PARLIAMENT

India plays major role in Sri Lanka's tourism - Prof G L Peiris

Sandasen MARASINGHE and Disna MUDALIGE

Deputy Speaker Chandima Weerakkody presided, when Parliament met at 1.30 pm yesterday. After the presentation of papers and oral questions, the House was adjourned till 9.30 am on July 12. The House took up the adjournment motion moved by DNA MP Vijitha Herath, regarding India's influence on Sri Lanka for debate.

Vijitha Herath (DNA):

I request the government to terminate its facilitation provided to the Indian government to influence our country's internal affairs in a manner that affects the sovereignty of Sri Lanka.

India has been intervening in our country's policy decisions even during the past.

In the past, India had wanted to make this country another region of India. India's intervention on behalf of the Tamil community in Sri Lanka was only due to its interests and strategic considerations.

This request was not due to narrow political desires and nor a total rejection of India. But this matter affects the sovereignty of the country and the Sri Lankan population in general.

Sudarshini Fernandopulle takes the Chair.

Vijitha Herath continues.

We observe several dangerous facts in the joint statement made by both Indian and Sri Lankan governments after External Affairs Minister G.L. Peiris' visit to India. This statement was a clear evidence to show how India has attempted to intervene into our economical, defence and political spheres.

The Indian government was attempting to take over the ownership of the Kachchativu island which is owned by Sri Lanka. The Indian government in a letter many years ago to Sri Lanka, had stated that it was owned by Sri Lanka.

Lakshman Kiriella (UNP): As MP Vijitha Herath stated, the Indian government was attempting to make hay while the sun shines. The Indian government was attempting to reap the benefits from the situation which arose after the Darusman Report was submitted.

We have had to face this situation for the reasons that we were unable to solve our problems within our own country. So far the Indian government had not made any statement against the Darusman Report.

The Channel 4 video had been shown to the officers of the Human Rights Commission.

The International Community has an agenda which was very clear. The government should not get itself in a trap.

External Affairs Minister Prof G L Peiris: First of all, I will answer UNP MP Lakshman Kiriella's statement about the Channel 4 footage. Instructions in the video footage had been shown to the officials of the Human Rights Council. The fact that the Channel 4 footage which was shown in Geneva was no reason that its authenticity had been accepted by the United Nations.

Deputy Speaker Chandima Weerakkody takes the Chair.

There has been a discrepancy over the audio and visual track of the Channel 4 not been given in Sinhala language, but in the Tamil language. At one point, instructions in Tamil say 'remove the boots' and at another point it says "why do you need to video all these things? Take the camera away."

Today, the media technology was very sophisticated. So it was wrong to jump into conclusion that these videos were genuine.

This motion was basically on Indo-Lanka relations.

We must be rationale and look at the magnitude of the opportunities before Sri Lanka today.

The three decade conflict has ended and all can go in peace. That part was over and now we are in a stage that we can draw the inherent capacities out.

But now the friends of the LTTE have transferred their military campaign to the international arena where they would use all their sources to cause damages to Sri Lanka.

They have initiated an economic onslaught against the country, to prevent tourists arriving in Sri Lanka, to prevent foreigners from investing in Sri Lanka and to inflict irreparable damage to the country. This was not a military campaign, but an economic campaign. The Opposition has fallen into their trap though they advised the government not to fall into the trap.

UNP MP Kirella, attempted to compare between Sudan and Sri Lanka. But there was no parallel between these two countries at all.

No country on this planet had identified a Tamil transitional government and why does the Opposition attempt to sanctify it? We have to consider the reality of the world where we live in. Look at the economy of the world. Today, the challenges before us was the uplift of the living standards of the people.

The economy of the west had gone up by 2.5 percent only. But the economy of a country in the Indian Ocean of Pacific ring was growing by a rate of 10 percent while India's was growing by 8.4 percent.

By geographical features, Sri Lanka has been linked to India. So we can use them for the benefit of ours.

Our economic prosperity depends mainly on strategies we follow to sustain in the global economy. It has been seen that the economic growth of China was greater than India.

