Synchronising PPP critical for economic inclusion, enrichment of all Sri Lankans

• Responsibility of the next president

Sri Lanka has witnessed three youth uprisings; one of the root causes was the prevailing education system  – Fill Photo

PPP towards an inclusive progress To drive Sri Lanka towards a more inclusive economic growth depends on not only on articulating statements via electronic and print media, but by making sure that economic growth shown by economic indicators are flowed down to the masses thus helping to improve their living standards and lifestyle. Even though the island’s economic infrastructure development has progressed considerably during the last 10-year period, along with the end of the conflict, still the majority of the public question the status of inclusivity, transparency and the impact this development has had on the majority of the people. We know the present Government had a very clear and decisive vision to achieve certain set goals but the process adopted and embarked on towards this engagement lacked critical partnerships that should have been in place. The countries that have achieved more inclusive economic growth in the West and in Asia, excluding countries like India and China, achieved those development goals by establishing core equal partnership engagement between the public and the private sector. The role of the governance and the role of the management are clearly defined and enshrined in the critical and key collaborations in planning development focus initiatives where all stakeholders are winners. Most of these countries treat their respective country as one business entity in bringing in value and development to benefit every segment of the society. As former Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamed commented during his recent visit to Sri Lanka about ‘Malaysia Inc,’ he articulated clearly defined roles for each of the stakeholders, particularly synchronising the public and private sector partnership for success of ‘Malaysia Inc’. We have seen Japan Inc, German Inc, etc. have achieved more inclusive development where all the stakeholders irrespective of fear or favour are able to drive economic development across to all sectors and economic enrichment for all segments to benefit.   Lost opportunities Unfortunately, in Sri Lanka we are yet see the Public Private Partnership model taking very firm engagement to bring about this inclusive economic development. What we have seen in the last 50 years is more or less one sector dominant role instead of core equal partnership between the private and public sector – either stronger public sector driven economic development engagement or unplanned private sector driven focused development of certain sectors only. In the pre-’77 era we witnessed the failed and unsustainable more public sector driven economic development model. The post-’77 era with the greatly liberalised economy with much greater private sector participation with an economic development model that focused on certain sectors however created significant and rapid growth. But due to the free ride, it did not facilitate more inclusive economic growth and enrichment to all, but instead widened the gap between the rich and the poor and almost destroyed the most vibrant middle class that existed in Sri Lanka. What is more significant in the last two decades was the emergence of an era where each one took the other for granted and carried on where development was more sector focused with less inclusive planning for much-needed public private partnerships.   Transparent, governance and management conscious public and private sector With the ending of the war, there was great expectation for closer collaboration of all stakeholders to work towards more inclusive economic development of key economic sectors of the country and enrichment of all segments of Sri Lankan society. President Mahinda Rajapaksa should be credited with critical leadership given and the determination in ending the brutal war and also working on some of the much-needed infrastructure. Yet we failed to see the much-needed public private sector partnerships working more holistically towards initiatives, frameworks and platforms that can create greater inclusive development across all key economic sectors of the country and thereby bring the impact of the development and enrichment of all the people of the country. While the public institutions worked on their own agenda, the private sector adopted a ‘make hay while the sun shines’ approach and at times some restricted their operations due to fear of non-collaboration of the public sector regulatory mechanism while some expanded their operations due to favours and they were able work around, with and through public sector authorities. This one of the key reasons that despite very significant and very timely achievements of this Government, still the majority of the people feel non-inclusion in the mainstream of the economic engagement and no opportunity has been given to enjoy the impact of these significant achievements after the end of the war. For the current status quo, the leadership of the both public and private sector institutions should take the blame as they failed see the big picture and eye-to-eye in ushering much-required economic development that can penetrate to every corner of the country where every citizen of the country too can feel and the enjoy the benefits of this much-awaited economic enrichment after the war.   Sri Lanka’s key challenge for next generation One key challenge Sri Lanka faced in the last 50 years was non-inclusion of more pragmatic and youth-focused economic planning for youth economic empowerment. Sri Lanka has witnessed three youth uprisings; the first being in 1970/’71 second being 1988/’89 and last being the northern-youth based 30-year Eelam war, where all three setbacks resulted in thousands of youth getting killed and greatly lost opportunities for the country. One of the root causes was the prevailing education system. Despite being the only country having such a blessed initiative of free education, it only produces youth more or less for desk jobs. Every year around 450,000 young people sit for the Ordinary Level examination and around 250,000 pass the OLs and sit for Advanced Level examination and out of this approximately 120,000 pass ALs with three subjects and qualify to enter universities but finally out of this only 25,000 get into the university system. The issue is out of the 450,000 youth who sit for OL only 25,000 get into university, leaving 425,000 every year at the crossroads, none of them are skilled in masonry, carpentry, bakery, plumbing, etc., and nor would they want to return to these vocations having reached and crossed the Ordinary Level Examination though there is huge need in the country for them in the craft, skilled and vocational area.   