PARLIAMENT

House takes up Resettlement Authority (Amendment) Bill

Sandasen Marasinghe and Disna Mudalige

Deputy Speaker Chandima Weerakkody presided when Parliament met at 1.00 p. m yesterday. After the presentation of papers and oral questions, the House took up the Resettlement Authority (Amendment) Bill for debate.

Resettlement Minister Gunaratne Weerakoon

I present the Resettlement Authority (Amendment) Bill for the approval of the House the validity of the Resettlement Authority which was setup in 2007 will expire on April 10, 2013. Therefore this Amendment has been brought to extend the period of validity of the Authority by another three years.

We have almost completed the resettlement of displaced persons from the Mavilaru Humanitarian operation. However, there are some more families displaced after that due to various other reasons to be resettled. For example, about 1,223 families in Sampur are to be resettled. Therefore the need to extend the period of the Authority is felt. The infrastructure facilities and housing for the resettlement work are now being progressed. This Authority is working unitedly with the Sri Lanka Army to carry on development and housing projects in resettled areas.

Opposition Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe:

This Bill seeks to extend the validity period of the authority from six to nine years. But as the minister said he may need more time than another three years to complete his task. The Resettlement Authority is slow in its progress, and when calculated we can see that only 117 houses had been built per year. Any private company if given the opportunity would have done this job with better efficiency.

The reconciliation process is also not progressing with much vigour. The government accepted the majority of the recommendations in the LLRC report. But the issue is why the government is not implementing them.

We are ready to extend our cooperation to the government to make the implementation of the LLRC report a reality.

External Affairs Minister Prof. G.L. Peiris:

This Bill is to extend the period of office of the Resettlement Authority.

The resettlement work is a serious task. It was one of the main challenges faced by the government in the post war scenario.

The Opposition Leader expressed certain views on Human Rights. As the External Affairs Minister I would like to point out certain issues in the field of Human Rights as the vote on the resolution on Sri Lanka is to be taken up today in Geneva.

The original resolution in its initial stage was sponsored by 32 countries. Twenty nine countries of them were from Europe and two were from the North America, namely the US and Canada. No sponsors had come from Asia or Africa. The geographical distribution of these countries says something about the motivations of the resolution. Usually, the UNHRC should encapsulate a vision for the globe. When considering the resolution about Sri Lanka, there is no sponsor country from this geographical area.

A resolution should be fair and in your own conscience you must feel that there is substance when considering this specific resolution substantial ground is totally unfounded.

When it was first indicated to me that a resolution on Sri Lanka would be moved in this session of the Council by a US representative. I was categorically stated that it would be a balanced and fair one that will also recognize the positive developments and achievements of the government while pointing out the work remaining to be done.

However, when the resolution came out we found that there was no word of acknowledgment of the positive developments we have achieved.

Obviously it is not because they cannot find at least a single positive development. A large number of countries spoke to the mover of the resolution and said it was one-sided. The basic sense of justice and fairness must have been there. This is not the spirit which we expect our friends to act. There must be on evenhandedness in the approach and not willful blindness. The resolution deliberately ignores what has been done in the country.

I request the mover of this resolution to think whether they are really pleased about the consequences they have made not only in Sri Lanka but also in neighbouring India. There had been a chain of events attached to the resolution. In retrospect they should assess whether they are satisfied of the consequences they have produced. Has it brought constructive and helpful influence or is it the very much opposite. Has it been helpful for discord and violence? Has it brought about rational, logical and long lasting solution to the issue?

There is a persevering attempt to internationalize this issue, by putting us on the agenda regularly. The world today is full of problems, which are crying out for attention. However, it is Sri Lanka that is singled out and sharply focused every six months. The UNHRC should take a balanced view. The international community is not comprised of few countries. There are situations where people in large number are slaughtered every day.

Then why this much of selectivism and subject approach. This is not because of the gravity of the issue, but because of other reasons mainly of political nature.

Human Rights High Commissioner Navi Pillay can visit Sri Lanka without being misguided by distractors. We invited her and we are not sweeping anything under carpet. She said she would make the visit after the LLRC was made in the public domain and after a visit by a technical team of her office to which we immediately agreed.

The stand of the government is that whatever solution we are reaching it must be for the well-being of the people of our country and the main concern should be the interests of our people. The governing motivations of this resolution have almost nothing to do with the people of this country.

There are several more distressing facts. Now the Council is attempting to incorporate the Darusman Report to the resolution. It was not an official report. There are ‘horrific descriptions’ of what has supposed to have happened in the battle field in the report and the writers themselves say those are not proven and could not be accounted as facts.

The government wanted a vote to be taken over the resolution to show the world how this country has been unfairly and unjustly treated. The government is not embarrassed. We can handle the situation, but there is more to it. I ask you, ‘is this the way your Motherland have to be treated in the UNO?’

The UNHRC needs a complete overhaul. The HR Council replaced the Commission because it was politicized. But today the Council is more politicized than its predecessor.