However, it has been seen that the greater percentage of our exports were still going to the west. Sixty percent of our exports were to Western Europe and the USA. We must consider this fact and take corrective measures.

One of any predecessors of the External Affairs Ministry, Lakshman Kadirgamar understood the relationship between India and Sri Lanka as very prominent and crucial.

India today was Sri Lanka's major trading partner. India was the first in terms of foreign investments in Sri Lanka. The largest number of tourist arrivals to Sri Lanka were from India. India plays a major role in tourism in our country. This was the economic reality.

According to the Mahinda Chintana policy put forward by the President, the world economy was growing at a rate of about five percent. Within the global economy, India and China have secured important and greater places in the recent past. By taking this fact into consideration, the President proposed to make this country a hub for five most important sectors.

We have to attain the benefits of the prevailing global economic context.

I am proud to say that India had ordered 11 ships from Sri Lanka, which was a sign of becoming a naval hub. We must remember that it was India, a very powerful nation who, had ordered for ships from a small country such as Sri Lanka. This contract was worth US $ 240 million. This was a great achievement.

When we look at the service sector of our country, 58 percent of our economy depends on the service sector. India's contribution to the development of our service sector was enormous. SriLankan Airlines holds about 100 flights to Indian cities daily.

Dr Rajitha Senaratne takes the Chair.

Prof G L Peiris continues: So I ask the Opposition seriously whether they want us to exclude India from our international relations?

In the tourism sector, the government was hoping to attract two million tourists by 2016. Among this number, 25 percent would be from India. Indians were the seventh biggest spenders in the world. So their contribution for the development of our tourism industry could not be disregarded. Well established large Sri Lankan companies have become major investors in India. This was a good sign and they have been able to place their mark on the Indian soil.

The National Security Advisor of India in a press conference held at Colombo three weeks ago, said that it was upto the Sri Lankan government to find a solution to the ethnic problem and India was only there to help in this endeavour. Today, Sri Lanka has decided to appoint a Parliamentary Select Committee in this regard as a genuine effort.

This was not an attempt to buy time and we have genuine interests in solving this problem as early as possible.

The Opposition members criticized the joint statement made by India and Sri Lanka. I must say that this was not an agreement by any means, but a media statement. The Opposition members have drastically misinterpreted this statement. There was nothing in the statement to be astonished or scared of.

The government of India in the statement had agreed to support us in the spheres of economy and defence. This was nothing to be criticised, but should be praised. The Indian government was building 60,000 houses as a donation to help in our resettlement efforts.

In terms of people to people contacts, the Dambadiva Vandana programme was to be initiated to launch pilgrimages to India with necessary facilities for Sri Lankan visitors to worship India's religious sites.

Our artistes such as Pandith Amaradeva and Sumithra Peiris have been appreciated by the Indian government. There were incidents outside the government to government contacts.

Our fishermen in the Northern territory have resumed their occupation after three decades of war. At this point, the encroachment of Indian fishermen into our territory could not be accepted.

We have no objections to India being granted a permanent seat in the UN Security Council and we also agree to that proposal.

Health Minister Maithripala Sirisena: I would like to bring to your notice the words used by DNA MP to refer to the relations between the two countries. He said there is 'Indian domination'. We as a government, totally reject this expression.

Both countries have very cordial and intimate relations. The friendship between the two countries had a long history and had always been very strong.

The Indian government became a true friend to us with its genuine support in our efforts to eradicate terrorism with the launch of humanitarian operations in 2005 under President Rajapaksa's regime.

We see that it was similar in Sri Lanka too that Opposition parties often create problems to the ruling party in India with regard to its relations with Sri Lanka. However, it was the government of the country which decides the foreign policy in a strategic manner. The Indian government has a very good understanding over the incidents taking place in Sri Lanka.

Ravi Karunanayake (UNP): Today, we are taking up political issues between the governments of India and Sri Lanka. Minister Peiris' speech did not fit into this topic.

Prof Peiris said that it was a press statement. This was an expression without responsibility. So does the Indian External Affairs Minister who considered it as a meaningless statement. I would like to inquire whether this statement was a ministerial statement or just a press statement by Prof Peiris.

