Factcheck’s counter response to MP Anura Kumara Dissanayake

Factcheck.lk appreciates the response of MP Anura Dissanayake.

Factcheck.lk noted not one, but two errors in the 64% figure claimed by MP Dissanayake. First was the misc at egor is at ion of loan amortisation as expenditure. Second was the inaccuracy of even the miscategorised calculation with regard to the budget tabled in parliament. Both these reasons were cited by Factcheck.lk in explaining the verdict.

In response to the fact check, MP Dissanayake discusses only the first error: Stating that it should be reasonable, nevertheless, to include amortisation in evaluating the total expenditure of government as the loan repayment figure has been stated under the head of the Ministry of Finance.

This consideration was already discussed in the published fact check: http://www.factcheck.lk/claim/anurakumara-dissanayake-7.

In evaluating government expenditure (e.g., claims on the expenditure percentage on health care, education etc.) the figures routinely cited in Parliament by the MP himself, follow the public accounting standard of excluding amortisation (loan capital repayment) from the calculation of expenditure. Similarly, in public finance accounting, cash inflows arising from loans taken are not considered a revenue item either.

These principles of reporting on public finance, which are prescribed by the Central Bank of Sri Lanka, are as provided in the Government Finance Statistics Manual published by the International Monetary Fund (see page 71). Even if the language that MP Dissanayake had used had been modified to explain that he was including expenditure plus amortisation payments, his claim would have still overstated the Rajapaksa family budget by 2.4%. This was also explained in the published fact check.

In light of the above, the response by the MP, which is appreciated by Factcheck.lk, does not provide any new information to justify updating the verdict.