State Minister of Vehicle Regulation, Bus Transport Services and Train Compartments and Motor Car Industry Dilum Amunugama said if we want to develop the East Container Terminal (ECT) of the Colombo Port, obviously we have to go for a public-private partnership. He said all the constituent parties of the Government say that the Government should take a final decision whether to develop the ECT or not. The State Minister in an interview with the Sunday Observer said the ECT can be developed if sufficient funds are available locally. The problem is, we don’t have enough funds right now to develop it. Therefore, if we are to develop the ECT, definitely we will have to go for a partnership.
Q: Even the Sri Lanka Podujana Perumana (SLPP) affiliated trade union together with other trade unions in the Colombo Port have resorted to a joint trade union action claiming that the East Container Terminal (ECT) of the Colombo Port is going to be sold. How do you view the ongoing issue regarding the ECT?
A: If the Treasury does not have sufficient funds to develop the ECT, we have no ability to impose more tax burden on the people. If we are to develop the ECT by ourselves then obviously we will have to go for a severe taxation. Government or Treasury funds means the people’s funds. If we want to develop the ECT, we will have to go for a public-private partnership. If not, we can have the ECT as it is and just leave it for development some other day when we have our own funds.
This is the decision which has to be taken. There are enough public-private partnership operations. As it was very clearly said by the relevant Minister, it will be a public-private partnership which will be 49 percent and 51 percent shares of the ECT.
If the trade unions and the whole country say we should not go for this decision that is also possible. The former Yahapalana Government had signed a MoC saying that they would go for a public-private partnership to develop the ECT. Therefore, they signed this MoC with the relevant companies and governments. A MoC doesn’t give much detail and talk about conditions. However, a policy decision had been taken to go for a partnership development and that was taken by the previous Government.
Actually, it is not about the Indian company that we have to decide. A decision has to be made whether we will be following the stance that we have to go for a public-private or Government to Government partnership to develop the ECT. Now it is up to us to decide whether we should go for a partnership or not develop the ECT. If we want to develop the ECT, obviously we have to go for a partnership. If that is not so, then there is no issue and we can just wait.
Q: Some of the prominent Bhikkhus who were at the forefront to bring this Government to power have also come forward to safeguard the ECT. They say if the ECT is given to any foreign country, it seems the Government is going against the mandate given by the people at the Presidential Election. Your views?
A: We see some people attempt to interpret this as a sale of the ECT. The Hambantota Port deal was a pure sale for 99 years at the first stage and it can be extended to another 99 years at the second stage. We could easily say the Hambantota Port can be given for 200 years.
That was a pure sale of the Hambantota Port. This ECT is a partnership which will be 49 and 51 percent shares and it will continue for 35 years. During this 35 years also, Sri Lanka Ports Authority will be the sole owner of the ECT. What the Bhikkhus and some other sections say we should not go for this partnership to develop the ECT and regain it in 35 years, then we can leave it like that and just operate the other terminal.
That is one option. The main issue is they should be able to understand the difference between a sale and a lease for 99 years. When you lease you could say we didn’t sell but the former Government has leased the Hambantota Port for 99 years. There is a huge difference between leasing for 99 years and going to a partnership for 35 years.
The Maha Sangha and the people should be able to understand the difference between these two. Obviously, the Government should also take a decision whether we should go ahead or just leave the ECT as it is and then develop it some other day when we can find the money.
Q: The point raised by the port sector trade unions and the engineers is that the ECT can be developed without any foreign investments. Would you like to comment on this?
A: If there are sufficient funds, obviously we can do that. As we know, when we handed over the Government in 2015, our economic growth was 7.8 percent. When we took over the Government in 2019, the economy had gone down to mere 3.2 percent. That happened during the Yahapalana regime without any Covid-19 pandemic or terrorist war.
After taking the Government, we are facing a Covid-19 outbreak and we don’t have sufficient revenue as the foreign exchange income has turned into zero and the tourism industry has also faced a severe setback. The ECT can be developed if the sufficient funds can be found.
The problem is we don’t have sufficient funds right now to develop it. Therefore, we should take a decision whether we are going to develop the ECT or not. If we are going to develop it, definitely we will have to go for a partnership. If that is not done, we can just keep the ECT as it is and a decision can be taken some other day.
Q: Is there any difference of opinion among the constituent parties of the Government regarding the ECT issue?
A: No. All the parties are of the view that the Government should take a final decision whether to develop the ECT or not. As we know the development of the port or the ECT will affect our economy in the future.
It doesn’t have an immediate effect but the issue is the development won’t be completed in a day or two and that will take some time. Now the Covid-19 vaccine is out.
By that time, we feel that our country and the world will be free from the Covid-19 situation and then there will be a cargo movement and maritime operations so that we can utilize this ECT. We don’t need to consider decisions taken by the previous Government.
As to why we are considering this decision taken by the previous Government is that development of the ECT would help improve the country’s economy in the future. A final decision has not yet been taken and it will be taken in the future.
