Justification Of Colombo Port City Project

Arguments of the Economists

Fr. Sarath Iddamalgoda.

A number of arguments have been put forward very recently to try and justify the construction of the Colombo Port City. Some argue that the Colombo Port City was a ‘business venture’ done with the view to make Sri Lanka the most competitive and preferred maritime and logistic hub in Asia. Hence, the construction of the Port City should be continued on a revised technical plan of the experts. Since 25% of the work Colombo Port City project is completed, others argue that by halting the project the country will suffer a heavy financial loss in addition to threatening livelihoods of local people in the Country, of the employees and service providers who have already made agreement with the Chinese company. There are also those who argue that this project shall create thousands of job opportunities and if halted the country will be deprived of all those benefits.

In the face of all this arguments, what seems certain is the underline ideology of those who argue in favor of the Colombo Port City which is a neo-liberal economics. Unfortunately, these economists are keen on denying and dismissing the warnings from scientist and environmentalists that the Colombo Port City – the country’s largest private investment in history – has the potential of becoming one of Sri Lanka’s biggest environmental nightmares: altering entire ecosystems and causing other serious environmental problems — and, by extension, endangering the millions who inhabit this country. We simply cannot sacrifice the environment in exchange for temporary economic gain.

This raises questions as to ponder, when viewed from stand point of an ordinary citizen of the country, how valid, informed and credible are the arguments of those who favor the Colombo Port City?

Human and Environmental Cost

The environmental impacts associated with large scale artificial economic project often brings with it many social and environmental concerns. The Colombo Port City is no different. The creation of the artificial city on a reclaimed maritime land affects species in the sea area, some endangered, water quality, and may increase the likelihood of earthquakes. The environmental impacts of the project are profound, and are likely to get worse as time goes on.

However, advocates who support the Colombo Port City for pity economic gains fail to understand the human and environmental cost that the project would entail, even when a revised plan is implemented. The economists who are often interested only in profits tend to be blind to such dimensions of social life. Such costs can be perceived only by those who looked at it from the people’s point of view.

For an example the project requires mass amounts of granite and sand. According to Port Authority “the estimated granite requirement for the project is 05 million cubic meters”. It was reported at a discussion held at the Human Rights’ Commission that the authorities have identified 20 quarries to supply the required amount.

In many places these quarries are already creating environmental hazards for people such as drying up of underground water resources, which is an indispensable requirement for survival of all life. In certain place water streams have already gone dry. Besides, the blasting of rocks is causing cracks in the houses and also health hazards both to people and animals.

Often these quarries are found in the interior of the country in the districts of Colombo and Kalutara; these are areas of rich biodiversity but the unique plant and animal species are quickly disappearing due to the destruction caused by the quarries. The situation will be definitely worsened when the demand for granite for building the port city increases.

Similarly a Colombo Port City Project will have a damaging impact on the coastal belt due to dredging of sand from the sea. Already excavation of large amount of sand from the sea off Negombo has caused numerous problems to traditional fishermen who depend on the shallow seas for their livelihood. The fishermen complain that the fish breeding grounds have been disturbed and have expressed fear that continuous digging for sand will intensify sea erosion and destabilize the coastal area. Recently there was a complain that fishermen incurred a loss fishing gear to the value of Rs 4 million due to the damages caused by the sand mining machinery.

The fishermen who use traditional methods for fishing also live in fear that once certain portion of land is given over to the Chinese government, the Chinese fishermen will one day become a serious threat to the livelihoods of the traditional fishermen.

Though the environmental impact of the project is already felt, there are many more concerns such as of altering entire ecosystems and causing other serious environmental and social problems—and, by extension, endangering the millions who live in this country. However, these aspects have not been taken seriously into account by the economists. But the threats to life are real. The Colombo Port City is a model for disaster.

Impact after Revised Plan

There are no signs that all these destructions stated above would cease when Colombo Port City is done according to a revised plan. It is so unfortunate that many of our experts seem to be more concerned about the profits rather than the wellbeing of the citizens.

