps between them, the US will be isolated, and Trump will have to face the wrath of the American consumers hit by rising import prices sooner than now expected. That would be the ultimate way out for the rest of the world from current American madness.

by Rajan Philips

Warm compliments received and some personal anecdotes

Mr. Maithripala Senanayake

These thoughts would not be complete without a reference to Mr. Maithripala Senanayake. He was the Minister of Irrigation, Power and Highways and the Minister next in seniority to the Prime Minister. As such, he was appointed to act for the Prime Minister when she traveled out of the country. It was in this context that I came to know him well. Mr. Senanayake was affable and dignified. He spoke softly and acted calmly. He was unhurried, unruffled and clear in his thinking. He was intelligent, greatly experienced and well balanced.

These qualities no doubt endeared him to the people of his electorate, Medawachchiya, in the North Central Province, because he never lost that seat in over 50 years of parliamentary life, a record. When I had to work with him, when he was acting Prime Minister, I found him extremely responsible and cautious. He would not decide anything, without careful scrutiny and asking me how the Prime Minister would have viewed the matter. This however did not lead to delay. Rapidly reassuring himself on all aspects, he would then decide quickly.

Anything major, which could await the Prime Minister’s arrival, he held back. He was deeply conscious of the fact that he was acting, and was very proper in his conduct. We got on well and had a relationship of mutual respect. Sometimes he invited my wife and me home to dinner, which was always of the highest quality and personally supervised by his wife and Private Secretary Mrs. Ranji Senanayake.

She was a delightful and entertaining hostess with a fund of stories, anecdotes and insightful comments. As Private Secretary, she was very proper and never intervened in any matter relating to us, unless it was relevant and necessary. I enjoyed working with Mr. Senanayake as much as I enjoyed working with the Prime Minister and I could see that he appreciated my guidance, on some of the difficult issues that came up.

But I did not know or realize how deeply he had appreciated my work, until very much later, in fact, until virtually a few months prior to his death. He was then Governor of the North Central Province, and I was Secretary to the Ministry of Education and Higher Education. I had lost touch with him for a considerable period. One day, his wife rang me on some matter of a school in which he was interested which I promptly attended to. This was in October 1997 just two and a half months before my retirement. I then received a letter dated October 5, 1997 from Mr. Senanayake which moved me considerably due to its sincerity and depth of feeling. It made me feel that I had not toiled in vain. The personal reference to me in the letter was as follows:

“Dharmasiri, you are the last of a very special breed of public servants and I am afraid you belong to another era, another time, the calibre of public servants that you do not get now. Loyalty, integrity, trustworthy and valuable asset to any government. Always with the correct advice, and to the benefit of the government. Certainly, this Acting Prime Minister could not go wrong with you and I am well aware how fortunate Hon. Mrs. Bandaranaike was to have you as her Secretary when she was Prime Minister in the seventies. “

Parliament was dissolved and the election campaign begun. It was June 1977. Elections were to be held on July 21. Such a period between the dissolution of Parliament and the holding of a general election, whilst a hectic period politically, is a quieter period administratively. Ministers and other political elements are out in the field. The public service runs the administration, subject to occasional interludes with Ministers. Public institutions take on a somewhat deserted air.

I was in office, one day during this period, when Sunethra, the Prime Minister’s elder daughter and Coordinating Secretary literally burst into my room. Since the campaign started she and her sister Chandrika, the present President were spearheading the election activities in Attanagalla, the Prime Minister’s constituency, reputed to be one of the safest electorates in the country. Sunethra, I was aware, was out in the field, and she had told me so. Occasionally, when she came into office, she used to open the door of my room, from the threshold say she was off to Attanagalla and disappear.

This time she came right in, and was about to say something and leave, when I asked her how the election was going. ” Very badly” she said. “Where?” I asked. “In the whole country,” she replied. This was with about three weeks to go to polling. “At least Attanagalla is o.k.”, I said. “No,” she said.

“as things stand today she will lose Attanagalla.” This was indeed staggering news, and I saw that she was not joking. Soon, she hurried away leaving me somewhat stunned.

What had happened was that, because she was extremely busy, the Prime Minister had neglected her electorate. Her visits to meet the people there had been few and infrequent. She had entrusted electoral work to certain lower level party workers, who were ineffective, and among whom some were corrupt. Party supporters were isolated and had no regular senior and respected person to appeal to or articulate their grievances. They were now seething and in a rebellious mood. Added to this was a swing in public mood against the government.

When Sunethra, came again for a brief chat, almost a week before the election, I asked her how things were going. “She will now win,” she said, “but with a greatly reduced majority.” I asked her what the majority was likely to be. “A little over 10,000”, she said. If this was so it was going to be a drastic reduction from the usual majority of between 24,000 – 26,000 votes. Sunethra added further, that the electorate was badly neglected and that when they went from house to house some party supporters asked them, “Are you coming only now?”

