In the wake of the government’s decision to restructure the loss-making national carrier, the nine main unions representing the employees of, SriLankan Airlines, have joined hands once again towards ensuring the survival of the airline and her staff.
“The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) that was renewed hails from a time during the previous government, which was determined to cease operations of the national carrier, representiaves of trade unions sweared.
The senior management team that was appointed paved way for a significant increase in the losses suffered by the airline through penalty payments for cancellations of aircraft orders, and the cessation of operations to many destinations that were key to the tourist industry of the country,” the Alliance of Unions said in a joint statement.
“It was argued that the Middle Eastern Carriers (ME-5) could be depended on to market our tourist industry and absorb the near 50% share of tourist movements that SriLankan was responsible for, when the airline was wound up.
“Towards that end and at an exorbitant cost, the services of several restructuring companies were sought, to either restructure or advise the Government on ways of privatising it or closing it down,” it added.
“The Alliance of Unions wishes to unequivocally emphasise to the public that all the losses pinned on SriLankan Airlines, is as a result of gross mismanagement, corruption and wastage by successive governments and officials appointed by them.
They have all continued to engage in bad decision-making and as the losses compounded, blamed all of it on the average staff of the airline,” it stated.
“Thereafter, COPE meetings are convened where the airline is portrayed to be a national crisis that does not generate any form of revenue for the nation; despite the reality of generating over Rs. 184 billion in revenue during the 2018/2019 financial year of which over 80% is due to foreign currency influx; over $ 1 billion.
“Yet those that have been wholly responsible for successively steering the airline through irresponsible and corrupt decisions are forgiven and forgotten due to their political affiliations and fealties,” it further stated.
“Once again, the loyal and dedicated staff are held to pay for the sins of these plunderers.
The manner in which the report of the Presidential Commission of TInquiry for SriLankan Airlines, SriLankan Catering and Mihin Lanka was conveniently forgotten and brushed away, is ample evidence of the mismanagement of the airline,” the Alliance of Unions statement added.
The objectives of the Alliance revolve around a joint effort to ensure that the airline is protected, transparency is maintained and wastage and corruption are eliminated.
It consists of the Airline Pilots’ Guild of Sri Lanka (ALPGSL), Sri Lanka Nidhahas Sevaka Sangamaya – SriLankan Airlines branch (SLNSS), Flight Attendants Union (FAU), Executive Association SriLankan Airlines (EASLA), SriLankan Airlines Aircraft Technicians Association (SAATA), SriLankan Airlines Aircraft Engineers Guild (SLAAEG), Association of SriLankan Airlines Licensed Aircraft Engineers (ALAE), Jathika Seva Sangamaya (JSS) and Inter Company Employees Union – SriLankan Airlines Branch (ICEU).
At this challenging time for Sri Lanka, economically and socially, with high magnitude risks of precipitating a crisis
that can easily destabilise the whole country, impoverish it and drive to starvation the poor and vulnerable segments and even lead to a national calamity following social unrest, are some Ministers and the Governor, misleading the citizens and even their superiors in governance? If so, do they not realise the impending risks, most recent examples from Lebanon and yet continue to mislead and take the country down a dangerous path, where one slip can mean disaster for the majority of the citizens and those yet unborn?
IMF has been made into a ‘Goni Billa/Grease Yaka’ by these ministers and the governor, and portrayed as an international institution waiting for an opportunity to strike, assist with regime change, go for the kill and swallow the sovereignty, independence and resources of the people in favour of the rich and powerful Western nations! This plan they make out will be achieved by ‘IMF conditionality’, described more or less as a suicide note cum last will in favour of the IMF.
To the contrary, this is how IMF describes ‘Conditionality1’ – “When a country borrows from the IMF, its government agrees to adjust its economic policies to overcome the problems that led it to seek financial aid. These policy adjustments are conditions for IMF loans and serve to ensure that the country will be able to repay the IMF. This system of conditionality is designed to promote national ownership of strong and effective policies.”
