Topic
Corruption & Governance Reform
2,708 speeches · 349 speakers
Party share
By the speaker's party · counts only, no scoring. "Unattributed" = speeches not resolved to an MP.
Most active on this topic
| # | Member | Speeches |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Hon. Bimal Rathnayake, M.P. JJB | 91 |
| 2 | Hon. Dayasiri Jayasekara, Attorney at Law, M.P. SJB | 86 |
| 3 | Hon. Mujibur Rahman, M.P. SJB | 80 |
| 4 | Hon. Ajith P. Perera, M.P. SJB | 70 |
| 5 | Hon. Chaminda Wijesiri, M.P. SJB | 68 |
| 6 | Hon. Dr. Harini Amarasuriya, M.P. JJB | 68 |
| 7 | Hon. (Dr.) Ramanathan Archchuna, M.P. Independent Group 17 - Jaffna | 67 |
| 8 | Hon. Sajith Premadasa, M.P. SJB | 65 |
| 9 | Hon. Chamara Sampath Dasanayake, M.P. NDF | 64 |
| 10 | Hon. Wasantha Samarasinghe, M.P. JJB | 64 |
Speeches
2,708 on this topic- 17 February 2026 The Hon. (Prof.) Ruwan Ranasinghe - Deputy Minister of Tourism JJB AI summary Hon. (Prof.) Ruwan Ranasinghe supported the Bill to abolish the special pension scheme for Members of Parliament, stating that it fulfils a National People’s Power manifesto pledge and responds to public demands for a new political culture. He argued that parliamentary service is a temporary public mandate rather than a pensionable career, and that lifelong pensions for MPs create unjustified privilege compared with ordinary citizens. He said the reform is intended to restore trust in Parliament and signal ethical leadership without undermining the need for adequate salaries and institutional support for MPs. Parliamentary Pensions (Repeal) Bill - Second Reading Debate Read →
- 17 February 2026 The Hon. Aboobucker Athambawa JJB AI summary Hon. Aboobucker Athambawa supported the Parliamentary Pensions (Abolition) Bill, arguing that it fulfils a government and presidential pledge to end non-contributory pension privileges for MPs and their families. He contrasted parliamentary pensions with the contributory pensions of public servants and said elected office should be treated as public service rather than a profession for personal benefit. He also cited public confidence, anti-corruption efforts, economic recovery, anti-narcotics action, tourism development, estate worker wage increases, coastal park projects, education reforms, and the “Praja Shakthi” rural poverty programme as evidence of the Government’s broader policy agenda. Parliamentary Pensions (Repeal) Bill - Second Reading Debate Read →
- 17 February 2026 The Hon. (Ms.) Lakmali Hemachandra, Attorney-at-Law JJB AI summary Hon. Lakmali Hemachandra supported the Bill to Abolish Parliamentary Pensions, stating that it implements a clear electoral pledge made at the presidential and parliamentary elections and is based on the Government’s mandate rather than the Chitrasiri Report. She questioned whether Members who had previously presented similar Private Members’ Bills would support the measure, and rejected the argument that pensions are necessary to attract quality representatives or prevent corruption. She argued that pre-1977 politicians served without pensions and said the Bill seeks to restore a tradition of public-spirited representation. Parliamentary Pensions (Repeal) Bill - Second Reading Debate Read →
- 17 February 2026 The Hon. K. V. Samantha Viddyarathna – Minister of Plantation and Community Infrastructure AI summary The Minister supported the Bill to abolish parliamentary pensions, presenting it as part of a broader programme to remove political privileges and rebuild public trust during economic hardship. He argued that the existing pension scheme, expanded since 1977, is unfair because MPs can qualify after only five years while public servants must work for decades, and said past abuses had strengthened public opposition to such benefits. He contrasted this with the Government’s measures to reduce official residences, vehicles and other privileges, and defended the plantation wage increase while criticizing Opposition resistance to it. He said the Government would consider compassionate assistance for former MPs in genuine hardship, but maintained that the general pension entitlement should end. Parliamentary Pensions (Repeal) Bill - Second Reading Debate Read →
- 17 February 2026 The Hon. Dilith Jayaweera SB AI summary Hon. Dilith Jayaweera opposed the proposed pension reform, arguing that it was motivated by hostility toward former JVP/NPP MPs who had contributed salaries and allowances to the party and now lack financial support, citing former MP Charitha Premasiri Manage as an example. He called instead for reasonable reforms such as need-based assistance or contributory mechanisms to protect financially vulnerable former representatives and encourage clean public service. He also urged caution over statements linking a slain lawyer in the Akuregoda incident to the underworld without proof, and asked government leaders to avoid broad claims that Sri Lanka is a “racist country” without specifying the conduct being addressed. Parliamentary Pensions (Repeal) Bill - Second Reading Debate Read →
- 17 February 2026 The Hon. Nihal Galappaththi JJB AI summary Hon. Nihal Galappaththi argued that the NPP Government is fulfilling a major pledge to reform parliamentary privileges and public representation, presenting it as a historic change made in the public interest. He contrasted his own record of serving without personal security with politicians who, he said, seek protection after failing to keep promises. He detailed MPs’ salaries and allowances, stating that total benefits amount to nearly Rs. 400,000 excluding staff, and said the Government would reject and reform practices such as appointing relatives to parliamentary staff. Parliamentary Pensions (Repeal) Bill - Second Reading Debate Read →
