Sunday Nov 24, 2024
Sunday Nov 24, 2024
Monday, 11 August 2014 00:03 - - {{hitsCtrl.values.hits}}
case for that. What are the two top options the Government can take in helping the industry face these challenges and move into the global value chain, add more value, create more wealth and create higher quality jobs?
Gunewardene: The first essentially is to have governance, transparency and rule of law. I am not saying this to have any political impact but the result of governance, transparency and rule of law is what drives investment. It brings in capability and there will be reverse flow of brain drain. You will have a brain gain when you create an environment which has that level of stability and confidence. We need to inject that over a period of time into this country and need to get back what we have lost. We need to drive that through governance, transparency and rule of law.
Q: So you think Sri Lanka will return when we have better law and order?
Gunewardene: You will have people coming back and new investments taking place. It is not tax incentives that will drive investment. The cost of not having rule of law, governance, and transparency actually drives away business. The attraction is not loads of tax incentives. You bring in the investment, you bring in the technology. Technology comes with investment. People come in with investment and that way knowledge transfer takes place. It is a virtual cycle. That is one important aspect.
The other important aspect that is required is that focus has to be on education. Education is key. We need to have proper education that is fit for the 21st century. We have to keep the education standards up to date, looking into the future and the goals the country aspires to achieve. It starts at the very base level of vocational training. We don’t have the luxury of having an unproductive labour force. Effectively that is what we have today. You look at the construction industry, it is unproductive. We might be able to get about at Rs. 1,000 per day but a job that can be done by one qualified person is done by five people. It creates a whole host of issues. We need to create an environment for innovative thinking, for young students to open up their minds. I believe the entire science field from education from lower levels have actually not improved or moved forward on the last 30-40 years. It is stuck in the dark ages. The quality of teaching and teachers should be emphasised. The motivation for teachers to teach needs to be created and a revamp of the entire education system is required, which will once again generate the thinking and human capital that will fuel innovation in this country.
Q: When we talk about innovation, we talk about research and development. The Government has given a number of tax breaks for this purpose, but how has it been used? Do we have a lot of R&D happening in this country or is there a lack of people to carry out R&D?
Esufally: Our incidence of tax is quite high and we have started using it. But you cannot turn on and turn off innovation within a one-year horizon. It takes a long time. It is definitely a step in the right direction and we are using it. But we want consistency in the policy.
Q: What is needed for a mindset change of the private sector to trust these incentives and use them much more?
Omar: I don’t think there is a problem of trust. Where the apparel industry is concerned, some of us are still on tax holidays. Export is anyway at 12% so triple deduction is a phenomenal piece of legislation which we were pushing for and was given. If you are paying 30% tax, then the R&D is free of charge. I don’t think we have communicated that enough. Whether you pay tax or do R&D and it is not costing you, I believe you will be a fool not to use it. I don’t think it has been communicated enough. I am unsure of the numbers but I believe it is not high. Looking at it from SLINTEC point of view we thought once that legislation came in there would be huge push towards R&D spend but we have not seen that. I believe it is because of communication. I think it will take time. In a year everyone will not suddenly wake up and say ‘I will become innovative,’ but it will start gaining momentum as time goes by.
Q: Is the SLINTEC model a good one?
Wijayasuriya: I think from the point of view of a corporation, the model certainly was innovate and was about bringing the private and public sector together and having that collaboration model. We must remember that nanotechnology per se and SLINTEC is focused on fundamental research. It is not a development organisation. Yes, there is some sort of contract development that goes on but it is fundamentally attacking nano-science and therefore the outcomes are long-term in nature. This is unique for a country like Sri Lanka to have Public and Private Partnership (PPP) coming in together with long-term research objective and long-term scientific outcomes being targeted. So in that sense we are on track. There have been a few patient applications that have gone in and some fundamental achievement. At this stage, we, Dialog Axiata, as an investor and myself on the Board, I think it is a good model that has yielded good results so far.
Q: Moving on to people, a lot is spent on training but one of the issues is that after training staff they get good credentials and experience and someone else will end up hiring them, either in Sri Lanka itself or abroad and the money spent on training cannot be taken back. In these situations, there are those who argue that there should be Public Private Partnerships that bring all the health sector people and those in hospitality into a collective effort where it is easier for everyone to invest and capture the value that is added. What are your thoughts?
