The Hon. (Dr.) (Ms.) Kaushalya Ariyarathne

¶ 01 Hon. Deputy Chairperson of Committees, thank you for this opportunity. Today, for debate in this Hon. House, four Gazette notifications—a notice, an Order, and Regulations—have been presented. Among them, the one most discussed these days is the Regulations published in the Extraordinary Gazette of 04 December 2024 issued under the Import and Export (Control) Act, No. 1 of 1969. I thought to begin my remarks with those Regulations.

¶ 02 Hon. Deputy Chairperson, I wish to reiterate a point raised earlier today by Hon. Dr. Harsha de Silva, MP. At the recent meeting of the Committee on Public Finance, an Additional Secretary of the Ministry of Agriculture participated. When we questioned him on the data, it became apparent—although he did not clearly indicate it—that there is a serious data problem in Sri Lanka. According to him, the Maha season paddy harvest was 4.9 million metric tons; rice production 2.63 million metric tons. These were the data available to us when we assumed office. As we all know, the annual rice requirement of the country is about 2.4 million metric tons. Based on that data, a decision was taken to import 70,000 metric tons of rice; ultimately, 167,000 metric tons were imported and a balance remained. However, I must emphasize this: this was not a shortage caused by a single government or a temporary, short-term disruption. This is a problem that has developed gradually due to flawed economic policies adopted as a matter of policy by every administration since Independence—especially with the advent of the open economy—which weakened agriculture.

¶ 03 Agriculture contributes around 7–8 per cent to Sri Lanka’s GDP. Our agricultural policy for decades was not designed to protect domestic farmers. Successive rulers were not willing to develop agriculture commensurate with the industrial and services economy. As a result, agrarian poverty increased. Many position papers by organizations like MONLAR have highlighted the adverse effects of neoliberal policies, particularly on land rights. The previous government’s “Urumaya” initiative sought to alienate State lands; likewise, enabling multinationals to grab land resources; failure to formulate climate‑resilient policies; and shortsighted decisions like the fertilizer policy severely affected paddy cultivation. This is not merely the result of stock loss at the Paddy Marketing Board, machinery breakdowns, or the absence of storage mechanisms among about 60 per cent of our SMEs; it is a deeper political problem that has persisted for years. The critical question is: what are we doing now?

¶ 04 The President stated the other day that Rs. 50 billion will be spent by the Government to purchase paddy from SMEs, and that paddy purchasing will be systematized. Work is underway to rehabilitate 209 paddy stores. Small and medium rice mills will be strengthened, including reviving women’s society‑owned mills. Further, by letter issued by the Commissioner General of Agrarian Development on 10 December 2024, this Government has completely halted the filling of paddy lands.

¶ 05 As a political movement that has always raised its voice against land grabbing, we have addressed in our policy the land rights issues of women farmers, and their water-related problems due to lack of representation in farmer organizations. We have also discussed how to preserve and transmit traditional agricultural practices and knowledge; post‑harvest losses; and productivity. A key proposal of our agricultural policy is to establish a National Agricultural Development Council by coordinating all State, private and university research institutions related to agriculture. I trust the Hon. Minister will elaborate further to this House.

¶ 06 Those who ask whether we are implementing our policies may refer to page 113 of our policy statement, where we commit to establishing a real‑time national agriculture data system with accurate information. Our Science and Technology policy is also based on data‑driven decision‑making. Therefore, I am pleased to inform this House that at the special discussion convened yesterday by the Ministers of Agriculture and Trade, the establishment of this data system was revisited, and an operational plan has been formulated.

¶ 07 Regarding the Regulations under the Import and Export (Control) Act, published in the Extraordinary Gazette of 17 May 2024 (Regulations No. 2), please note the date—17 May. This has come very late; it reflects a problem created by past governments: they make laws and gazette them but fail to place them before Parliament and fail to build the necessary mechanisms. This was a good Gazette to raise standards for 34 new commodity categories, but it was not presented to Parliament. Conflicts arose between the Food Control Authority and the Standards Institution, with no consensus, and without a common food standard, containers piled up in port warehouses. Thereafter, congestion at Customs occurred. We are now compelled to find answers to problems that you created.

¶ 08 Next, the notice published in Gazette Extraordinary No. 2399/16 of 26 August 2024 relates to an investment associated with the textile manufacturing zone established at Eravur in Batticaloa. This is a US$35 million investment, with a projected net foreign exchange benefit of US$300 million to Sri Lanka. In 2019, foreign exchange earnings from the apparel industry were US$5.3 billion, reduced to US$4.7 billion by 2024, largely because fabrics—the raw material—are imported from China, limiting value addition and causing significant outflows. This project seeks to address that by enabling local fabric production, creating 490 jobs in the area, increasing foreign exchange from apparel, and potentially tripling fabric exports to Europe through garments made with locally produced textiles.

¶ 09 Further, we have presented to this House the Order under the Ports and Airports Development Levy Act by Gazette of 28 March 2024. Frankly, we are compelled to pay for old debts arising from actions of previous governments.