I wonder whether the advocates of development and advancements focus mainly on the economic benefits overlooking the environmental destruction and violation of rights when constructing and approving such artificial economic projects. Thus, from right perspective this project violates the rights of the people to a safe environment and to livelihoods.

A project which is not primarily people friendly or environment friendly cannot be called a development, however much it promotes growth and bring profits to the elite. It is time that the advocates of modern development be inspired by the ancient wisdom of the Red Indians.

“When all the trees have been cut down,
when all the animals have been hunted,
when all the waters are polluted,
when all the air is unsafe to breathe,
only then will you discover you cannot eat money

Good Governance and Port City

By Fr. Sarath Iddamalgoda -

Fr. Sarath Iddamalgoda

Two days after the protest against Colombo Port City, there was in the morning an announcement that the Port City Project was suspended. On face value, this will bring happiness to many. But is a mere statement to the press by a Minister or two sufficient grounds to believe that the statement contains the truth? In spite of the statements of the Ministers, it was reported by the media that work on the project was going on even at 6.00 pm that day.

My reflection here is about the event that took place on the 3^rd of March. We of the “People’s Movement against the Port City”, staged a protest in front of the Fort railway station on this said issue and then proceeded to the Presidential Secretariat to present a petition.

But the civilian unarmed group of people was met by a strong police force and riot police with tear gas and so on, and our way was blocked. I do not blame the Police because they only carried out the orders of the higher authorities. What then is the issue there? As a participant, my concern is on what grounds did the authorities prevent an unarmed group of civilians to walk up to the Presidential Secretariat to present a petition?

My feeling is that it is a sign that the two leaders are gradually getting alienated from the people. I would like also to question whether this behavior reflects good governance or whether these are signs of dictatorial governance that is to come in a short period of time.

Another reason to doubt the validity of today’s statement of the Ministers is the assurance given by President Sirisena to the Indian government that since 25% of the ground work on the Port city is already completed, he would not able to stop the project. Further he has decided that the 80 acres to be given to China will be given on the basis of a 99 year lease.

This promise made to the Indian government says that the project will not be stopped. This compels us to question whether the Maithree and Ranil government have taken that decision on the information received from the EIA report of the committee recently appointed or have decided independently without any reference to the report of the environment committee. Does it mean also that this government also does not follow the normal procedures?

Therefore it is becoming clearer that both Maithri – Ranil, although they made promises to do away with it during the election campaign, they are not prepared to drop this Port City plan. At the same time, Ministerial statements are not sufficient proof that the project is going to be stopped. We know the behavior of the politicians. The practice of bluffing and misleading people is their second nature.

Therefore, all talk about good governance has now been proved to be mere empty words. They are valid only during the election period to deceive the gullible and naïve voters.

So people ought to know that the project will definitely move ahead. That is the truth about it. It will be useful to remember the origin of this idea of constructing mega cities was first found in the concept of “Regaining Sri Lanka”. Later it was found in the “Sri Lanka National Physical Plan of Mahinda Chintanaya”.

Therefore, year by year many more such projects will be introduced whoever holds the political reins of the country. It is therefore of paramount importance that people continue with their resistance to the project. At the same time they have to be prepared to face disaster when it comes. If not, catastrophe will fall on them quite unawares as it happened to the people affected by the Uma Oya project.

As a result of this Port City project, the coastal land, sea and lagoon and the fish breeding grounds, will be damaged and the livelihoods of the fisher people will be heavily affected. The houses in the coastal line will be in danger of being washed away into the sea due to erosion.

In the interior of the country, hillocks will be cut down and rocks will be blasted to provide close to 16 million metric tons of granite, impacting on the lands in the Western province and the water level in those areas will drop and the paddy lands will go dry. When blasting of rocks take place, the walls of nearby houses can crack or collapse. This is already happening in the areas such as Waga, Bomiriya and Padukka.

Further politically, we are getting more and more convinced that the government is now on its way to forget the people who voted them into power but better committed to serve the capital of the Chinese business community.