- 17 February 2026 The Hon. (Dr.) Harini Amarasuriya – Prime Minister and Minister of Education, Higher Education and Vocational Education AI summary Prime Minister Harini Amarasuriya supported the Bill to Abolish Parliamentary Pensions, saying it fulfils a government pledge and is intended to end a special privilege for MPs rather than gain popularity. She traced post-1977 pension amendments as progressively expanding benefits to Members and their families, arguing that these reflected a broader political culture of privilege that widened the gap between representatives and citizens. She said abolishing the pension was both symbolic and substantive, aimed at rebuilding public trust, reducing elite entitlement, and presenting politics as public service rather than a route to lifelong benefits. Parliamentary Pensions (Repeal) Bill - Second Reading Debate Read →
- 17 February 2026 The Hon. Chamara Sampath Dasanayake NDF AI summary Chamara Sampath Dasanayake argued for honesty in political criticism, citing NPP representatives living on former Bandaranaike family land in Attanagalla while stating that not all wealth should be characterized as illicit. He praised the President and Shammi Silva for facilitating a cricket match that he said attracted 15,000–20,000 Indian tourists, and said municipal-level corruption, including in the Kadawatha/Kaduwela area, would be exposed. He also urged that pensions be granted to those genuinely in need, clarifying that he was not seeking a pension for himself. Parliamentary Pensions (Repeal) Bill - Second Reading Debate Read →
- 17 February 2026 The Hon. Sunil Watagala, Attorney-at-Law - Deputy Minister of Public Security and Parliamentary Affairs JJB AI summary The Deputy Minister supported repealing the Parliamentary Pensions Act, No. 1 of 1977, arguing that it created an unjust benefit for MPs compared with ordinary public servants. He traced the law’s enactment and subsequent amendments in 1982, 1985 and 1990, stating that they expanded pensions to MPs’ spouses and children and further entrenched the scheme. He said the repeal would end a long-standing system that allowed elected representatives to receive pension benefits after short periods of service. Parliamentary Pensions (Repeal) Bill - Second Reading Debate Read →
- 17 February 2026 The Hon. Harshana Rajakaruna SJB AI summary Hon. Harshana Rajakaruna argued that MPs should receive pensions to provide financial security and help attract qualified people to Parliament, while cautioning against portraying all MPs as corrupt. He questioned the Government’s consistency on pledges relating to voluntary service, fuel and electricity price reductions, VAT, abolition of the Executive Presidency, and constitutional reform, citing low implementation of promises. He also raised concerns about alleged interference in Parliament’s independent administration, referring to action involving the Deputy Secretary-General and possible moves concerning the Secretary-General, and called for protection of institutional independence. Parliamentary Pensions (Repeal) Bill - Second Reading Debate Read →
- 17 February 2026 The Hon. Ananda Wijepala - Minister of Public Security and Parliamentary Affairs JJB AI summary Minister Ananda Wijepala said the Government had acted on its manifesto by stabilizing the economy, increasing foreign exchange earnings and fiscal revenue, and allocating funds for disaster recovery after “Ditva.” He framed the Bill abolishing MPs’ pensions as part of a broader effort to reform political culture, reduce privileges, and combat corruption, rejecting the Opposition’s argument that pensions deter corruption. He said investigations into corruption would continue, alongside measures against links between politicians, narcotics and the underworld, and referred to wider reforms including education changes and the “Praja Shakthi” rural poverty programme. Parliamentary Pensions (Repeal) Bill - Second Reading Debate Read →
- 17 February 2026 The Hon. Dharmapriya Dissanayake JJB AI summary Asked whether the Government will implement a programme aimed at the overall development of journalists. Oral Question: Media Institutions and Support for Journalists (Q.9/2025) Read →
- 17 February 2026 The Hon. Suranga Rathnayaka SJB AI summary Hon. Suranga Rathnayaka raised a supplementary question concerning alleged national losses arising from substandard coal procurement, with part of the remarks expunged by order of the Chair. He asked what action the Ministry and Minister would take to recover any losses and sought the current status of related inquiries. Oral Question: Electricity Generated by Solar Panels (Q.2/2025) Read →
- 6 February 2026 The Hon. Bimal Rathnayake JJB AI summary Bimal Rathnayake accused the Opposition of undermining Easter Sunday attack prosecutions by describing repurposed state properties used for daily hearings as “jungle courts,” and argued that such venues are intended to clear backlogs and assist victims. He alleged that the Opposition was attempting to equate the Government with past corruption, cited the Mahaiyawa tunnel project and alleged demands for payment under a former Highways Minister, and defended the current Speaker’s integrity. He also said the Government supports free education, respects the armed forces while addressing post-war abuses, and plans transparent use of recovered gold for North and East development funds. Division: Resolution under Public Security Ordinance Read →