She said that in many places, it was a humiliating experience for them. But she was prophetic. At the general elections, which proved a disaster for the SLFP, Mrs. Bandaranaike as predicted by Sunethra retained her seat by a majority of a little over 10,000 votes, when all around her was lost.

Prophecy, however did not end here. The ultimate prophet turned out to be the Army Commander General Sepala Attygalle’s barber. About three or four days before the elections, Sepala dropped in at the office. WT, I and a couple of others were talking to him. Sepala said that he had a most amusing tale to relate. He had been to his barber’s the previous day. Like most barbers, this one too was virtually a non-stop conversationalist. Sepala had asked him as to who was going to win the elections.

The barber had promptly replied “Sir, UNP 140. SLFP 10. Thondaman Leader of the Opposition!”. Sepala was highly amused by what he thought to be this intemperate, wishful thinking dreamer his barber was. His whole body was shaking with laughter as he related the story. He was later to say that the barber should have been in a University teaching political analysis.

Sunethra Bandaranaike

Before I conclude my references to personalities, it would be relevant to refer to Sunethra. I have already related an instance of the remarkable quality of her political analysis. This was but a typical example of her capacity for lucid thinking. She had a good and trained mind, and she used it with a degree of discipline free of political emotion which was remarkable in so political a personality. She had her views and convictions. But she like her mother was prepared to listen and if necessary change. In her, strong convictions did not hinder the free play of intelligence and she was prepared to depart from dogma if there were sufficiently cogent reasons.

She had the rare ability of amalgamating strong convictions with an open mind and holding both in balance. These intellectual qualities were supplemented by a deep humanism and kindness towards others. I remember how distraught she was when the Additional Secretary, Ministry of Planning Dr. Ananda Meegama’s young son died in a bicycle accident. She nearly exhausted herself by running to the hospital, taking the initiative in getting the body out as soon as possible, consoling the family and attending to so many matters as if this was a bereavement in her own family.

There was also the time, when she being aware that my father was quite ill, came to my room early evening on a Friday, and asked me whether I had enough money at home in case of an emergency. She reminded me that it won’t be possible to cash a cheque over the weekend. She wanted to give me some money in case I needed it. She knew I was extremely busy with my work and wanted to make sure that I had not overlooked a possibly serious contingency.

This was her nature, and it was a pleasure to work with her. It was perhaps the country’s misfortune that she had opted to retain her personal freedom over the shackles and the nastiness of competitive representational politics.

Breakfast with President Gopallawa

Virtually on the eve of the elections, the President’s office spoke to me and stated that the President, Mr. William Gopallawa wanted me to join him at breakfast, on the day after the poll. He was also inviting WT Jayasinghe, the Service Chiefs and the IGP. The President’s aim was to have us as an advisory group in his management of the post-election situation until a new government was installed.

We were at President’s House by 7.30 a.m. The President had ordered a sumptuous breakfast. By now, the results announced upto that time indicated a complete rout of the government. Most of the Ministers had lost their seats as well. Among them was the powerful Mr. Felix Dias Bandaranaike, who lost his safe seat in Dompe to Sarathchandra Rajakaruna, a newcomer to Parliamentary politics. It was evident that the United National Party was going to obtain a majority of well over two-thirds of the seats. In the end they ended up with over five-sixths of the seats, an astounding record.

In these clear circumstances, there was not much advice that we could proffer, nor was there much advice needed. There was one matter however, the President discussed with us. The Commissioner of Elections could not declare the complete result of the election until the results of the three member; Multi-Member seat of Nuwara-Eliya/Maskeliya came in. There was a delay in counting there due to the great length of the ballot paper. By the early afternoon of July 22nd all the results were in except for this electorate.

There was information coming in that people were getting restless due to this delay and that some incidents had begun to occur. Under these circumstances, after discussion with us, the President telephoned Mr. JR Jayewardene, the leader of the UNP and Prime Minister elect and suggested that he makes an appeal over the radio for calm, until the final result was declared. Mr. Jayewardene accepted this advice and his broadcast helped to calm things down. There was nothing more for us to do at President’s House, but WT and I decided to go to Horagolla, Mrs. Bandranaike’s country seat, about an hour’s drive from Colombo.

But before we left, I had an important telephone call to make. This was to Mr. Menikdiwela, Secretary, to the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. JR Jayewardene’s Secretary. I knew that he would now require the famous “Subjects and Functions” files, and it was my duty to discuss this with him. I got him over the telephone at Ward Place, the residence of Mr. Jayewardene. After the congratulations and good wishes, I told him that WT and I were going to Horagolla, and asked him whether I could leave the files with Mr. HK Fernando, the Senior Clerk handling the subject and who by now was an expert on the whole subject area.

