brand logo

Closing deals behind closed doors

10 Nov 2021

The controversial agreement the Government signed in secrecy with the US-based energy infrastructure company, New Fortress Energy Inc., will soon be presented to the Parliament, bringing some discussions about the little-known agreement to an end, while also sparking new discussions about the same. This was revealed by Leader of the House and Education Minister Dinesh Gunawardena in Parliament on 8 November, while responding to a question raised by United National Party (UNP) Parliamentarian Ranil Wickremesinghe. It is not only the UNP or other Opposition parties that are not aware of the contents of the said agreement. The secretive nature of the agreement has been a pressing concern for many in the political arena in the past few months, especially after it was revealed that the agreement was signed without much publicity, and it was dubbed by many as a “secret agreement”. According to Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB) Chairman M.M.C. Ferdinando, as of last week, the agreement had not even been presented to the CEB, and he had claimed that the agreement contained a condition which prevents the disclosure of the contents of the agreement. What is more, Energy Minister and Co-Cabinet Spokesman Udaya Gammanpila, one of the main ruling parliamentarians opposing the agreement from within the Government, had recently said that no official from the Energy Ministry had been represented in any of the committees that signed the agreement, and that the agreement was in fact signed at a time when tenders for the same project had been called. The wisdom and transparency behind signing a national-level agreement of this nature without discussing with the lawmakers or the relevant institutions and experts first signals a concerning situation. What is more concerning is, if the Government can sign agreements in this manner, without telling or consulting anyone, even the important members of the Government, what is the point in electing 225 Members of Parliament and having law and policies to regulate tender procedures? All this points towards one question: Where is the transparency the Government promised when it came to power? Even though Gunawardena said the agreement will be presented to the Parliament, when looking at the manner in which documents, especially committee reports, that were a secret before being tabled in Parliament were presented to the Parliament in the past few years, we have to ask the question whether the original and full agreement would be presented. According to Gunawardena, the agreement will be presented only after what he referred to as the “relevant formalities” were done, and therefore the people can only hope that these formalities do not result in amending or redacting or not publicising certain parts of the agreement. The biggest concern is: Why was an agreement for a project of this nature – which, according to Gammanpila, will have a direct impact on close to 40% of the country’s power requirement in the near future – not presented to the Parliament or to the people before being signed? Also, there is a question as to what can Sri Lanka do now, even if the agreement in question truly included conditions that may affect or be used against Sri Lanka as several parties claim. Presenting an agreement after being signed begs the question as to whether those who were involved in making the decision to sign the agreement were planning to do what they wanted to do regardless of what public representatives or the public had to say. This lack of transparency can not only blunt the faith the country has kept in the Government, it can also affect the country’s people, economy, and sovereignty, because an agreement with a foreign firm is not an internal issue and instead involves countries. If the opposition against the agreement mounts after it is presented to the Parliament, which is highly likely, it will be very difficult for Sri Lanka to both renege on the agreement or to go ahead with it. The recent incident surrounding the Chinese organic fertiliser ship is a good example as to how difficult it can be to deal with foreign firms if things do not go their way. Why Sri Lankan governments do not practise the transparency they preach, is a question, and what this whole incident can cost Sri Lanka is still a mystery. However, this shows how, despite claiming to be a democratic country, Sri Lanka has a very long way to go in order to ensure that people have access to information to weigh in on national-level decisions, and the Government too has a long way to go with regard to its responsibility to be transparent and accountable.


More News..