“Conditionality covers the design of IMF-supported programs—that is, macroeconomic and structural policies—and the specific tools used to monitor progress toward goals outlined by the country in cooperation with the IMF. Conditionality helps countries solve balance-of-payments problems without resorting to measures that are harmful to national or international prosperity. At the same time, the measures are meant to safeguard IMF resources by ensuring that the country’s balance of payments will be strong enough to permit it to repay the loan.
“The member country has primary responsibility for selecting, designing, and implementing policies to make the IMF-supported program successful. The program is described in a letter of intent, which often has a memorandum of economic and financial policies attached. The program’s objectives and policies depend on a country’s circumstances. But the overarching goal is always to restore or maintain balance-of-payments viability and macroeconomic stability while setting the stage for sustained, high-quality growth and, in low-income countries, reducing poverty.”
In addition, ‘Guidance note on IMF engagement on social safeguards in low-income countries2’ of 14 June 2018 refers to;
“The role of social safeguards in protecting vulnerable groups is an important element of the Fund’s engagement with low-income countries (LICs).
Reducing poverty, and more broadly promoting inclusive growth, helps support economic and political stability. For these reasons, achieving strong and durable poverty reduction was established as a key objective for Fund programs supported by the Poverty Reduction and Growth Trust (PRGT) and Policy Support Instrument (PSI)
Social safeguards represent a key policy tool to achieve this objective, and thus have an important role in both the design of LIC programs and policy discussions with LICs in Fund surveillance.
For the purposes of this note, social safeguards comprise the following:
Commitments to social and other priority spending. Minimum floors on social and other priority spending should be included, wherever possible, in programs supported by PRGT facilities. Social spending is defined as spending on education, health, and social protection— with social protection comprising social safety nets (or social assistance) and social insurance. Other priority spending generally includes high-priority projects that support national poverty reduction and growth strategies.
Specific reforms designed to protect poor and vulnerable groups, for instance by strengthening social safety nets and improving the tracking and monitoring of spending on such groups.
The key concepts described above are amplified as:
Inclusive growth versus pro-poor growth. While there is no universally agreed definition of the concept of inclusive growth, it generally refers to circumstances where growth is robust and broad based across sectors, and the benefits are widely shared. Growth is said to be pro-poor in relative terms if and only if the incomes of poor people grow faster than those of the population as a whole. Pro-poor growth can be the result of direct income redistribution schemes, whereas fostering inclusive growth requires effort to boost productivity and measures to mitigate growth-inequality tradeoffs
Social protection consists of social safety nets and social insurance policies:
Social safety nets (or social assistance) are defined as “noncontributory measures designed to provide regular and predictable support to poor and vulnerable people.” They can include measures such as cash transfers, school meals, in-kind transfers (such as targeted food assistance), public work programs, and fee waivers (The State of Social Safety Nets, World Bank 2018).
Social insurance policies are typically financed by contributions and can include old age and disability pensions, maternity, unemployment, and health insurance.
Other priority spending usually includes certain infrastructure spending that can be a development priority but may provide limited or no benefits to the vulnerable in the short term. Due to the country-specific nature of such spending, this note focuses more on social spending. Country teams, in close consultation with the authorities, need to exercise judgment when deciding on whether to incorporate other priority spending into program design.
Brookings Institute article titled ‘Managing developing countries’ sovereign debt’3 states: “The IMF determined early in 2020 that 29 of its most vulnerable members will be exempted from amortisation and interest on their debts with the organisation, during an initial period of six months that was later extended to 24 months (until April 13, 2022).
In turn, the G-20 offered a suspension of the debt service of the countries of the International Development Association (IDA) for the year 2020. This Debt Service Suspension Initiative (DSSI) potentially benefited 73 countries, but did not cancel the debt, which also continued to earn interest.
The corresponding decision was adopted by the Paris Club and other major creditors, especially China. However, private creditors did not adopt it, as requested by the G-20, and some debtor countries did not use it for fear that their sovereign credit ratings would be negatively affected.
The IMF proposals underscored the need to improve the existing institutional mechanism—the so-called “contractual arrangement” based on the collective action clauses included in bond contracts—which was redesigned in 2014, and highlighting at the same time the growing problems associated with non-bond and collateralised debts, and the lack of transparency in this field.
