The Hon. (Dr.) Najith Indika

¶ 01 Hon. Presiding Member, today we debated the Amendment and its technical aspects, and will continue to do so. Amidst this, our policy has been questioned. Before coming to power, we said we would reduce tariffs by one-third within three years—systematically. You cannot reduce tariffs overnight or with gimmicks; in the past both sides tried and only loaded the burden onto CEB.

¶ 02 We have been in Government for ten months. We bring this Bill because the previous Act needed to be changed, as we stated even before elections. There are inefficiencies from past recruitments and practices. We must protect employees’ livelihoods, safeguard the CEB and steer the economy and politics responsibly. This is about national energy.

¶ 03 Hon. Namal Rajapaksa said only the cover has changed. We never said we would trash the Act; we said we would change it. We accepted that restructuring is needed and private investment is recognized. Generation and distribution already have private participation, particularly in renewables. But the 12-company model explicitly enabled selling up to 50% of eight entities to the private sector. We have removed that. Some criticize from both sides.

¶ 04 Two months ago, the World Bank, ADB and JICA wrote publicly to the Ministry of Energy acknowledging our 100% State ownership stance. Even Mahinda Rajapaksa, last year on May 13, issued a statement saying not to proceed with the earlier Bill near elections and not to sell State assets—clearly different from today’s Bill.

¶ 05 There was also agitation that employees would lose jobs. That is false. Under this restructuring no current employee is to be removed. The Minister and others have clearly stated so. In fact, a circular dated 2024.09.18—three days before the election—quoted a Cabinet decision to reduce staff from 26,783 to 12,000 in three phases. We are reversing that policy direction; under our Government, jobs are safeguarded.

¶ 06 This must operate under a national energy policy, given its macroeconomic impact and our path out of the debt crisis. With a forward plan, and correcting past errors, this is what we bring—long discussed and now advanced.

¶ 07 Finally, yesterday there was a decisive debate and vote on the former IGP. For the record, 177 voted in favour; many others abstained. No one dared vote against. I note it here as part of our contemporary history.