The Hon. Chithral Fernando, Attorney-at-Law

¶ 01 Hon. Presiding Member, I am pleased to speak briefly on the Reconstruction Government’s Reconstruction Budget.

¶ 02 “Reconstruction” implies something new: a new Government, a new Budget, a new society, a new country. Reading past Hansards, I found Hon. Sunil Handunnetti’s 2006 Budget debate speech, which too spoke of a new Budget, new Government, new people, new society. He said then that Mahinda Rajapaksa presented a fresh Budget reflecting new policies, in a way visible to the whole country—despite an earlier Budget on 8 November. He lauded it as a new journey. There is a great deal of affection in those words.

¶ 03 The young Deputy Minister who spoke earlier—whom I like—complained about the costs of New York trips and First Lady’s expenses. If they had not done such foolish things and had instead fielded their own Presidential candidate and won, he would not be lamenting now. But this is the burden you carry. We never partook in such practices.

¶ 04 On nationalism too, now you come to lecture us. If you had fielded your candidate and even if he lost, you would at least have preserved your party; now you blame us.

¶ 05 On alliances: you made alliances with every party in Sri Lanka and now accuse us of trying to ally with the UNP. The Leader of the Opposition is the leader of all Opposition MPs, including our colleague Archchuna (if he were present). When Opposition MPs meet at his office to discuss Parliamentary business, cadres are instructed to accuse them of forming alliances. You have allied with everyone and come here today; there is no point preaching to us.

¶ 06 There is debate about whether this Budget is liberal or socialist. We are not here to recite ideological labels. We have capable economists—not fake PhDs. If you have questions, raise them; they will present their case.

¶ 07 I also have Hon. Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s 2006 Budget speech. He said the UNP set the initial steps and legal framework for the 1977/78 economic path, and by 2004 it had run 26 years. It is now 47 years since 1977; by the current President’s own standard, Mahinda Rajapaksa is “good,” because this Budget mirrors those same policies. After 20 years in the House reading and criticizing, once he became President, he brought a Budget aligned with the same approach.

¶ 08 On Adani: Before coming to power, you said Adani was not required; after power, you embraced it. You claimed wind power could not be done domestically, rejected Adani, then returned to negotiate. This is not double standards—this is five standards.

¶ 09 The President said a 50 MW wind project was awarded at 4.65 US cents per kWh, and asked why not give such at that rate to local businesses. Who is that “local businessman”? It is Dhammika Perera—the same name appears repeatedly. Adani is building a 500 MW project. Tell Dhammika Perera to deliver 500 MW at 4.65 cents. The President conflated distinct projects to present a narrative favouring the same businessman previously protected by blocking James Packer’s casino entry—a move that benefited only Dhammika Perera’s casino interests then.

¶ 10 On expatriates: Under “Sri Lankan Diaspora” in the Budget Speech, the President mentions exploring ways to recognize and incentivize them. Hon. Ajith Gihan raised a question this morning on the Italian driving licence issue; the Minister rose but provided no substantive answer—only that they would consider it in future. From Wennappuwa alone—my electorate—tens of thousands live in Italy, sending valuable foreign exchange. Since 2022 they have suffered over the Italian driving licence recognition matter. This must be discussed with Italy and resolved. Also, on tourist vehicle permits—tourists renting vehicles do not bring money in; focus instead on supporting those who actually bring foreign exchange.

¶ 11 Regarding permits: do not claim you ended them. Provincial Council permits were stopped from 2013; Parliamentary permits from 2020. Please do not spread falsehoods.

¶ 12 Finally, the Presidential Secretariat has called tenders for luxury vehicles—18 in number. Information exists on 107 vehicles publicized earlier—what happened to the rest? Two Range Rovers missing I can understand; but where are the others? On MPs’ insurance: reducing headline limits from Rs. 1 million to Rs. 250,000 looks like big savings, but actual premium reductions are negligible; given current medical costs, even Rs. 250,000 is inadequate. Thank you.