Pathirage: In the healthcare sector we train our own people and we invest a lot in that. I cannot say much about the tourism industry since we just entered that arena, but I suppose for that too it is similar to the health care sector. Staff leaving is a global issue. When they find better opportunities, they will go for it. Then from an employer’s perspective one should know how well you can retain your best talent, and that is how you can drive your business. It is good if you can bring high-skilled professionals, mostly for the hospitality sector. If they can be brought in with the support of the Government, retain them and make use of them to achieve these goals, it will be good.
Q: In bringing back the people, do you see any value in SLINTEC like PPP for building up human resources within the country without each of you doing things separately in your own silos?
Pathirage: The Government and the private sector can come together and this is a need since we are talking about a number of goals. We are seeing these goals being shifted from $ 4,000 to $ 7,000 per capita and to achieve such we need the support of the public sector and we need to work together as a team. We have seen many examples. In private sector banks there are large ownerships from the Government and we also see a lot of Government-appointed directors and we work well with the sector directors. A similar thing can be done in other areas as well. We should work together as one to achieve these goals.
Q: Working together is a nice thought. Any particular interpretations? Are there any specifics the private sector can do by itself or together with the Government to work on master plans on skill development?
Gunewardene: The whole education sector is an area where the private sector can play a proactive role together with the Government. You have the free education system which is essentially funded by the Government. If there can be a scheme to monetise this and enable the individual to make a choice as to where he wants to go, I am sure some of them will make better choices. And there the private sector can create the education institutions that are relevant to the industries they are running. There is a great dynamic that can be created in the sphere of education between the Government and the private sector.
Esufally: On a specific note on people engaged in R&D, on getting high-calibre researchers, they will not just turn up here. Two things should be done; one is to have a job role that is meaningful. It has to be a big enough role to come back. Also from an income perspective you need to be able to match that. The garment industry has done this successfully where they have integrated to the supply chain. Anyone abroad in R&D would be happy to come and work in Sri Lanka. But if you take something like pharmaceutical manufacturing, where there is hardly anything going on at all, it is difficult to convince them. We need to show ambitions that are global in nature and that has to be big enough to attract people back to Sri Lanka. On that perspective I think what the Government can do is to lay the right foundation and welcome people of this calibre.
Q: On getting people to come back, it is found that children’s education is a key factor. A lot of people want to put their children into schools without having to plead. They want good quality education without hassle. They want a good compensation package, a decent city to live in. Is this something the private sector can put more effort into? Another area is dual citizenship; we were told it was done, this was back in December, and it is not. Are these the kind of things you see as barriers to people coming back?
Omar: Personally I don’t think so. We can sit here and grumble till the day is over. Even if you open up dual citizenship, I don’t think there will be a line outside the country of people trying to get in. I believe that the private sector has to wake up. We have one million housemaids earning $ 200 a month and it is a shame on all of us. During the war we had an excuse since there was no activity and majority were sent to Arabia for 200 bucks a month and we had to survive on that. But I think today as a chamber and industry if we sit and say there is no dual citizenship and there is no electricity, then we are just missing the bus. Our measurement should be that if we can sit here for a year or two and have zero house maids, have a reverse where we can have housemaids from somewhere else, then I think the private sector can sign off and say we have won. Otherwise we will grumble every year that something is messed up. When the war was there, we wanted it to end. Now that the war is ended, we want something else to end, so where will it stop?
Q: Directed to Wijayasuriya, most of what you do is not exports. Most of what you do is creating a platform for everyone to engage in export activities and so on. Is that something you are comfortable with and is that something your company thinks you need to get into more value addition and get into the global value chain?
Wijayasuriya: I think in an information age where knowledge and the plurality of knowledge, if you can create an information society where domestically everyone is connected and be part of a larger value chain, both domestically and internationally, that is already a huge challenge for the connectivity industry per day. There is a lot more work to be done but when you look at the ICT sector it has done a lot of good work in the last decade or so. First we have to connect every citizen in this country, and that is to enable the trishaw driver to the fishmonger and fishermen, to basically connect all to the large value chain. The global aspect of this is again international connectivity and opening up the e-commerce environments globally. Again connectivity industries have a lot of work to do and so do the financial services sector because funds flow both domestically as well as globally. We facilitate the connection of these value chains.