Mr. Menikdiwela agreed, and we were off to Horagolla. When we reached there, as expected, gloom prevailed. Mrs. Bandaranaike was in tears when she greeted us. But we soon cheered her up. We knew that she was very resilient. What she needed now was to get out of the state of denial, in which she was and face reality squarely. WT and I thought, that optimism and frankness were both necessary.

Among other things, I told her “Madam, I am going to use a cricketing metaphor. This match, you have lost comprehensively by an innings. What is necessary now is to learn the lessons of this match and prepare for the next match.” She laughed and agreed. Both of us; as we took our leave, felt sad to see her in the condition she was in, and on the journey back to Colombo, there was little conversation between us.

Points of View

By this time, I had worked with Mrs. Bandaranaike for over seven years as her Secretary and about four and a half years as her Assistant Secretary, during which period I also acted for the Secretary on a few occasions. I have already commented on some of the major issues that she had faced and my assessment of her outlook, character and abilities. But what did she think of my work? I had reason to believe that she was pleased. This was demonstrated both through her general attitude towards me as well as the occasional gesture.

One such gesture was a recognition by her of the virtually exhausting hours of work I put in just prior to, during and for sometime after, the Non-Aligned Summit. One day, when she came to office she presented me with a gold Rolex watch. This had been one of the personal gifts she had received during the conference. But I really came to know the depth of her appreciation much later. I was in the habit of writing a short letter wishing her well on her birthday. Particularly, in the context of a new government, I did not consider it proper to personally visit her.

She herself, as I have already pointed out was very proper in her own actions and fully understood I could not come. In reply to a letter from me wishing her on her birthday in 1989, she wrote me a rather long letter, dated 2nd May 2, 1989. In it, she stated as follows:

“I realize the responsibility cast on you having to handle a large Ministry. (This was the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Co-operatives). I do not envy you. In fact, I really sympathize with you because you area person who is so conscientious of your duties. I have watched you when you were my Secretary. I can imagine the workload you have to shoulder I wish you the best and the strength to shoulder the responsibilities cast on you.”

Again, on 4/5/1992, in reply to a letter of birthday greetings to her, where I also wrote stating that I was nearing 55 years of age and that I would have to give some serious thought as to my future, she wrote as follows:

“I didn’t realize that you are nearly 55 years in age. You can afford to work longer, perhaps not at the same pace you have been doing. I hope you are not thinking of retiring just now. The country needs honest and dedicated public servants like you. This is very rare these days. I hope you are not working so hard as you used to. We are old and no longer getting young. “

In addition to these written sentiments, I was also aware of the complimentary manner in which she had referred to me to several people. One such person was Mr. Lalith Athulathmudali, who was my Minister in the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Cooperatives at the time. One day, he came from Parliament and said “There, I met an admirer of yours in Parliament today.” I asked who it was. He said Mrs. Bandaranaike, and went on to add that she had said that he was lucky to have me as his Secretary.

These sentiments, I am aware, she carried to the end of her life.

As late as 1997, when we went to Rosmead Place to invite her to be an attesting witness at our son’s wedding, she was not in the best of health. She appeared frail and had a badly swollen foot wrapped in bandages. Seeing her in this condition, whilst stating the purpose of our visit, I also said that we did not wish to impose on her if she was not well enough. She wouldn’t hear of it. What she said touched us deeply. She said, “I will come. But I’m not sure that I will be able to walk. In that case, I will come in my wheelchair.”

(Excerpted from In Pursuit of Governance, by MDD Pieris)

The General Elections were drawing near. There was concurrently a disturbing trend manifesting itself. A vociferous group were demanding that the elections be postponed for a further period, because the government was unable to complete its “progressive” social and economic programme, due to reasons beyond its control such as the insurgency of 1971. the oil price hike, the food crisis and so on. These arguments were patently absurd. The government had already extended its term of office by two years consequent to the introduction of the new constitution.

Now, a group of people were orchestrating a campaign for a further extension. At various public meetings where the Prime Minister attended, members of this group raised their voices and demanded a further extension of time. It appeared to take the form of a popular agitation exerting pressure on the government. No doubt, various persons holding similar views would have been speaking to the Prime Minister personally about the same issue. The whole thing seemed well orchestrated.