Q: United Nations (UN) Human Rights Commissioner Michelle Bachelet in her annual report has made several recommendations to the Government on taking action on matters concerning human rights in the country. Your views?
A: Recommendations can be made by organisations but the implementation of them is the sole authority of the Government. We can consider the recommendations. Right now, it is not an issue on human rights but an issue about a pandemic.
The United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) took us to the task for committing alleged war crimes when we finished the most dangerous terrorist outfit in the world. We managed to destroy them and go for a victory and liberate the country from the clutches of terrorism.
The only point raised by the UNHRC was that there were war crimes committed. These organisations that go down to such level and say war crimes were committed during the humanitarian operation carried out by the Army, it is nothing new that they are trying to level baseless allegations about human rights. The recommendations are taken into consideration but the implementation or main decisions will have to be taken by the Government.
Q: When grave human rights violations take place in some other countries why is Sri Lanka targeted by those western countries?
A: I think they should be more concerned about the rights of living- humans than the dead. What they are talking about is not human rights and actually they are talking about corpse rights.
Q: US Ambassador to Sri Lanka Alaina B. Teplitz had told journalists that US President Joe Biden’s administration would definitely continue to engage in Sri Lanka’s human rights issue and there is no difference from the approach of the Trump administration. Will this have any adverse effect on Sri Lanka at the forthcoming UNHRC sessions in Geneva?
A: It is very clear that the UNHRC is working closely with the diaspora and they just want to get our war heroes into trouble. However, no one had guts to say this straight but this is the gospel truth. When there is an organization with this sort of agenda which attempts to trap our war heroes, it is the responsibility of the Government to safeguard war heroes and the veterans who fought for the terrorist war. That is exactly what we are doing and that is what we will do in the future as well.
Q: The UN Human Rights Commissioner in her report has raised concern on the appointment of ex-top military personnel to the high-ranking Government positions. Would you like to respond?
A: How can they do that? They are talking about the human rights of the Muslims, when their own President and the Government itself went and invaded Iraq and destroyed the whole country and killed its leader.
How can a country like that which performed that sort of atrocities talk about the Muslim people’s rights. The US is the country which has the least ability to talk about the Muslim people’s human rights.
Anyone else would have more responsibility to talk about human rights. How can the US talk about human rights? They destroyed Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. They are destroying all the Muslim countries that they can get their hands on. When it comes to Sri Lanka, they have a different stance.
Q: Amidst the Covid-19 pandemic situation, the Government is taking stern decisions to rebuild the economy. However, the Opposition says the Government has failed. Your comments?
A: The Opposition that has failed to the extent that the oldest party in the county was wiped out from Parliament and that is what you call an utter failure. They tried to run the country for a couple of years but they miserably failed and brought down the economy.
Therefore, a party which was an utter failure politically as well as technically resulted in the Opposition Leader, Prime Minister and all their high-ranking Ministers to be swept out of Parliament by the public.
The Government may be a success and sometimes it may be a failure. However, it is too early to say whether the Government may be a success of failure. The Government has just completed only one year and there are four more years to go.
Q: How would you respond to former Health Minister Rajitha Senaratne’s comment that the Government has failed to control the second wave of Covid-19 pandemic?
A: It is not only our Government, the whole world has failed to contain the Covid-19 pandemic. That is the ultimate truth. It is about how much you control it and how much you just let it go. If you take the US, UK or any other country, obviously all the countries with all the technologies have failed. So failing to control the pandemic is nothing new and it is happening everywhere.
The Covid vaccine is out and we have at least managed to treat all the Covid patients in hospitals. Other developed countries couldn’t even accommodate the Covid patients in their hospitals. We are doing the best we can do. Someone can say we couldn’t control it totally.
The pandemic is not a thing that we can fully control till we find a vaccine or cure. If this is coming out of somebody else, it would have been acceptable. When it comes out from former Health Minister Rajitha Senarathne’s mouth, it is just another joke.
Q:Different views are expressed regarding the non-functioning of Provincial Councils. Some say the PC system should be abolished while others say it should be continued. Your views?
A: We should take a decision whether the PCs should be around or not. If not, then the total system should be abolished.
Now we have provincial schools, hospitals and administration. All these are in existence right now. The only part that does not exist is the Provincial Council members who are voted by the public. Now the system is not good because you get the provincial system operating without the mandate of the people. That is not a democratic system at all. Either if a decision is made that you don’t need the PCs, then the whole system should be scrambled. If you are just having the system running, you cannot run without having the public right to vote and get their people in the PCs to do their jobs.
Q:Some have raised concern on the military training mandatory for youth above 18 years saying this would head the country towards militarization.
A: It is just a proposal made. My personal view it will lead the country into discipline. We are a country which seriously lacks discipline in all sectors including religious and public sectors as well.
So, there is a serious lack of discipline in the country. It is too early to comment that it should be mandatory or not. There are certain countries such as China where it is mandatory. However, this may be a good idea which can be considered.