It should be noted that the other possibility that has been on the table over the past two decades is the creation of a new institution that would support sovereign debt renegotiations. An additional possibility is doing so in the context of the IMF, as was attempted at the beginning of the century, if the debt panel in charge is independent from the board of the institution. The need for such a reform, called “statutory” in the debates, has been championed again by the UNCTAD during the current crisis.”
The above evidence supports the assertion that some ministers and the governor created ‘Goni Billa/Grease Yaka’ picture of the IMF, is only a figment of their imagination or a picture painted with personal or political interests.
3March 2021-Jose Antonio Ocampo- Chair – U.N. Committee for Development Policy
Professor and Director, Economic and Political Development Concentration, School for International and Public Affairs – Columbia University
At this challenging time for Sri Lanka, economically and socially, with high magnitude risks of precipitating a crisis
that can easily destabilise the whole country, impoverish it and drive to starvation the poor and vulnerable segments and even lead to a national calamity following social unrest, are some Ministers and the Governor, misleading the citizens and even their superiors in governance? If so, do they not realise the impending risks, most recent examples from Lebanon and yet continue to mislead and take the country down a dangerous path, where one slip can mean disaster for the majority of the citizens and those yet unborn?
IMF has been made into a ‘Goni Billa/Grease Yaka’ by these ministers and the governor, and portrayed as an international institution waiting for an opportunity to strike, assist with regime change, go for the kill and swallow the sovereignty, independence and resources of the people in favour of the rich and powerful Western nations! This plan they make out will be achieved by ‘IMF conditionality’, described more or less as a suicide note cum last will in favour of the IMF.
To the contrary, this is how IMF describes ‘Conditionality1’ – “When a country borrows from the IMF, its government agrees to adjust its economic policies to overcome the problems that led it to seek financial aid. These policy adjustments are conditions for IMF loans and serve to ensure that the country will be able to repay the IMF. This system of conditionality is designed to promote national ownership of strong and effective policies.”
“Conditionality covers the design of IMF-supported programs—that is, macroeconomic and structural policies—and the specific tools used to monitor progress toward goals outlined by the country in cooperation with the IMF. Conditionality helps countries solve balance-of-payments problems without resorting to measures that are harmful to national or international prosperity. At the same time, the measures are meant to safeguard IMF resources by ensuring that the country’s balance of payments will be strong enough to permit it to repay the loan.
“The member country has primary responsibility for selecting, designing, and implementing policies to make the IMF-supported program successful. The program is described in a letter of intent, which often has a memorandum of economic and financial policies attached. The program’s objectives and policies depend on a country’s circumstances. But the overarching goal is always to restore or maintain balance-of-payments viability and macroeconomic stability while setting the stage for sustained, high-quality growth and, in low-income countries, reducing poverty.”
In addition, ‘Guidance note on IMF engagement on social safeguards in low-income countries2’ of 14 June 2018 refers to;
“The role of social safeguards in protecting vulnerable groups is an important element of the Fund’s engagement with low-income countries (LICs).
Reducing poverty, and more broadly promoting inclusive growth, helps support economic and political stability. For these reasons, achieving strong and durable poverty reduction was established as a key objective for Fund programs supported by the Poverty Reduction and Growth Trust (PRGT) and Policy Support Instrument (PSI)
Social safeguards represent a key policy tool to achieve this objective, and thus have an important role in both the design of LIC programs and policy discussions with LICs in Fund surveillance.
For the purposes of this note, social safeguards comprise the following:
Commitments to social and other priority spending. Minimum floors on social and other priority spending should be included, wherever possible, in programs supported by PRGT facilities. Social spending is defined as spending on education, health, and social protection— with social protection comprising social safety nets (or social assistance) and social insurance. Other priority spending generally includes high-priority projects that support national poverty reduction and growth strategies.
Specific reforms designed to protect poor and vulnerable groups, for instance by strengthening social safety nets and improving the tracking and monitoring of spending on such groups.