It was in this context that one day, she asked my opinion about the matter. I replied that I had always spoken absolutely frankly to her on any and all matters, and in the same spirit all I could say was that any attempt to extend the life of the government would be a total disaster, both for herself and the country. I went on to speak about her considerable achievements, as the world’s first woman Prime Minister; probably also as the first woman to be leader of the opposition in a parliamentary democracy, Head of the Non-Aligned Movement; honouredby the ILO, by their invitation to her, to deliver the keynote address at one of their inaugural sessions; honoured by the FAO by the award of the CERES medal in recognition of her personal and successful leadership of the food production drive consequent to the difficulties of 1974/75; honoured by the United Nations by their invitation to her to deliver the keynote address, at the first UN Conference on Women and Development and other achievements.

Then I told her that if elections were not held at the proper time, the position in the country could get unmanageable, and she would face the charge of destroying democracy in Sri Lanka. I had to be hard, because it was evident that many people had created for her, some kind of fantasy world, and she was getting confused. As was customary, she listened to what I had to say with grace and thanked me for being candid. Then she said, “l have asked WT also, and he said the same thing.”

That was the Prime Minister. She was always prepared to listen to different views, after which, she made up her mind. The dose of reality administered by WT Jayasinghe and myself, two public servants who had nothing to do with politics, would no doubt have helped her to take the final decision of holding elections.

Dealing with political personalities

Before I get to the election itself, I wish to refer to one or two other matters. One of the more important of these relates to some of the political personalities I had to work with, other than the Prime Minister. These included the Minister of Trade, Mr. TB Illangaratne; Mr. Hector Kobbekaduwa, Minister of Agriculture and Dr. Colvin R. de Silva, Minister of Plantation Industries, among others. My dealings with Mr. Maithripala Senanayake, I will refer to separately.

The fact was, that at some time or other one had to deal with practically all members of the Cabinet, since all of them had some business to transact with the Prime Minister’s Office at various times. Some of the ministers I have mentioned had more to do with us, both because of their seniority and the sensitive and important nature of their portfolios. My policy was equal attention and equal treatment for everyone. The internal politics between them did not concern me; neither did the state of relations between the parties in the coalition.

These were political issues that had to be resolved at other fora. I saw my job as attending fairly and diligently to any request or advice sought. There was a creative element in this, because, knowing the prime minister’s mind on many matters I was at times able to steer ministers and others away from courses of action which could have negative consequences. Therefore, many ministers dropped in to discuss some sensitive matter or sometimes to seek advice how best to handle a given situation with the prime minister.

They knew that they could repose trust in the confidentiality of such conversations. At the same time, when I thought that the prime minister had to be briefed on some developing situation, I always said openly that I would have to do so. In some circumstances, the relevant minister and I. only discussed a suitable approach. I did not view my duty to the prime minister as one entailing the carrying of tales or the retailing of gossip and rumours.

However, whenever relevant, gossip and rumours were checked out, because beneath them could lie some real problems. Occasionally, when something was beyond our competence to check, and if it looked important enough the prime minister was briefed. This approach begot a great deal of trust and confidence, so much so that on one occasion, Dr. Colvin R. de Silva told me that he as well as others in the LSSP were extremely sorry that I would not be available for appointment, when a vacancy occurred in the post of Secretary, in the Ministry of Communications, a ministry then held by Mr. Leslie Goonewardena, a senior LSSP minister. In his booming voice, he paid me the compliment of saying that they were not only looking for a secretary but also “a man.”

Besides dealing with ministers and government personalities, the secretary to the prime minister had also to deal with many opposition personalities. They received the same treatment as anybody else. If a request was valid, one worked to grant it. If in a particular instance, politics were proving to be an irrelevant and extraneous factor, one proceeded to remove it. Sometimes, this necessitated talking to the prime minister, and if she too were inclined to see only the politics, one analyzed the issue and pointed out that politics had no relevance to the issue, and that in her position she had to do the right thing. All this meant extra work and effort, but I considered it as part of a duty that had to be performed.

In this context, I was able at times to resolve genuine problems faced by opposition MP’s and personalities such as Mr. R. Premadasa, Mr. Gamini Dissanayake, Mr. Lalith Athulathmudali and others. My belief was that the prime minister’s office of a country should act fairly and justly on all matters referred to it subject to overall government policy. When the occasion so demanded, my endeavour was to point out that irrelevant or extraneous considerations could not be the foundation of good policy. They could be petty revengeful acts, harassment or abuse of power, but never policy, and it was my firm belief that those at the helm of affairs of a country should always distinguish between these.

All these meant an addition to an already nearly crippling workload. There were even times when one continued to work when one had fever, in order to meet impending deadlines. Indeed, there were a few occasions during the seven years I held this post, that when I eventually reached home in the night my temperature had risen to over 104°F.

(Excerpted from In Pursuit of Governance, autobiography of Dharmasiri Peiris, Secretary to the Prime Minister)