Colombo Port City

By Fr. Sarath Iddamalgoda -

Fr. Sarath Iddamalgoda

Denial of People’s Right

The citizens in Sri Lanka are being kept in the dark as to the nature of the project known as ‘Colombo Port City Project’ (CPCP) which was launched in a hurry by the former President in Sept. 2014. An EIA report, which is an essential condition prior to receiving the official approval to launch a major project, is said to have been prepared but was never made available to the public. Thus, in the case of CPCP, the usual procedure has not been followed.

It is common sense that people have right to know what their leaders are doing for development of their people and what contracts they enter into with other countries, in the name of development.

In this case, information related to the ownership, the extent of the land to be reclaimed, project activities to be carried out, total cost, environmental and social impact, possible economic activities planned to be implemented and a profile of the contractor, have not been made available to the citizens of the land, leaving room for diverse speculations. According to unofficial reports, the Chinese contractor of this project is one who has been blacklisted. Therefore, in many respects this is a denial of a basic right that the citizens are entitled to.

However when taking into account factors such as the capital to be invested, the ownership of the reclaimed land, physical and environmental changes, sovereignty of our land, and even more, our politicians who are not very dependable and can hardly be trusted, the citizens have to take greater interest and responsibility in the issue of the Colombo Port City project, in order to safeguard their rights.

It is up to the government to provide an opportunity to the citizens to express their views on this project. Had the previous government provided the basic information prior to the launching of the project, the citizens would have already voiced their concerns on this matter.

The previous government should take the blame for its failure to provide the required information which would have enabled the citizens to perform their civic responsibility in this regard.

Good Governance

Good governance was proclaimed as the major agenda of the Maithree –Ranil government on every political platform during the election campaign. It can be realized only if they keep up to the promises they made before the masses.

It is a universally accepted principle that people’s participation in the governance of the country is an essential element of good governance and democratic rule. If our rulers are honest they should now place before the public what this Colombo Port city is about.

Colombo Port City: A Hidden Agenda?

As for now, the secrecy surrounding the CPCP is a major issue. On the one hand, the previous government has been in a mighty hurry in launching the project and on the other, all information about the project has been purposely hidden from the people. Not only the general public but even the Central Environmental Authority, which is the government arm established for the protection of the environment, seems to be kept in the dark. Had it been informed, by now it would have conveyed its position to the general public. Therefore the question arises whether the previous government has had a hidden agenda behind it?

The new government which pursues the policy of good governance should now set a good example by listening to the views of the people and acting in a totally transparent manner.

Environmental Impact

We have seen, in the recent times, the earth falling apart in the hill country causing several deaths and immense hardships to the people in the plantations area. Several affected families are still living as refugees in welfare centres. Many people now believe that such tragedies are caused by the unplanned development projects carried out in the area.

Thanks to the media we are now informed about the catastrophic situation prevailing in Bandarawela area due to the Uma Oya project launched by the previous government with the assistance of the government of Iran in spite of the warning given by our environmentalists. Such development programmes have only brought disaster and have disrupted the peace which was prevailing prior to the launching of the so called development project.

The traditional farmers complain that their paddy lands have dried up due to lack of water and so are the drinking wells; that the houses they had built with all their hard earnings are now cracking. The land value has dropped. Such were the woes that people revealed before the media.

The CCPP needs millions of tons of granite and large amount of gravel which have to be brought from the interior of the country to reclaim the sea. The sand is being pumped already from the sea. What will be the impact of such activities on the natural and social environment? When questioned, the fisher communities expressed their fear about the possible damage that this project would cause to the fish breeding grounds, corals and the sea coast. Who can guarantee that the fate that befell the people due to the Uma Oya project may not fall on the people living in the western province and those living in the coastal belt?

Therefore the government should insist on a serious study of the environmental and social impact of the project by an independent committee. Only on the information so collected should a decision be taken. Until then the project has to be suspended.

The Promise given during the election

People remember well the promise made from the political platforms that the Colombo Port City Project would be discontinued because of its disastrous environmental impact. These leaders would not have made such a promise to the people if they had no solid ground for it. Therefore the promise needs to be honoured.