From the point of view of being a Sri Lankan, I think on one hand this connected world is very exciting because you see a huge market and enthuse about a craftsman in some corner in Sri Lanka being able to sell his products globally. It also means we must compete globally. That is where national competitiveness is a buzz word. So are we really competitive? If you open up the game and put our professionals, services and industries on the global landscape because of the connected world where a lot of other barriers have been removed, are we competitive? I would like to challenge ourselves on that and all Sri Lankans should now understand that the barriers of geographic isolation are gone. The fact that we are a small island, just 20 million people, those disadvantages no longer exist. We should be really taking in the rest of the world in this environment.
Q: How keen is the private sector to invest in high-tech manufacturing, nanotech manufacturing products for example? Or is the private sector going to restrict its scope in investing only in hotels and casinos?
Gunewardene: I don’t think we have to restrict ourselves to high tech manufacturing. The question is, will we invest in innovation? Innovation means we will become globally competitive in everything we do. Yes, currently the country is not a manufacturing base, it is more a service-oriented entity, but even on the service-oriented side, how do we become competitive? So everything that we do has to show that we innovate and improve ourselves to become competitive as an international player. In the apparel industry that is essentially what they did and stayed ahead of the game. The answer is no. It is not just the bricks and mortar, it is everything that goes into it and the output from that has to be the best in class.
Q: Is the fact that the service sector is heavily represented here an indication that Sri Lanka has an heavy representation in services as against manufacturing? Any thoughts on that?
Pathirage: The cost of labour could be one of the reasons why people get into the services sector and also I would say entering the services is risk free comparing to the investment size of a manufacturing business. That is one of the reason Softlogic has built itself over a period of 22 years where we entered with a very small capital but were able to develop ourselves through what we have earned within the business. That may be one of the key reasons.
Esufally: I am dwelling more on pharmaceuticals and the FMCG sector. Pharmaceuticals are on the Government’s agenda and it is a goal to increase self-sufficiency to local pharmaceuticals. The risk of not doing otherwise is a number of quality issues. So being involved in the healthcare industry for so long we think the only responsible thing we can do is to support that endeavour. However, it is pretty tough with India being the most competitive country in pharmaceutical manufacturing. They enjoyed a long period of protecting when they didn’t recognise the patent law that was out there in the West. So for us to start when there was no tariff protection is not easy. But the State is supporting us in some ways and that is driving our optimism in this area.
Q: Credit growth in Sri Lanka has declined to almost zero or negative levels even though interest rates have reduced. Is the private sector holding investment? And why is private sector credit growth slow when the economic growth is robust?
Pathirage: That is a difficult question for which we ourselves try to find answers because the inflation level is low today and the interest rates are also low, but we don’t see consumer pick-up in terms of business. And also the credit growth is not there. We need to wait and see. You don’t plan an investment over a period of one to six months. I am sure there is enough investment being planned by the private sector and down the line credit growth should pick up.
Q: With due credit to the Government, in the post-war era there has been a lot of emphasis on building infrastructure, yet there has been no significant FDI coming in to the benefit of the general public. What are the key reasons for this?
Pathirage: It is what Gunewardene was talking about, law and order. It is obvious that people have to be confident when pumping money into the country, so the rule of law has to be perfect and there should be good governance. That could be one of the reasons. The other problem is that we are not communicating well with the rest of the world what we have achieved. Most of the people when they come in they see the roads and infrastructure and the development achieved in the last three to four years. I think it is also important that we communicate that to the rest of the world, especially to the investors. I am positive that down the line things will happen, but then again we need to get our policies right. We can’t think of taking the tax breaks away and expect investors to come in with loads of money. It is a work in progress and the Government has to do its part and the private sector also has to encourage and find investors to form joint ventures.
Q: Is there any connection to innovation with FDIs coming in?
Wijayasuriya: First is, if FDI is a driver of growth, sure. If you just add up the numbers for a country like Sri Lanka, the size of the economy to propel itself in an accelerated growth path, there has to be an input from outside. A plus B will not add up unless there is FDI brought into the country. So what are the ingredients that are needed to drive FDI? I think the telco sector is a good example where liberalisation commenced in 1996, where there has been good regulation and discipline and if you add up the telco sector FDI, it is clearly the largest in Sri Lanka. Dialog alone is $ 1.4 billion, and when adding up the rest of the industry, it is nearly $ 2.5 billion. This is not an export industry so $ 2.5 billion FDI is supported by domestic market. And it has delivered dividends in terms of plurality of opportunity.
