Hon. Bimal Rathnayake, M.P.

Jathika Jana balawegaya (JJB)· National List

Minister of Transport, Highways and Urban Development and Leader of the House of Parliament

Profession: Politician

Roster profile ↗

Speeches 1,262 #1 of 225·#1 in party

Attendance 8/8 days present (of recorded)

Top topic Parliamentary Procedure 955 speeches

Last spoke 10 June 2026 in Debate

Activity by sitting

140 sittings · counts only, no scoring.

Topic focus

AI summary AI-assigned tags, 1–3 per speech. Counts only — not a score.

Speech history

1,262 speeches

11 September 2025 AI summary Hon. Bimal Rathnayake indicated that parliamentary proceedings should continue regardless of whether members take their seats. His remark was procedural, urging the Chair or House to proceed without delay. Procedural Matters and No-Confidence Motion Dispute Parliamentary Procedure Read →
11 September 2025 AI summary Hon. Bimal Rathnayake urged the Chair to proceed with Government business, stating that the Bill and two Supplementary Estimates needed to be passed. He argued that obstruction of proceedings was not parliamentary procedure and asked that such political disruption not be allowed. Procedural Matters and No-Confidence Motion Dispute Parliamentary Procedure Read →
11 September 2025 AI summary Hon. Bimal Rathnayake stated that Parliament needed to pass two Supplementary Estimates. No further details on their contents or related allocations were provided in the excerpt. Procedural Matters and No-Confidence Motion Dispute Parliamentary Procedure Read →
11 September 2025 AI summary A brief procedural statement noting that a Bill must be passed by Parliament that day. Procedural Matters and No-Confidence Motion Dispute Parliamentary Procedure Read →
11 September 2025 AI summary Hon. Bimal Rathnayake, as Leader of the House, urged the Speaker to proceed with parliamentary business. He characterized the disruption or incident occurring in the House as “terrorism,” repeating the term to emphasize his objection. Procedural Matters and No-Confidence Motion Dispute Security & Defence Read →
11 September 2025 AI summary Hon. Bimal Rathnayake objected to what he described as an imbalance in speaking opportunities during the debate, saying many Opposition Members had spoken while only one Government Member had been allowed. He urged the Chair to maintain discipline and proceed with House business, asserting that the Government’s restraint should not be treated as a disadvantage during the No-Confidence Motion proceedings. Procedural Matters and No-Confidence Motion Dispute Parliamentary Procedure Read →
11 September 2025 AI summary Hon. Bimal Rathnayake rose on a point of order. No substantive argument, proposal, or policy matter was stated in the provided excerpt. Procedural Matters and No-Confidence Motion Dispute Parliamentary Procedure Read →
11 September 2025 AI summary Hon. Bimal Rathnayake requested that parliamentary sittings continue without interruption due to scheduled Government business. He urged the House to proceed with its work. Procedural Matters and No-Confidence Motion Dispute Parliamentary Procedure Read →
11 September 2025 AI summary Hon. Bimal Rathnayake stated that the conduct in question was merely an attempt to disrupt proceedings. He did not raise a substantive policy issue or proposal in this brief intervention. Procedural Matters and No-Confidence Motion Dispute Parliamentary Procedure Read →
11 September 2025 AI summary Hon. Bimal Rathnayake stated that the motion concerning Mervyn Silva was a motion of censure, not a No-Confidence Motion. He challenged others to bring any motion in the proper form and said the Government was prepared to face it, while urging them not to burden Parliament due to procedural errors. Procedural Matters and No-Confidence Motion Dispute Parliamentary Procedure Read →
11 September 2025 AI summary Hon. Bimal Rathnayake stated that he signed the relevant document because, based on his understanding after seven years in Parliament, the appropriate parliamentary action available at the time was a censure motion. He indicated that this was the reason for his decision to sign it. Procedural Matters and No-Confidence Motion Dispute Parliamentary Procedure Read →
11 September 2025 AI summary Hon. Bimal Rathnayake clarified that the matter under discussion was correctly categorized as a censure motion. No further substantive argument or proposal was made in the quoted remark. Procedural Matters and No-Confidence Motion Dispute Parliamentary Procedure Read →
11 September 2025 AI summary Only a Cabinet Minister or the Prime Minister can present reports concerning the Ministries of Defence or Digital Economy, and a Deputy Minister’s defeat in a No-Confidence Motion would have no legal effect on the Government. Referring to the Speaker’s ruling that such a motion cannot be brought against a Deputy Minister, he said the Government was prepared to face any other permissible motion of that nature. Procedural Matters and No-Confidence Motion Dispute Parliamentary Procedure Read →
11 September 2025 AI summary Hon. Bimal Rathnayake briefly requested the Speaker to give the Government side an opportunity to be heard, noting that the opposing side had already spoken at length. No substantive policy issue or proposal was developed in the recorded portion. Procedural Matters and No-Confidence Motion Dispute Parliamentary Procedure Read →
11 September 2025 AI summary Hon. Bimal Rathnayake noted that the President, as Minister of Defence, is assisted by a Deputy Minister of Defence, two additional Deputy Ministers under the President, and other Ministers present in the House. He stated that, under the Standing Orders, a report had been requested from the Ministry of Defence. Procedural Matters and No-Confidence Motion Dispute Parliamentary Procedure Read →
11 September 2025 AI summary Hon. Bimal Rathnayake complained that Members were raising irrelevant matters and urged the Chair to control the House, alleging that threats of a No-Confidence Motion against the Chair amounted to intimidation and reflected a return to disruptive conduct. He clarified that No-Confidence Motions may be brought against parliamentary office-holders such as the Speaker, Deputy Speaker, Ministers and Opposition office-holders, but argued that a Deputy Minister does not hold such a parliamentary office. He also stated that only the Prime Minister and Cabinet can respond on behalf of the President. Procedural Matters and No-Confidence Motion Dispute Parliamentary Procedure Read →
11 September 2025 AI summary Hon. Bimal Rathnayake stated that the government was willing to debate the matter concerning Deputy Minister Aruna Jayasekara if Parliament admitted it under proper procedure, but argued that such motions against Deputy or State Ministers should be treated as censure or condemnation motions rather than No-Confidence Motions. He cited precedents from 2007 involving a State Minister and Mahinda Ratnatilaka, and said the decision on tabling the motion rested with the Speaker. He criticized attempts to proceed with an inadmissible No-Confidence Motion as a waste of parliamentary time. Procedural Matters and No-Confidence Motion Dispute Parliamentary Procedure Read →
11 September 2025 AI summary Hon. Bimal Rathnayake referred to and began reading a parliamentary motion dated 12 October 2007 concerning the conduct of Hon. Mahinda Ratnatilaka during a division on Money Bills on 6 September 2007. The reading was interrupted by uproar in the House. Procedural Matters and No-Confidence Motion Dispute Parliamentary Procedure Read →
11 September 2025 AI summary Hon. Bimal Rathnayake begins to continue a prior point by referring to an event or date, 12 October 2007, but the provided excerpt ends before any substantive argument, proposal, or context is stated. No policy position, legislative issue, or demand can be identified from the available text. Procedural Matters and No-Confidence Motion Dispute Parliamentary Procedure Read →
11 September 2025 AI summary Hon. Bimal Rathnayake, as Leader of the House, briefly requested that Parliament proceed with its scheduled business. No substantive policy issue, proposal, or debate point was raised. Procedural Matters and No-Confidence Motion Dispute Parliamentary Procedure Read →