If they have made such a promise solely for the purpose of attracting votes, then they have violated both social and political ethics.

Some argue that a contract signed by two countries cannot be annulled. However, if the contract really undermines the sovereignty of the country and brings it harmful effects on, the leaders of both countries have a moral duty to reconsider the contract.

Development Priorities.

Does a project which comprises a golf course, racing car track, facilities for sea sports, casinos, tourist hotels and shopping complexes, make any sense in Sri Lanka, where more than half the population receives only a two dollars a day? The focus of development programmes in a country where 75% of the population are peasants ought to be the needs and concerns of the peasantry. Indeed the CPCP is an agenda meant to cater to the needs of the foreign tourists and the urban rich, at the expense of the majority in the country.

Chief Justice Mohan Peiris as a Diplomat

I read in the media about CJ Mohan Peiris’s demand that if he is to resign he should be compensated with a post of a diplomat. Although I am a layman in the field of judicial matters, but from a common sense point of view, I would like to raise the question whether he has proved himself qualified to hold the post of a diplomat or for that matter even the post of Chief Justice.

Everyone knows that a judge is duty bound to uphold the independence and the integrity of the judiciary. Never a judge should allow himself be influenced by his personal political preferences. Another responsibility that a judicial officer ought to undertake is to win the confidence of people.

In the case of Chief Justice Mr. Mohan Peiris, we are compelled to question whether the above standards were maintained by him. The loss of confidence in the present Chief Justice arose because of his inappropriate conduct was reported in the media. 

People saw in the media his presence at the new year celebration of the Rajapaksha family. Another such occasion was his visit to Vatican with the President Rajapaksha. Then was his presence at the Temple trees in the early hours of the 9^th of January when the results were being announced.

If Mr. Peiris has not ever denied any of these allegations, he has himself admitted that his conduct has been not in accordance with the accepted norms of behavior prescribed for a judicial officer.  

Amidst all these he has now being questioned by the Police, a thing which has never happened in the history of Sri Lanka.

All these instances prove his intimate association with the former President. Does the office of Chief Justice allow such familiarity with a politician?  When one assumes the office of judge, he cannot allow himself be dictated by what is in his heart. He has to comply with a restrained behavior that his office imposed on him.

The office of a judge who dispenses justice demands independent behavior without partiality to anyone because not only must justice be done, it must also seen to be done." 

In my view he seems to have failed in all these matters. What is now left for him is voluntary resignation. If for some reason he does not, the citizens of this country need to act. The foundation for democracy sovereignty rest with the people. I am reminded of the quote which says “There may be times when we are powerless to prevent injustice, but there must never be a time when we fail to protest.”

Emerging Common Opposition

The factors which are forging unity among the opposition political parties and the civil society organizations are the immediate need to change the constitution and to abolish the Executive Presidency. This includes also ending the rule of one corrupt family. We have seen the results of the 18^th Amendment to the constitution. How true is Edmund Burke for us today who said, the greater the power, the more dangerous will be the abuses.

Undoubtedly, the preoccupations of the opposition movement reflect some urgent needs of the ordinary people and focusing on them is extremely important.  

However it is also important to raise the question -  will a mere change in the political leadership and the abolition of the Executive Presidency be a panacea to the real issues that our country is afflicted with, such as the high cost of living, the vast income differences, the national issue, threats inflicted on the natural resources, and so on?  My view is that except those who perceive the current political situation in a very narrow sense, all others would agree that the people’s expectations cannot be realized just by making constitutional changes.

Certainly, such changes will bring about a temporary relief and will allow a free space necessary for short term political engagement, but in the long run such a space does not really matter. The real challenges are centered round the differences of opinion over the national issue and the economic strategy among the opposition political parties.

These are difficult questions to solve. If the leadership of the common opposition fails to come to a consensus on the national issue and the economic strategy, a breakdown of the united alliance would be inevitable. The experiences of the last 60 years of the power seeking political parties have failed to agree on a political solution to the national issue. For them the national question was only as a political tool to attract votes.