The German model for PPP On the invitation of the German Federal Foreign Ministry I visited Germany from 30 November to 6 December on an exposure visit to understand how the German dual education system creates youth empowerment and strengthens the corporate industry sectors in Germany. Sri Lanka in fact can gain much-needed inspiration from this German model to bring a number of progressive initiatives to change the current process to a more dynamic shift and adaptation that suits the requirement of Sri Lanka. One of the most significant inspirations I gained was the dynamic and highly synchronised public private partnership as core equal partners and collaborators that drives more inclusive economic engagement, development and enrichment across all segments of the German people. There is a significant collaboration between the Federal Government and State Governments, whichever party is in power, and they equally partner with the Chambers of Commerce and Industry as the private sector representing apex body and all three institutions partner with respective labour and professional unions. All these partners see the big picture clearly, the need of economic development of the ‘German Inc’ and towards facilitating this development they begin to see eye-to-eye on partnership and collaborate to facilitate that.   German dual education system is an inspiration to Sri Lanka The German dual education system is a unique collaborative mechanism between a number of partners of public and private institutions, the Federal Government, the State Governments, Chambers of Commerce and Industry and the Worker Unions, which together work on a seamless program on vocation education and training that meets the critical requirement of the country’s industry sector and facilitates continuous improvement of the training to accommodate the changing needs of the economy. Through the collaborative Public Private Partnership (PPP), the German dual education system ensures generation of jobs and thereby stabilises fragile labour market situations. The Association of German Chambers of Commerce and Industry (DIHK), which is the apex representing body of the German companies covering wider industry sectors, plays a huge role in the success of the dual education system as two-thirds of the curriculum of vocation training has to be at the respective companies as an apprentice and only one-third takes place at the respective vocational/technical centres or colleges. At any given time there would be millions and millions of youth who are part of the dual education system works as apprentices in all the companies in Germany. Having an apprentice in a company being trained under a specific curriculum is a huge responsibility and cost to the companies; however the companies consider this as an investment as they would have the opportunity of having highly-skilled youth in the respective companies. This collaborative partnerships covers business interest, worker interest and public interest through the State Governments and the Federal Government. This partnership collaboration ensures a vibrant and more sustainable economic development and the benefits of that development are felt across all the people and segments of German society, where all become beneficiaries of the economic enrichment that is ushered to all. Another unique facilitation of the German dual education system is any of the youth getting into this training process in any of the vocation fields has the ability to go up to the university system too if he or she wishes. Reinventing not needed but synchronising PPP key for economic inclusion The replication of the German dual education system as operated in Germany is not pragmatic, however Sri Lanka need not reinvent the wheel either; there is a strong educational system prevailing in the primary, secondary and higher educational system. There is also a strongly-established vocational educational infrastructure and a system in Sri Lanka which is managed by the Tertiary and Vocational Education Commission of the Ministry of Vocational and Technical Training. The training includes courses based on curriculum at vocational training centres. The National Vocational Qualification System (NVQS) provides through these centres a structured seven level of qualification from level 1 to level 7. There is also some partnership between the private sector and the National Apprentice and Industrial Training Authority (NAITA) that focuses on certain vocational areas but this is not very inclusive. Sri Lanka has a strong private sector from blue chip corporates to medium, small businesses/industries covering wider Sri Lankan industry sectors. We also see some corporates have their own vocational training facilities and programs and some partner other organisations, doing vocational training as a part of their CSR initiatives. All these activities and programs have some impact but because it is not driven under a single broad vision based on preparing the next generation of skilled youth for growing industry needs, falls short of sustainable youth economic empowerment. These programs are like bits and pieces here and there. There needs to be well-coordinated collaboration between the public sector, the Government Ministry which runs the vocation education system that offers the national qualification and the private sector companies which can provide apprentice employment as a part of the curriculum in the respective private entities. This would indeed be a cost to the private sector, giving opportunities to thousands and thousands of youth under the NVQSL, but this not as a part of CSR but as part of CCR – Corporate Commercial Responsibility. This commitment of the private corporates in the long run will eventually benefit as having the benefits of a highly-skilled work force in their respective industry sectors and organisations.   Responsibility of the winner There is now a crying need in the country to synchronise public private partnership not only for education and vocational training but also for preparing the youth for the next generation of industry sectors’ human resource requirement but also as there are a number of public institutions that need private sector-like efficiency, accountability and governance in the same way most of the private sector needs public sector consciousness not only in terms of paying taxes but also in complying with regulation and profit not at any cost but more responsible revenue generation by giving products and services to the society that create value. The private sector has the responsibility in creating very impactful transformation to all of their stakeholders inclusive of their shareholders, employees, customers and the public the society at large. Whoever wins the election as the new president, despite many promises each one is making, if the leadership doesn’t believe in collaborative Public Private Partnership (PPP) in the era of economic development and fails to create the framework and platform to synchronise Public Private Partnership, this beautiful country will remain a less-achieved state which has failed to harness its human resources and other God-given, natural and economic resources.   [The writer is the Chairman of Asia’s largest Microfinance Network – Banking With The Poor Network (BWTP). He is also Chairman of the CSR Sri Lanka national Apex body for corporate social responsibility, serves on the boards of national and international financial institutions. Innovator, advocate and practitioner of Financial Inclusion in Asia. He can be contacted via [email protected].]