P’ment flares up in debate over CoPF’s report on visa outsourcing

• State Minister Shehan Semasinghe accuses CoPF Chairman Dr. Harsha de Silva of presenting misleading and defective report
• Calls for Dr. de Silva to be referred to privileges committee for misleading Parliament
• Dr. de Silva rejects all charges, stood by report and offered to step down as CoPF Chair till matter was resolved inviting scrutiny
• Asserts report included views of all committee members; not done secretly
• Alleges threats of imprisonment; says he is unafraid and ready in best of the citizens and country
• MP Nimal Lanza and Public Security Minister Tiran Alles point to increase in tourist arrivals and revenue, to dismiss concerns about impact of visa process outsourcing deal
• Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa argues competitive tenders could have prevented $ 25 visa charge, with $ 1 Mobitel service
• Justice Minister Dr. Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe argues appropriateness of raising a privilege issue against a Committee Chair, citing Constitutional powers 
• Highlights challenging Chair equates to testing Speaker’s authority

Dr. Harsha de Silva

Shehan Semasinghe

Tiran Alles

Nimal Lanza

Dr. Dr. Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe

The Parliament was engulfed in a heated debate yesterday after Government MPs raised a privilege issue against the Committee on Public Finance (CoPF) Chairman Dr. Harsha de Silva who last week tabled a report on a controversial visa deal with the GBS Technology Services and IVS Global – FZCO and VFS VF Worldwide Holdings Ltd. 

On 12 July, MP and CoPF Chairman Dr. de Silva submitted the final report on the controversial visa issuance system, recommending the cancellation of the visa process outsourcing deal that the Government signed with the consortium.

The committee suggests either calling for new bids or incorporating its recommendations into a new agreement, citing serious irregularities in the current deal. Dr. Harsha de Silva presented the report to Parliament, highlighting the need for a comprehensive forensic audit of the tender procedure and the full procurement process. 

State Minister of Finance Shehan Semasinghe countered, accusing Dr. de Silva of presenting a defective and false report that misled Parliament, claiming the report was unanimously approved by the CoPF membership. 

Semasinghe asserted that the privileges of 16 members had been breached and that misleading a Parliamentary committee was a punishable offence. 

He called for Dr. de Silva to be referred to the privileges committee.

In his defence, Dr. de Silva rejected all charges individually and collectively, insisting that the views of all committee members were included in the final report. 

He offered to stand down as CoPF chair until the matter was resolved, emphasising transparency in his actions and inviting scrutiny of his report.

“This was not done secretly. There were three weeks for members to respond,” de Silva stated. “If I am to be imprisoned, do it. I am not afraid that it is for the best of the citizens and country. Give me an opportunity and I will show how each word is true.”

CoPF Chairman said the report was also attached as an addendum. 

Semasinghe also clarified that there was no intention to remove Dr. de Silva from the CoPF. 

MP Nimal Lanza added that while there were initial concerns that tourist arrivals had fallen due to the visa outsourcing deal as per the said report by the CoPF there was, in fact, an increase this year. 

Joining the debate, Public Security Minister Tiran Alles corroborated this, noting an increase in tourist arrivals and significant revenue generated under new categories.

“After April there were 53,000 tourists under new categories, which boosted revenues of Rs. 1.4 billion,” he added.

Minister Alles questioned the Deputy Speaker’s decision to allow a debate over the visa outsourcing deal, suggesting it would attract unnecessary media attention. 

Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa argued that competitive tenders would have prevented the $ 25 visa charge, as Mobitel had only charged $ 1. 

He expressed concern over procedural fairness, noting his microphone was muted during the debate.

Justice Minister Dr. Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe questioned the decency of raising a privilege issue against a Committee Chairman, who was acting under powers derived from the Constitution. 

He highlighted the Constitutional powers of committee Chairman and warned against diminishing Parliamentary authority by raising privilege questions against them.

“If he is made an accused in another committee of the same Parliament and there is an investigation, it is the Parliament’s power that is degraded. So it is the confidence people have in the Parliament that is reduced. There is a legal question here. The Chair should consider whether it is possible to raise a question like this.”

He noted that the ultimate responsibility of all committees rests with the Speaker, implying that challenging a committee chairman equates to challenging the Speaker’s authority.

“It is not important whether it is Dr. Harsha de Silva or not. There are many committees. Can the Chairman of a committee be called over a privileges issue? Under the Constitution there are powers to make standing orders. It is implemented through the 1953 Privileges Act. The Chairman has certain powers and he acted under the limits of his powers,” Dr. Rajapakshe said.

The Justice Minister also stressed that while it was fair to allow Dr. de Silva to respond to initial charges, a prolonged debate was unnecessary.