As regards the economic strategy, the question is whether these political parties in the opposition alliance will come to an understanding as to what their economic strategy for Sri Lanka is going to be.

If they have not agreed on a plan, the only option would be to implement the existing one introduced in different names for expediency, such as “Regaining Sri Lanka” or what was lately known as the “Mahinda Chintanaya” or the “National Physical Plan”.

According to that plan Sri Lanka is to have five centres: Navigation Centre, Aviation Centre, Economic Centre, Knowledge Centre and Energy Centre. It is proposed that the projects include 19 Airports, Mega Cities, Railway and High Ways connected to Asian Network of Roads and Rail Roads and so on. The project is spaced out until year 2030.

If successfully carried out it will make Sri Lanka the ‘Miracle of Asia”. But, there are a few very critical questions that have to be raised and sought answers for.  Is the new regime going to continue this programme.

If yes, at whose expense are they going to implement them? Are they aware of its impact on the peasantry and fishermen, the environment (forests, water ways, flora and fauna) and so on? 

In the context of globalization, we know that those projects are primarily meant as infrastructure facilities for the international companies to carry out their businesses in an efficient way and certainly not aimed at helping the local people. 

Therefore how can we expect through such mega projects, economic justice for people and also the environment? How would such programmes put an end to corrupt practices of governance?  Would they reduce the income differences among different classes?  Or are we to expect just the opposite?

We also know that these projects, as happening with the current regime, will create opportunities to enter into businesses as partners of the foreign investors directly or by co-opting the family members.

Further it is certain that those people who enter into politics do so not with the interest of doing welfare to the people but enriching themselves in the shortest possible time.  In this climate of globalization, doing politics is a big business venture that can earn a massive income without much investment on your part. Nelson Mandela, affirmed this trend when he said that the rich and powerful now have new means to further enrich and empower themselves at the cost of the poorer and weaker people.

In this back drop, we have no reason to believe that the opposition parties aiming at the reign of power will ever overcome these challenges and transform politics in our country into a means of serving the masses.  

I salute those who work to bring about a new regime and constitutional changes, but am surprised to see why these critical issues are kept away from the present debate. 

Now the challenge before the citizens is to contribute and build up people’s power or the movement of the poor and the oppressed and to join in a “creative struggle”, to do away with the structural causes of poverty and marginalization and construct a just Society.

The citizens in this country need to rethink their political mission. Is it to work for the empowerment of power seeking politicians or for the poor and weaker masses?

This strategy I believe is a massive task and has its own mission. Most certainly for several reasons it would not attract those who are engaged in party politics but one possible reason is that it does not guarantee personal benefits. There is one more reason why it would not draw the attention of others. If one opts for such a strategy he/she would not be able to move about with the rich and the powerful because the mission is mostly around the poor, the weak and the marginalized. In my opinion, one of the main tasks that this mission entails is freeing such masses of their mythical beliefs related to religion, development and politics. 

Fr. Sarath Iddamalgoda

By Fr. Sarath Iddamalgoda -

Fr. Sarath Iddamalgoda

The report that the President Rajapaksa soon after his return from New York has flown to the Vatican to extend an official invitation to the Pope Francis, astonished me.

It was somewhere in July this year that a delegation from the Vatican arrived in Sri Lanka to see to the logistics of the papal visit schedules for January next year. Subsequently there was also a media conference and announcements were made by the Sri Lankan Church authorities with regard to the Pope’s two-day visit. A senior police officer has also been appointed to see to the arrangements.

After all those arrangements have been made, it looks quite strange to me that  the President has now gone to the Vatican personally to invite the Pope. This gives the strange impression that the Pope, as the head of a State, has decided to visit  Sri Lanka without the consent of our government.

I cannot understand the protocol. Has this happened in previous instances when heads of States from China and Japan visited Sri Lanka? Could anyone be kind enough to explain this anomaly to me and to others who may find difficult to understand these proceedings regarding Pope’s visit?