- 6 February 2026 Hon. (Dr.) Najith Indika JJB AI summary Hon. (Dr.) Najith Indika defended the continuation of the emergency declared after Cyclone “Ditva,” arguing it remains necessary to coordinate disaster relief, essential services, housing assistance, and support for displaced persons across the affected districts. He said the Government had not used emergency powers to suppress protests, dissent, or criticism, contrasting its conduct with alleged past abuses under earlier administrations. He rejected allegations of acting above the law and urged any complaints of theft, fraud, or unequal legal treatment to be raised through proper channels. He also criticized repeated obscene language directed at parliamentary leaders and suggested the Opposition address such conduct internally. Debate: Extension of Emergency Regulations (Cyclone Ditwah) Read →
- 6 February 2026 Hon. Nalin Bandara Jayamaha SJB AI summary Hon. Nalin Bandara Jayamaha opposed extending the emergency, arguing that disaster-related regulations and compensation are already in place and that the measure is being used to suppress public dissent rather than address post-disaster needs. He criticised delays in restoring flood- and landslide-damaged railway and infrastructure links, questioned the Government’s capacity to manage reconstruction, and suggested seeking capable foreign assistance where necessary. He also alleged economic stagnation, pressure on SMEs, weak post-Cyclone Ditva recovery measures, and low public-sector morale, while calling for the dignity and independence of Parliament’s offices and staff to be protected. Debate: Extension of Emergency Regulations (Cyclone Ditwah) Read →
- 6 February 2026 Hon. M.A.M. Thahir ACMC AI summary Hon. M.A.M. Thahir questioned the necessity of extending the emergency, arguing that the Government’s stated restoration of calm did not justify continued extraordinary powers and citing past impacts on the Muslim community, including the detention of Hon. Rishad Bathiudeen under the PTA after the Easter attacks. He alleged that emergency-related authority and programmes such as “Prajashakthi” were being used to consolidate political control without proper legal process. He also requested action on coastal erosion, effective paddy procurement at the declared floor price, and administrative improvements in local hospitals, including appointments and reversal of ad hoc transfers. Debate: Extension of Emergency Regulations (Cyclone Ditwah) Read →
- 6 February 2026 Hon. Sundaralingam Pradeep - Deputy Minister of Plantation and Community Infrastructure JJB AI summary Hon. Sundaralingam Pradeep supported the extension of the Emergency Regulations, arguing that the current emergency was declared for humanitarian response to Cyclone Ditva rather than for political suppression. He said the regulations enabled faster rescue and relief in hill country areas by allowing cross-boundary assistance, removal of dangerous trees, land allocation, and delivery of essential services. He rejected Opposition claims of abuse of emergency powers, asked for specific examples, and raised related concerns including communal divisiveness, respect for women MPs, ongoing hill country housing projects, wage increases, and a call for estate-owning politicians to provide land to affected people. Debate: Extension of Emergency Regulations (Cyclone Ditwah) Read →
- 6 February 2026 Hon. (Mrs.) Nilanthi Kottahachchi, Attorney-at-Law JJB AI summary Hon. Nilanthi Kottahachchi argued that the Government is managing the aftermath of the “Ditva” cyclone as part of a wider socio-economic and institutional recovery, emphasizing housing, land, financial support, and restoration of livelihoods for affected families. She defended the extension and use of Emergency Regulations as necessary to reduce administrative delays and enable timely relief, while stating that assistance is being delivered transparently and according to need. She criticized the Opposition for focusing on shortcomings rather than supporting disaster response, and called for cooperation among political leaders, officials, and citizens in rebuilding efforts. Debate: Extension of Emergency Regulations (Cyclone Ditwah) Read →
- 6 February 2026 The Hon. Muneer Mulaffer — Deputy Minister of Religious and Cultural Affairs AI summary Deputy Minister Muneer Mulaffer defended the extension of the Emergency as a necessary measure to respond to the destruction caused by Cyclone “Ditva” and said it was being used to expedite rehabilitation, not to suppress media or the public. He rejected Opposition criticism by referring to past uses of Emergency and questioned earlier governments’ records on disaster response, environmental issues, and corruption. He also addressed the Mannar–Puttalam road and the Saudi-funded Nurachcholai housing scheme, alleging that past political actors had obstructed solutions and benefits for affected communities. He added that his Ministry would seek to prevent the politicization of mosques and religious institutions. Debate: Extension of Emergency Regulations (Cyclone Ditwah) Read →