India was a very strong friend of ours and we have treated it with respect. We have never been anti-Indian. The DNA and UNP were two different parties with different ideologies.

Youth Affairs and Skills Development Minister Dullas Alahapperuma: The JVP from its outset was against India and they have never changed it during their 40 years of political career, although many other matters have changed.

But now there was development in the UNP as they too agree with JVP opinion. India is the most powerful country in our region although the JVP believes it is not and not willing to corporate with that country. When the relationships between India and Sri Lanka was facing a critical state, Economic Development Minister went to India to strengthen the relationship.

When the President instructed the forces not to use heavy weapons during the operations as there were civilians cornered by LTTE as human shields. Then the Opposition asked as to why the heavy weapons were not used to batter them.

The JVP has always stood against India. They set fire to 800 Indian TATA buses. The UNP had to change the uses of dhal and big onion as the JVP protested against the import of those goods from India.

The biggest contribution was made by India to make our operation a success. About 1,200 Indian soldiers were killed in Sri Lanka. If India had not been supportive to Sri Lanka, we would not have been able to face the pressures of the foreign inimical forces against us. I request the Opposition not to create an India phobia in this House of Sri Lanka.

Foreign Employment Promotion and Welfare Minister Dilan Perera: We know the JVP protested against India from its outset.

Deputy Speaker Chandima Weerakkody takes the Chair.

It was not a surprise. The other matter was that the UNP also showed its stance today when they agreed to the JVP.

The UNP who holds America in high esteem, made abusive remarks on the Indian lady and her child during their regime. It was always their stance.

What is the scheme behind this motion? The Sri Lankan government never acted as a puppet of the western countries, but won the humanitarian operation. Because India supported us, the UNP and JVP wanted to stand against India. The Opposition said that the Indian government had not made any statement against the Darusman Report. They too had not spoke against the Report.

Who disliked the building of 50,000 houses in the North, construct an airport and also a harbour in the North?

It was only for those parties in the Opposition who fulfil the needs of the foreign forces against Sri Lanka. I don't know how much dollars had been paid to them. I say the Kankesanthurai Harbour should be developed. The Palaly Airport should be developed.

A S Adeikalanathan (TNA): If you were criticizing the assistance given by India, you should at the same time criticize the assistance given by China to us. I ask those who criticized Indian support and aids, why they did not object to Chinese assistance?

India has always been supporting to upgrade the living standards of our people. We should welcome their support.

We as the TNA, oppose this motion.

Sajin Vaas Gunawardena (UPFA): I am happy that the TNP MP clearly stated in this House that they did not consent to the motion. Even though the position the DNA and UNP were the same, what matters for the Tamil community was the position of the TNA.

It was the UNP, who bent down before the Indian domination during the peace agreement period. It was President Rajapaksa who came forward bravely to launch a massive military operation to save the country from the terrorists. India had clearly stated that it was not forcing any solutions to the ethnic problem in Sri Lanka. They have accepted that it was up to the Sri Lankan Government. Then what was the purpose of this meaningless agitation?

Fisheries Industries and Aquatic Resources Development Minister Rajitha Senaratne: Even though the UNP seconded the motion today, even they did not have the courage to embrace the ideas of the DNA as presented by MP Vijitha Herath.

Instead they spoke of the Darusman report, the UN and various other matters. They did not directly speak about Indian relations.

Many Tamil parties in Sri Lanka, had started following democratic means by rejecting military means, due to the agreement with India in the past.

Our culture, art, music and many other spheres have been influenced by India, throughout history. The relations between the two countries are very powerful. Nobody could say that Indian policies have never become realistic. India has provided us with free assistance during many occasions.

P Rajathurai (UPFA): We have maintained a cordial relationship for a long time. We who have an Indian origin, were living 200 years in Sri Lanka. We are opposed to this motion. India is not going to be developed because of Sri Lanka. They are well ahead of us.

Their support is a great benefit to our country.

Parliament adjourned until 1pm on July 12.