Minister Speaks:

Development Strategies and International Trade Minister Malik Samarawickrema seems to be developing a penchant for behind the scenes manoeuvrings and using a familiar refrain of the previous Government – the media is “irresponsible”, telling “untruths” and not just that, they are even sabotaging the economy. It was “traitors” then. It is “saboteurs” now. When the Sunday Times revealed in its front page lead story on July 31 headlined “H’tota and Mattala: China declines Lanka’s request.” He got this story denied through the Government Information Department. When we reproduced the minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet Committee on Economic Management (CCEM), despite his accusation that “we are disrupting the economy,”we proved him wrong in our issue of August 7 and made clearer that our account was accurate and factual. The Minister sulked but remained mute. Now, Minister Samarawickrema has made another statement over our front page lead story last week headlined, “Malik hires another US firm to lobby for Lanka.” Strange but true, it was not copied to the Sunday Times. Only two television networks – the state run Independent Television Network (ITN) and Derana aired it. Not satisfied, he went to Parliament and made a statement on Friday. We publish on this page his statement to Parliament with our comments below each paragraph. I would like to make the following statement on the article which appeared under the heading ‘Malik hires another US firm to lobby for Lanka’ which is based on incorrect and misleading information in the Sunday Times on 21.08.2016 1. It appears that the mere intention of the article is to unjustifiably make a comparison of the previous government retaining different lobbying firms in the US as an image building exercise of the country with the recent agreement with ST&R. This agreement with ST&R is purely made on an economic rationale to obtain expert assistance to the Ministry of Development Strategies and International Trade to pursue the objective of maximizing Sri Lanka's access to the United States market at a juncture the country needs enhanced opportunities for trade. RESPONSE: When the Government keeps saying that the US, the West and the International Community have praised the new Government in Sri Lanka and wants to do business with it, and that the President was welcomed by President Barrack Obama and other world leaders on the side-lines of the UN and G7 summit, Minister Samarawickrama concedes that US lobby firms are still needed to maximize Sri Lanka’s access to US markets. Is there some mismatch in what the Government says and what it does? These were the same arguments put forward by the previous Government to justify hiring US lobby firms, now the subject of a Presidential Commission of Inquiry for money laundering. There has been a regular parade of senior US officials to Colombo post January 2015 and the Obama Administration has revised US policy towards Sri Lanka already. All this is done by the Executive Branch of the US working with the Senate and the House of Representatives (Congress) because it is also in US national interest to be good with Sri Lanka. So, is this lobby firm being paid to convince the converts, or shall we say, sing to the choir? 2. The scope of engagement as per the agreement signed, after obtaining Attorney General’s approval is as follows; "The party represents the Ministry of Development Strategies & International Trade in connection with representation of Sri Lanka in Washington, D.C. before government agencies and the U.S. Congress focusing efforts on educating about the peace process in Sri Lanka; exploring options for greater economic and commercial ties between the U.S. and Sri Lanka; identifying and expanding options for market access of Sri Lanka goods into the US; expanding the Sri Lanka Caucus and building a friends of Sri Lanka caucus in the Congress; assisting in visiting delegation agenda development; promptly notifying of any Congressional or Administrative action of importance to Sri Lanka; preparing brief analyses of developments in Congress and the Executive Branch on particular issues of concern to Sri Lanka; interacting with the interested US stakeholders and advising Sri Lanka on its free trade negotiations with other partner countries and possibly the United States.” RESPONSE: Minister Samarawickrama gives just a portion of the agreement signed. We will give readers the full agreement 3. The said article in the Sunday Times refers to an engagement of a firm for "nonexistent peace process part of the deal" Therefore, it is clear that this statement in the article is incorrect and totally misleading. The scope of engagement includes lobbying of US Congress with a view to introducing and passing a bill to have conflict affected areas and lagging areas of our country as “qualified industrial zones" and thereby obtaining preferential market access to goods produced in these industrial zones. RESPONSE: Readers will see the reference to a peace process in this agreement. News to us that there is a peace process going on Sri Lanka. Our news item referred to a “non-existent peace process, economic ties and market access” as being part of the agreement. If this does not cover what the Minister says the agreement includes, what does. 4. This contract with the US firm ST&R has been entered into the fullest transparent manner. The proposals have been evaluated by the Sri Lankan Embassy in the US and their recommendations have been obtained. The proposal to enter into a contract with this firm was endorsed by the Cabinet Sub Committee on Economic Management (CCEM) on 25.05.2016 and subsequently approved by the Cabinet of Ministers on 14.06.2016 after submitting a comprehensive memorandum which gave all details of the objectives, output of the contract, type of engagement with a comparison of costs among the offers. It is untrue to say that the Foreign Ministry is unaware of the engagement, as it has been presented to the Cabinet of Ministers and the decision approving the recommendations of the Cabinet Memorandum has been sent to relevant Secretaries including the Secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Attorney General's approval has been obtained for the Agreement before signing. RESPONSE: We said nothing about who did, or did not evaluate the agreement, nor whether the cabinet did, or did not approve the agreement, nor if the Attorney General approved this agreement. In fact, we did say that the Cabinet Sub Committee on Economic Management (CCEM) “gave the nod” to this agreement; and we stand-by our story that the Foreign Ministry was not aware of this agreement when we made inquiries. From the Minister’s own remarks it seems that he has been dealing with Sri Lanka’s Ambassador in Washington DC directly. The Minister’s own statement shows that the Foreign Ministry should have been aware of this agreement only because it has been approved by the cabinet and the decision been sent to the Secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Clearly, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has been otherwise kept out of the loop and the agreement has been signed by his Ministry Secretary, not the Secretary, Foreign Ministry. And furthermore, if the cabinet decided on this agreement on 14 June why was it not announced and the Minister