The Hon. Amila Prasad

¶ 01 Hon. Presiding Member, today’s debate on education reform is important. It is also a historic day: on 21 January 1982, the White Paper was presented to Parliament. Content expunged on the order of the Chair.

¶ 02 Those who then opposed major reforms and set this country on a destructive path now lecture us on reform.

¶ 03 Sir, you are here today; I listened to you. We know the help you gave in the past to the current President regarding education timelines. Please remember that too.

¶ 04 Hon. Presiding Member, I did not name anyone. Allow me to proceed.

¶ 05 We expect these reforms to protect cultural heritage and create mindful citizens. True — if citizens are mindful, they will confer power responsibly. You also spoke of national harmony and fostering a Sri Lankan citizen. If so, how do you exclude History as a compulsory subject? Beyond science, maths, and English, History is the one subject commonly studied across Sinhala, Tamil, Muslim and all faith communities; it builds a sense of the nation. If History is not compulsory, explain how this aligns with building national harmony.

¶ 06 We value the Prime Minister’s conduct abroad and her representation of the country. The issue here is about her portfolio as Education Minister — not her person or gender.

¶ 07 Hon. Minister Wasantha Samarasinghe spoke about the Dharma Chakra. What is at the top of the State Emblem here? If that is wrong, should we remove it and replace it with what is in your book? You tell us to study the facts; the State Emblem bears a Dharma Chakra. If a Grade 6 child visiting the public gallery sees it and asks “What is this?”, what is the answer?

¶ 08 On modules: there are weaknesses. For subjects like religion, there are multiple perspectives; when children collect material and report, several viewpoints arise — which is “correct”? This shows the module system can be unsuitable for some subjects, though good for others. The problem is the rush to implement.

¶ 09 NIE and the Ministry were not ready this year; this was hasty, driven by prior accusations against the Ministry. No one opposes reform per se. But don’t claim JVP alone defends free education by blocking all change. Blocking private medical education in the past did not help students who now go abroad — would it have been wrong to study here?

¶ 10 Real reform must address that only about 15% entering Grade 1 reach State universities; 85% have no pathway, and you even oppose private universities. What in these reforms reduces that 85%? How do you raise university access to 60–70%? That is the true reform.

¶ 11 Global shifts mean English alone is insufficient; India, China, Japan, Israel are becoming key partners. Do your reforms address additional language acquisition for future competitiveness?

¶ 12 Tuition arises from competition. To reduce tuition, increase school resources; do not just try to abolish exams. What measures here increase school facilities?

¶ 13 Expanding universities would reduce A/L competition. Otherwise, competition shifts from State to private streams (Edexcel/Cambridge). The burden will still fall on parents.

¶ 14 Do not accuse the Opposition of seeking to destroy free education. In the 1990s President Ranasinghe Premadasa provided uniforms and meals — were those anti–free education? Many of us are products of Central Colleges and State universities; we understand both public and private education and are ready for a substantive debate.

¶ 15 There are also teacher guidance issues: duplicate Grade 6 textbooks, inadequate teacher training, insufficient schools for science streams, problems with BEd qualifications and pirivena education. O/L results take months; A/L results take months; university admissions take months — determine the age at which a first degree is completed; reduce wasted time.

¶ 16 Ensure results are issued in formats adequate for foreign university entry — this is real reform.

¶ 17 Assessment: without robust exams, module marks become vulnerable to internet-enabled homework and plagiarism; selection may not capture true ability. Scholarship exam abolition — what alternative? Teacher-assessed marks can be biased; safeguards?

¶ 18 Time is up. Finally, when your own university’s Opposition Leader was studying and people called him O/L failed, you couldn’t even state he had passed. In a country with such teachers, you attempt reform.

¶ 19 To conclude, I quote C. W. W. Kannangara in 1943, when introducing free education: he compared his joy to that of Emperor Augustus on completing Rome’s marble transformation, saying he too rejoiced to gift free education to the nation’s children. Let the Government take pride — but not in inserting abnormal sexual content into free education. You may say it’s “a small part” in Grade 6, but introducing notions of homosexuality into the system is not trivial.

¶ 20 Hon. Presiding Member, I conclude.