I believe if you add up all the ingredients of good and consistent policy, regulation and governance over a period of time, then investors will develop a strong trust in the FDI environment and will continue to reinvest. And the dividends that consumers accrue from this are high. FDI is the way to go, no doubt. If a domestic market of ICT and telco can support $ 2.5 billion, I think other industries can support much more.
In terms of what is required for innovation, I don’t see a strong link there. Innovation is not adapting or adopting new technology. Innovation is simply the innovative mind and the will to do things differently. Why do you innovate? You should not innovate if you are not solving a problem. And the first thing in innovation is solving someone’s problem or someone’s economic arbitrage. If not, don’t innovate.
Q: So have you innovated and solved problems in Sri Lanka?
Wijayasuriya: Yes, I believe so. Not only Dialog, but the entire ICT industry since 1996. We did this through high-tech products and the belief that if you give high-tech products to the nation, the value addition and knowledge creation will propel a continuous cycle of returns. I think that whole thought by all in the sector has delivered a good outcome.
One should be invest in high-tech; true you might think the private sector must focus on more high-tech innovation and investments, but we need to ask ourselves if we are solving a problem of the world and if we have some competitive advantage in that area, over and above a country like Korea. Do we want to compete with South Korea on high-tech nano-manufacture or should we play to our strengths? Have we not unlocked all the opportunities where we are very strong, and have we turned every stone to be globally competitive and what we are really good at first. If we don’t deliver a solution to the world, no one will pay us and we will not obtain the returns we should.
Omar: My view is you need to ask, what is it that we want as FDI? For example, we developed infrastructure. If the infrastructure companies were private, then all these roads and ports that had come up would have been FDI. But because it was done by the State it was fine. If we were debating about it we would have had 10 conferences and no roads.
The next thing is, what do we want? We would have got about Rs. 3-4 billion in infrastructure and that has come. In manufacturing, do we have the scale? Sticking to apparel since I know much about it, do we have the scale to set up factories with 20,000 workers? We don’t since there is no concentration of population up to that amount. So I believe today we as a country and industry need to plan what we need. Attracting investment is not very difficult because the interest rates at LIBOR are not even 1-2% return. So if you give 5% return, you are attractive, so I don’t think there is an issue in attracting capital. The problem is, do we have the ideas to generate at least 10% return? I am challenging ourselves, are we smart enough and hungry enough for this?
Q: Is that a factor, are we not hungry enough? There is a question here about lethargic workforce?
Omar: The workforce is not lethargic. I can tell you our girls leave home at 4:30 a.m. and get back at 7:30-8 p.m. and earn $ 200. That is not lethargy.
Gunewardene: There is an issue. It is time the private sector woke up and started thinking big. We have to think on a scale that is relevant. FDI is not going to come here in bits and pieces. If the private sector does not wake up and look at things in terms of what is going on in the rest of the world, we are just going to miss the bus. In that sense a lot of the initiatives are in the hands of the private sector. You come up with something and develop the right project and you can raise the money. That is effectively what we did.
Q: Would each member of the panel invest $ 2-5 million in manufacturing agriculture education in Vietnam, Thailand, Indonesia or Sri Lanka. The reasons for your answers?
Omar: My answer is I will not invest. Primarily because you make an investment to make a return, not to satisfy some religious vow, that should be clear. Why should I invest in agriculture education? I would rather invest in training apparel technology. My answer is I will not invest my money, my company’s money, or even my friend’s money.
Esufally: From an incremental basis I think there are lots of opportunities in underserved market regions which could offer a better return.
Q: Has anyone thought of the neighbourhood? India, for example; are there problems in terms of exporting and engaging and placing parts of your value chain there?
Omar: We have invested to source out of there, not to export into India. We feel in our product and market segment we have hardly scratched the surface so we have a lot more room to compete and get into the EU and US markets. So we have not looked at exporting to India. You will sell to a country where you have the best return, so if your market is the US, you would rather market and service that.
Q: We have this fixation on manufacturing. One of the important things in service exports that is happening under your nose is that when you go to a hospital under the Softlogic Group, you will find an international desk manned at all hours because they expect clients from the Maldives. That is what you call service exports. Is this something companies are taking seriously? Is this something where we could, instead of our people going to Thailand or Singapore, should we think of people coming here, is that a realistic possibility?