The key concepts described above are amplified as:
Inclusive growth versus pro-poor growth. While there is no universally agreed definition of the concept of inclusive growth, it generally refers to circumstances where growth is robust and broad based across sectors, and the benefits are widely shared. Growth is said to be pro-poor in relative terms if and only if the incomes of poor people grow faster than those of the population as a whole. Pro-poor growth can be the result of direct income redistribution schemes, whereas fostering inclusive growth requires effort to boost productivity and measures to mitigate growth-inequality tradeoffs
Social protection consists of social safety nets and social insurance policies:
Social safety nets (or social assistance) are defined as “noncontributory measures designed to provide regular and predictable support to poor and vulnerable people.” They can include measures such as cash transfers, school meals, in-kind transfers (such as targeted food assistance), public work programs, and fee waivers (The State of Social Safety Nets, World Bank 2018).
Social insurance policies are typically financed by contributions and can include old age and disability pensions, maternity, unemployment, and health insurance.
Other priority spending usually includes certain infrastructure spending that can be a development priority but may provide limited or no benefits to the vulnerable in the short term. Due to the country-specific nature of such spending, this note focuses more on social spending. Country teams, in close consultation with the authorities, need to exercise judgment when deciding on whether to incorporate other priority spending into program design.
Brookings Institute article titled ‘Managing developing countries’ sovereign debt’3 states: “The IMF determined early in 2020 that 29 of its most vulnerable members will be exempted from amortisation and interest on their debts with the organisation, during an initial period of six months that was later extended to 24 months (until April 13, 2022).
In turn, the G-20 offered a suspension of the debt service of the countries of the International Development Association (IDA) for the year 2020. This Debt Service Suspension Initiative (DSSI) potentially benefited 73 countries, but did not cancel the debt, which also continued to earn interest.
The corresponding decision was adopted by the Paris Club and other major creditors, especially China. However, private creditors did not adopt it, as requested by the G-20, and some debtor countries did not use it for fear that their sovereign credit ratings would be negatively affected.
The IMF proposals underscored the need to improve the existing institutional mechanism—the so-called “contractual arrangement” based on the collective action clauses included in bond contracts—which was redesigned in 2014, and highlighting at the same time the growing problems associated with non-bond and collateralised debts, and the lack of transparency in this field.
It should be noted that the other possibility that has been on the table over the past two decades is the creation of a new institution that would support sovereign debt renegotiations. An additional possibility is doing so in the context of the IMF, as was attempted at the beginning of the century, if the debt panel in charge is independent from the board of the institution. The need for such a reform, called “statutory” in the debates, has been championed again by the UNCTAD during the current crisis.”
The above evidence supports the assertion that some ministers and the governor created ‘Goni Billa/Grease Yaka’ picture of the IMF, is only a figment of their imagination or a picture painted with personal or political interests.
A sharp rise in Covid-19 cases in India over the past week has sparked fears that a third wave, driven by Omicron, is around the corner.
The country reported 16,764 new infections and 220 deaths on Friday for the last 24 hours.
This is the highest single-day increase in cases since October.
The jump appears to be the starkest in densely packed metros such as the national capital, Delhi, financial hub Mumbai and Kolkata city.
Mumbai reported 3,671 new cases on Friday, up 46% from the previous daily total – cases in Delhi (1,313) were up by 42%, and in Kolkata (1,090) by 102% in just 48 hours.
India experienced a devastating second wave in April and May, with daily averages of around 400,000 cases at the peak of the crisis. Caseloads dropped significantly since then – for many months the national tally remained well under 10,000 cases a day.
But officials and experts fear that the new highly transmissible Omicron variant is starting to fuel a third wave.
It accounted for 309 fresh infections on Friday – taking the total number of Omicron cases in India to 1,270 cases. Maharasthra state, where Mumbai is located, has reported he highest Omicron cases (450) so far, followed by Delhi (320).
The variant, which was first discovered in South Africa in November, has since spread fast across the world, dampening Christmas and New Year celebrations.
Many countries, including India, have imposed travel restrictions after the World Health Organization (WHO) designated it a variant of concern.
Preliminary studies published in the UK and South Africa suggest that fewer people infected with Omicron need hospital treatment when compared with other variants.
But experts still advise caution as the infectious nature of the variant could lead to a surge in cases, increasing the load on already strained healthcare systems.