M.A. Sumanthiran (TNA):

Prof. G.L. Peiris asked a question whether this is the way our Motherland should be treated by the UNO, but I would like to say the more relevant question is that whether this is the way our Motherland is treating us, just because we are inferior in number.

Uditha Lokubandara takes the Chair.

M.L.M. Hisbullah (Economic Development Deputy Minister):

The resettlement of the forcefully evicted people is being done by my Ministry. Around 150,000 Muslims are in resettlement camps. The people who are resettled have very little facilities. So I bring their plight to the notice of the Minister.

Anura Kumara Dissanayake (DNA):

A motion has been passed against us at Geneva by now. It is because of the arbitrary actions of the government. The US is attempting to spread their power across the world. But how a room was created for them to pass a resolution against us. It is because that the government failed to take prompt actions soon after the elimination of terrorism.

A land in Trincomalee has been given to an Indian company for an industry.

Felix Perera (Social Services Minister):

There is a land issue in the North. There is only 17 families in a square kilometre. But this is a matter for political gains by the Opposition.

The IDPs came to us for relief. I was given by the Government goods worth Rs. 8 million to be distributed among them.

Only in Colombo there is 52 percent of Tamil people.

I can’t go to Vellakkarni Church. There was only 11 percent people in 1956. But you asked for 50 percent. Is it fair?

Harin Fernando (UNP):

I am not going to say the US is correct on the Western countries are correct. However, there is no accountability in the Government projects. I like to ask M.L.M. Hisbulla as to if he is in Government side in the Opposition. He said difficulties faced by the Muslim IDPs.

Rishad Bathiudeen (Industries and Commerce Minister):

Hisbulla said difficulties of the IDPs in Puttalam. They live in various areas of the country. They thought that they could live happily in those areas after elimination of terrorism. Terrorists chased our people and they gave only two hours for them to leave.

M. Swaminathan (UNP):

The resettlement is not a topic to discuss in Parliament. It is three years since elimination of terrorism. But the government could not resettle the IDPs.

Vinayagamoorthy Muralitharan (Resettlement Deputy Minister):

We request to extend the period of resettlement authority of another three years. I think a period of five years will be required for resettlement. However, these people were displaced over a period of 50 years. This matter shouldn’t be a political issue. The resettlement is not a matter that comes only under the Resettlement Ministry. The electricity, bridges, roads and many other infrastructure facilities should be developed before people are resettled. The government has constructed 12,000 houses. In addition NGOs and India have constructed houses. The Kalladi bridge will be opened today (22). There are much more programmes progressing to develop the area.

J. Sri Ranga (UNP):

After elimination of terrorism, the people thought they could live peacefully. We have to find out as to if those displaced people are resettled in their own areas. Some people cannot do their jobs. Some say the resettlement is over. So people have not even the basic needs.

A. Vinayagamoorthy (TNA):

Some IDPs are not allowed to go to their own lands. There is no civil administration in Jaffna. We request the government to resettle those IDPs.

Dinesh Gunawardena (Water Supply and Drainage Minister):

Why were you silent when the Muslims were chased away from Jaffna. You are silent bout them.

Sajith Premadasa (UNP):

We don’t need foreign views or opinion for integration and reconciliation in Sri Lanka. Nearly four years have lapsed after defeating terrorism. The historic victory at Nandikadal is being attempted to reverse. We always stand against Eelam and separatism. But we have to give them the other needs. Deputy Speaker Chandima Weerakkody takes the Chair.

I think that all irrespective of Government or Opposition have to get together to unite the country. There is no room for Eelam or separatism in this country. But we all will get together to reconciliate and integrate the communities. We don’t need instructions from foreigners for that purpose.

Chandrakumar Murugesu (UPFA): The resettlement process were accelerated soon after the conclusion of war. Even the foreign diplomats have praised the progress on the resettlement work. The 30 years war had devastated the entire area. Many things have to be done to make peoples lives to bring to normalcy. We appreciated the support of the Economic Development Minister to expedite the resettlement work.

R. Yogarajan (UNP): Four years have passed after the conclusion of war. But the resettlement and reconstruction progress is very slow. As the minister said construction of 9,000 houses have been completed.

But the requirement in these areas is very high. About 65,000 houses are more to be constructed and it will need approximately Rs. 24 billion Financial allocations for this construction work is not adequate.

Ajith Kumara (Independent): The minorities in the country have not been treated equally. The reconciliation and integration of the society have been hampered.

Today, Muslim community is often harassed. The ethnic problem will not see a solution by writing letters to Geneva or India. This government needs to be toppled. That is what I request from the people.

Deputy Health Minister Lalith Dissanayake: A National plan has been implemented with regard to the resettlement of internally displaced people and refugees.

The resettlement does not only mean providing a shelter, but it encompasses many other aspects such as domestic economy and occupation.

The Bill was passed.

The House adjourned until 1.30 p.m today.