Pathirage: We are getting there. Even today we are getting a lot of customers from Maldives despite India being highly developed in the healthcare sector. We are not trying to attract from India but hospital companies are gearing themselves. We have to get certain accreditations and there are mandatory requirements in terms of quality and standards. We have invested in those and we are gearing ourselves to have a bigger medical tourism moving forward. Also if you talk about Thailand, we are in line to compete with it since we are nearly equal in tourism and why not in medical tourism? We need to get this done with the help of the Government. We could look at linking medial tourism to the tourism sector. So they must promote that as a product.
Esufally: I agree. The private sector should wake up and do their own thing. In certain instances cooperation with the Government will get you there much faster and quicker. Malaysia has this Health Tourism Council where there is a specific vision and they are mandated to drive health tourism into the country.
Q: Could the panel step back and look at Sri Lanka in the macro global context. What do we want to be in the world based on our strengths, core competencies, and global vision? This is the right time for a paradigm shift in changing our strategies to absorb FDIs and identify correct export sectors. To enhance towards the goal of achieving the goal of $ 7,000 per capita by 2020, are our national policymakers smart enough to cater to this?
Gunewardene: From a big picture perspective, forget the GDP numbers, what we would like to see where the country is essentially to people who can add value to the economy. We must get away from a three-wheeler economy to a value-added economy. What we do have to be at a standard where we can deliver a service to the region and the region is the 2.5 million people we are talking about. That should be the growing side of the global economy; it is right next door to us. We have a significant strategic advantage in terms of location. We have an intelligent nation and we have to make it more intelligent. In my opinion the private sector can drive this. We don’t need too much support from the Government and we shouldn’t be looking for too much of it either since there is a lot we can do to drive this. I can see our country 10 years from now catering goods and services to that population.
Q: The infrastructure is in place. Is the private sector ready to capitalise on Sri Lanka’s competitive advantage? What is preventing people from doing so?
Gunewardene: I think we are capitalising on strategic location. The tourism industry is one. The infrastructure is going to help benefit in the longer term and there is lots that needs to be done to position Sri Lanka. I don’t think the infrastructure is wasted. Ports are not going to be wasted. The Modi effect can have a phenomenal effect on Sri Lanka and we must be ready for that. If India grows 7-8%, which it will do over the next 10 years, the impact on Sri Lanka will be phenomenal. Even the Colombo Port is growing at 12% per year. The Colombo Port alone, once fully built, will have a capacity of 16 million containers, the largest by far in this part of the world. So yes, we are capitalising on this.
Q: If the Modi factor is to be taken into account, should we think of trade agreements, and things of that nature? And what is your opinion on the FTA with China?
Omar: The FTA with China, we are really pushing it. The drive has come from the apparel sector. The idea is the imbalance of trade with India, China and Japan is heavily in their favour, so we are trying to find a way to penetrate that market. It is not easy since China exports $ 137 billion worth of apparel. So one would say we are crazy to think we can be a part of that market. They have 40% of global apparel exports. What we find is that there are brands that produce here and want to export part of that to China, which they still do. And if we have a duty free access then our penetration into that market will be higher.
I think with India our relationship is decent at the moment, irrespective of all chatter we hear on and off. When you look at connectivity and the number of flights into India per day, it is massive. I think we as an industry have failed to convince India to open up the market much more than it has done. We have not given up; as time goes along we will do so. Down the line that will be our largest market. They have a trade deficit of $ 200 billion and we have argued this all the time that to give Sri Lanka duty free access of at least $ 1 billion and it will not even dent their trade balance by any amount. But we will keep on lobbying for that.
On ports and airports, due to the 30-year war we have got stunted in our thinking. We export $ 10 billion and we think we have arrived. Singapore exports over $ 200 billion and they are 18 by 24 miles, that is the size of the country. In the US there were the baby boomers; unfortunately, most of our generation are free rice eaters. Up to 1977 we had that and we want everything from the Government. Till all the younger generation take over, we will sit and grumble about the Government.
Q: Isn’t it time the young generation entered the boardroom to reach the 2020 target? Are you keeping them out?
Gunewardene: It’s time we went. It’s time we introduce the younger generation. The digital generation should come it.
Q: Isn’t it too early for you to retire? Shouldn’t you all be in the game?