In fact, on two previous occasions, when the popes, namely Paul VI and John Paul II, visited Sri Lanka, there were no visits made to the Vatican by the then prime minister or the President to extend formal invitations.

What was the need for our President to spend the money of the people to make this visit to the Vatican when a papal envoy is residing at Baudhaloka Mawatha a few kilometers away from the Temple Trees?

The ambiguity of this visit by the President at a time when an election is to be held soon in Sri Lanka is really creating suspicion and leaving room for legitimate speculation.

Is the pope having second thoughts about the visit? Is he considering to cancel the intended visit because of the election that is to be held a few days or weeks before or after Pope’s visit?

Is the government planning to get the needed legitimacy through his visit? Will his visit be used by the government as a part of his election campaign to attract the votes in the Catholic belt? Is there a hidden agenda behind the visit not made known to the public? Are the Sri Lankan Church leaders also involved in a secret agenda? Or as some people wonder, is there here an appeal to  the Pope to reverse his previous decision not to visit, bless or open the massive building complex intended for an Opus Dei University constructed by the armed forces  with the dollars of the Opus Dei flowing into the country, and of course to the metropolitan church?

The media has reported also that the Sri Lankan President has mentioned to the Pope about the socio-economic development that is taking place and the high level of religious harmony prevailing in the country.

Perhaps the Pope may not be aware of the results of the recent provincial council elections in Western and Uva provinces, which indicates the people’s fast losing confidence in the governance of the President !

Has Pope Francis Got a Genuine Picture on Sri Lanka?

It is heartening to note, in his statement made after the meeting with the Bishops’ conference of SL, that Pope Francis has drawn attention to the victims of violence and war.

Among many words of wisdom found in the statement, I am very much touched when he notes that the “poor should not be forgotten and inequality not be permitted to grow”. I guess one of his priorities for Sri Lanka is the “elimination of violence”. 

Indeed, the cause for emergence and prevalence of violence in Sri Lankan society is the “increased economic development”. Such development cannot be achieved without “exclusion and inequality in society”, which is a kind of unceasing violence inbuilt into the system of governance and politics.

In Sri Lanka violence takes various forms such as cultural, economic and also political. From his statement we can observe that Pope Francis seems to be well informed about the cultural violence that is prevalent in the country due to ethnic war and “religious extremism”.

However, I wonder whether Pope is sufficiently informed about the fact that cultural violence in Sri Lanka is often a political tool made use of by those engaged in power politics to legitimize their positions. The perpetrators of violence caused by the elements of religious extremism have never been brought before the Law. Hence it can be concluded that even religious extremism seems to be sponsored by those who wield political power.  

Amidst this controversy there is also an effort on the part of the Church and governing authorities to invite the Pope to Sri Lanka. His visit, if happens as planned, will be another cultural event that could be used by the current regime to justify its image before the masses now marred by years of violence inflicted on people.    

On the other hand, if Pope decides to visit Sri Lanka the event ought to become a source of strength to the victims of violence and never let it be a source to legitimize the perpetrators of violence.  

Pope also speaks about economic development that Sri Lanka has achieved. The violent character of economic development can be seen in the way the wealth is distributed. According to an official data the richest 20% of the Sri Lankan society enjoys 54% of our national wealth and the poorest 20% is left with only a 5%.

The 18^th amendment to the constitution is another instance of exclusion. The creation of a system of executive presidency in which all power concentrated in one person is a form of political violence where the principal equality is ruthlessly undermined.  

It is known that Pope Francis has won recognition not only among the Catholics but also among those non Catholics as a world leader who is more than capable of contributing towards making our world more just and humane. He does so by motivating the Catholic community which has been called to be the “leaven in the midst of humanity”. Whether Pope Francis   visit Sri Lanka or not, the Catholic community can be enriched by Pope Francis’s pastoral advice and guidance. Nevertheless in order that his teaching to become more relevant and contextual, the Pope has to be presented with a genuine picture of the socio, economic and political realities affecting the life of a larger majority of the population.