As usual today (31st) long queues and crowds were seen in front of Colombo, to buy milk powder and gas shops.
The people are suffering due to the shortage of these essential commodities and at present, they are blaming the conduct of the government. They strongly allege that the rulers have no understanding of the plight of the common people.
They also say that they elect Gotabhaya Rajapaksa to become helpless.
202 billion worth of currency was been printed on the 29th. This is the first time money has been printed since October 14th.
With this 202 billion, the total value of banknotes printed in 2021 is 825 billion rupees.
Opposition political groups, as well as economic experts, accuse the rupee of depreciating sharply in the face of continuous printing. However, the only option left for the government to cover the expenses in the country is to print money.
Udaya Gammanpila, Minister of Energy said that steps will be taken to develop 61 tanks in the Trincomalee oil tank complex in collaboration with Lanka IOC.
This was stated at a media briefing held at the Ministry a short while ago today (31).
The Minister said that steps will be taken to develop these tanks through a new company to be set up in which the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation will have a 51% stake.
About 14 tanks currently used by the IOC are expected to be leased to them for another 50 years.
The remaining 61 tanks will be handed over to Trincomalee Petroleum to be 51% owned by the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation and the remaining 49% to be owned by Lanka IOC. The company is a subsidiary of the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation (CPC), which appoints four of the seven members of the Board of Directors.
Buddhi Marambe, Senior Professor, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Peradeniya states that a food shortage is inevitable in the future and that the harvest of the Mas season can be predicted to be reduced by about one third.
Marambe pointed out that on the one hand there is a shortage of imported food items due to the dollar crisis and on the other hand that the food items produced in the country are declining by one-third, adding that people should be prepared to face a food shortage.
The professor points out that due to the lack of adequate nitrogen nutrients, which are crucial for the photosynthesis process required for food production, the crop turns yellow and yields are reduced.
Meanwhile, loans have been requested from India and Pakistan for the purchase of essential food items. It is reported that the loan request has been made by the Ministry of Trade.
Trade Minister Bandula Gunawardena has already commenced discussions with the Indo-Pakistani Trade Ministers.
Most of the essential food items including rice, onion, potato, and potatoes are imported to Sri Lanka from India and Pakistan.
Indian politician, economist and statistician Subramanian Swamy has castigated his Government for the failure to
extend critical support to Sri Lanka at her neediest hour.
“If India wants an ally for the Indian Ocean long term, then India must give deferred interest $ 10 billion loan to the Rajapaksa Government now or face China getting one more junior partner,” Swamy tweeted.
“Modi Govt. has failed in so many foreign policy issues. Let not Sri Lanka be another,” he added.
Swamy is no stranger to Sri Lanka, nor is his support to Rajapaksa unknown. In October, Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa celebrated Navratri with his ‹long-time friend and colleague› Swamy, a senior Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader.
Swamy is a staunch advocate for a strong, friendly relationship between Sri Lanka and India.
Dr. Chandima Jeewandara of the University of Sri Jayewardenepura says that 41 cases infected with the Omicron covid strain have been identified in the country.
Accordingly, the total number of Omicron infections identified so far in the country has increased to 45, he said.
A survey done among a pool of our readers to identify the top 3% among people representatives in parliament among the 225 who had contributed to the ongoing debate constructively and intelligently from the quality of healthcare to education to industrial output, from the pandemic management to public sector governance to poverty alleviation .
Also People Representatives who stood firmly to protect good governance and won the confidence of the public. The following eight parliamentarians representing the key parties got the top marks. a few others Dr Rajitha Senaratne and Sudarshini Fernandopulle were fearless voices during the height of the pandemic. Harin Fernando, Kumara Welgame, SM Marrika, M Nanayakkara and M Rahaman raised issues fearlessly . Also Sajith Premadasa on grassroots issues and Harsha de Silva on the economy .
They all deserved to be mentioned. The public who pays for their upkeep wants representatives with some intelligence and tenacity to fulfill their responsibilities effectively.
Many are throughly disappointed with their contribution. More than 60% of the MPs most people have no recollection of their names or faces. That sums up their pathetic contribution of that 60+%.