Omar: There should be a condition: don’t grumble, just do it. The moment you tolerate all this whining, you cannot get out. If there is a solution; give it; if you don’t have a solution and want to grumble, then get out of the room. Only then will we change as an industry and as an association. Otherwise it is a waste of time, energy and money.
Q: Given that it is a technology-intensive industry where R&D is essential to allow people to innovate in a largely-penetrated market, can you give an example of what prospects a person holding a PHD from a world class university will have to work in Sri Lanka? How seriously has your company taken R&D?
Wijayasuriya: First we all have to accept that in our industry it’s a very small ‘R’ and a large ‘D’. Again that large D is about adopting and adapting. If you want to really drive a contribution to the economy and therefore drive jobs and attract Sri Lankans back, then we need to be clever about how we take modern technology and innovation and make it applicable to the Sri Lankan marker. Unless something is applicable for our entire population at least in five years, then it will not create jobs and value.
I myself had a PHD in 1994 and I took that challenge of coming back and what I did on a day-to-day basis was not work in a high profile R&D lab like I did overseas. But the innovation that went on around me and kept me excited for the next 20 plus years is something more rewarding. So it is in your mind what innovation is about. It is not about tapping away on a high-tech machine and creating the next Silicon Valley invention. Innovation is about solving problems, and Sri Lanka has a lot of them. So clear and intelligent people can find plenty of work and excitement and can add value.
Q: As a way of facilitation of PPP and private sector involvement in the advancement of R&D to achieve global competitiveness, can the private sector involve itself more with the universities by working with students and help funding research arm of these universities? Why has this involvement been limited?
Wijayasuriya : I think there is a lot of collaboration with the universities. We have a Dialog Moratuwa Wireless Communication Laboratory and there is lots of communications development going on there which then gets absorbed into our own technologies or third party technologies. Is it sufficient? I believe not. We need to see more impetus, and more private sector-university partnerships. I again say it should be small R and big D. Let’s play to our strengths and needs. We need to adapt and adopt. Not just essentially do fundamental research.
Omar: I fully agree. Over the last 10 years I think the collaboration between the private sector and the universities have gone up greatly. If you look at the intake, Moratuwa University especially, I don’t think any singe graduate leaves the university without a job since the private sector competes with each other to get those students. I believe if we can expand what we have, it will be good. The talent is comparable with the best in the world, the talent is phenomenal. There has been collaboration and superb practices but I think the idea has not been communicated enough and not known. But my experience in the apparel industry, we have signed MoUs with almost all the companies. Unlike 15 years ago, there was nothing.
Q: Would you consider yourself to be an optimist or a pessimist on the future of Sri Lanka? What one fact would you state to support your point of view?
Ashroff: I don’t believe in pessimism. I am an optimist. Just look around you. Look at the progress that has been achieved in the last four years. When you look at every industry, there has been growth. Some say tourism is not growing in Sri Lanka. Just look at the accounts of hotels as of 31 March, it has the best closing. There has been some growth. Be it exports, car imports, tourist arrivals, everything is on a high. My view is that all of us have to be optimists.
Esufally: I am a cautious optimist. The evidence for that is that we are seeing less of our high potential talent leaving our shores. We have also been able to attract high profile talent back and have also been able to attract people from other nationalities.
Gunewardene: We are making the largest investment of $ 900 million in a company, one shot. That is the single piece of evidence.
Pathirage: I am very optimistic on the view of Sri Lanka overall. There can be challenges but having gone through a war for 30 years, today’s context is much easier and we companies have brought ourselves to a platform where we can make use of the opportunity. So we are very optimistic.
Wijayasuriya: We have always been optimistic. Even during the toughest times, we have been optimistic. It brings to surface our key strength on being small. The chances we get even in the private and the public sector on the global scale are higher. We just need to compete as hard as possible to get as much investment as possible into the country. We are optimistic since all the indices are moving in our favour. The fact is that in the knowledge economy, we can compete with the rest of the world.
Just one piece of caution is that the only way we can trip ourselves up is social unrest and political unrest as we have seen. A little fly in the ointment can explode and take us back several years. We need to be cautions that when the country is accelerating fast and progressing well, we must not forget that social equity, the basis of education health, and equal access to opportunity should be made available to all Sri Lankans so that there will be no risks of political and social unrest in the coming years. We need to be crystal clear on that front in the next 10 years and with that I think there will be nothing stopping us.
Pix by Lasantha Kumara
