• Around 200,000 beneficiaries initially identified as not holding a bank account

The Welfare Benefits Board (WBB) has issued an ultimatum for beneficiaries of the ‘Aswesuma’ scheme to open a bank account by June in order to continue receiving payments.

Commenting on the mode of making payments to beneficiaries, WBB Chairperson Jayantha Wijerathna told The Sunday Morning that payments were generally made electronically, but that the WBB encountered the issue of beneficiaries lacking bank accounts. 

“Initially, around 200,000 beneficiaries lacked bank accounts, but that number has significantly decreased due to various initiatives. As of now, less than 20,000 people are in this category. We will issue a final notice next week and they must open bank accounts before June to continue receiving payments,” he said.

With President Anura Kumara Dissanayake announcing on Wednesday (17) that 400,000 new beneficiaries would be added to the ‘Aswesuma’ welfare scheme, The Sunday Morning explored how ‘Aswesuma’ could address potential problems resulting from poverty and its significance in uplifting the poor from poverty.

According to the 2025 Budget, the Government has allocated Rs. 232.5 billion for the ‘Aswesuma’ welfare programme, a significant increase from the Rs. 60-65 billion allocated in previous years. 

The monthly allowances have also been revised according to beneficiary categories: those classified as Extremely Poor will receive Rs. 17,500 per month from January to June; the Poor category will receive Rs. 10,000 per month during the same period; the Vulnerable group will be entitled to Rs. 5,000 per month throughout the year; and those in the Transitional category will receive Rs. 5,000 per month from January to March. 

Eligibility based on 2019 data?

‘Aswesuma,’ launched in 2023 as the country’s primary social safety net, has been a crucial economic stabiliser amid one of the nation’s worst financial crises. Designed to replace and expand upon previous welfare schemes like ‘Samurdhi,’ the programme now supports 1,894,140 eligible beneficiaries with direct cash transfers.

However, as the Government prepares to integrate 400,000 new beneficiaries in its second phase, the question remains whether ‘Aswesuma’ is merely a short-term relief measure or a sustainable poverty alleviation strategy.

When contacted, Rural Development, Social Security, and Community Empowerment Deputy Minister Wasantha Piyathissa claimed that the particular welfare programme did not fall under his purview. “We handle a variety of social welfare schemes, but this particular scheme falls under the purview of the WBB of the Ministry of Finance. The President is spearheading this project,” he said.

During a previous interview with The Sunday Morning, the Deputy Minister claimed that corruption had been a persistent issue with the ‘Aswesuma’ programme and that the current Government would introduce a database after a re-scrutiny of eligible members. 

The question then arises as to who is entitled to benefit from this scheme.

University of Peradeniya Department of Economics and Statistics Professor Ananda Jayawickreme noted that no effective monitoring mechanism for this existed at present. 

“There’s a lack of updated data, with the most recent poverty data being from 2019 from the Department of Census and Statistics. Without accurate and timely information, we cannot properly assess who genuinely qualifies. The Government should not solely rely on village-level officers. A comprehensive, impartial assessment is essential. Otherwise, those who are wealthy but concealing their income may continue to exploit the system,” he said.

Wijerathna confirmed that while current beneficiary selections relied on 2019 data, a new nationwide census was underway to refine eligibility criteria.

This recalibration comes amid growing concerns over misallocations, inefficiencies, and the lack of long-term development components in the programme. Prof. Jayawickreme argued that while ‘Aswesuma’ provided immediate consumption support, it failed to equip beneficiaries with the tools to escape poverty permanently.

“‘Aswesuma’ is a consumption subsidy; it helps people survive but does not help them escape poverty,” he said. “For meaningful poverty reduction, there must be two elements: immediate survival support and livelihood development.”  

The mechanics of ‘Aswesuma’

One of the biggest challenges in welfare programmes is ensuring that assistance reaches the most vulnerable. Currently, according to Wijerathna, ‘Aswesuma’ relies on a poverty-scoring system developed by the Department of Census and Statistics, using 22 criteria to determine eligibility. However, since the last official poverty data is from 2019, Prof. Jayawickreme argued that the information was outdated. 

“Over a period of time, persons living within a certain income range may change their circumstances and perhaps no longer be eligible for the subsidy. They may further enrich themselves at the expense of the Government. This has contributed immensely to corruption in the system,” he said.

Wijerathna acknowledged this gap but assured that the new census was being conducted to update beneficiary lists. Additionally, the WBB is introducing stricter measures such as income ceilings to exclude higher-earning households, electricity usage thresholds to identify households with higher consumption, and physical verification of grievances through divisional and grassroots committees. A technical committee was reviewing the selection methodology to improve implementation, Wijerathna said.

One of the most persistent criticisms of welfare programmes in Sri Lanka is inclusion errors, where ineligible individuals receive benefits. In February, the WBB invited public grievances and received 800,000 complaints. 

“We have appointed grievance committees at divisional and grassroots levels. These include grama niladharis and economic development officers who will conduct field verifications,” Wijerathna said. The board aims to resolve these grievances before July, ensuring that only deserving households remain in the system.

Why ‘Aswesuma’ needs livelihood development

While ‘Aswesuma’ provides essential short-term relief, Prof. Jayawickreme argued that cash transfers alone could not break the cycle of poverty.  

“Historically, Sri Lanka’s welfare programmes, such as ‘Janasaviya’ and ‘Samurdhi,’ included compulsory savings, vocational training, and small business support. However, ‘Aswesuma’ lacks such components, making it more of a reactive than a proactive solution. 

Programmes like ‘Janasaviya’ combined cash aid with self-employment projects and mandatory skills training, while ‘Samurdhi’ initially included microfinance and entrepreneurship support, although these elements weakened over time. Past programmes recognised that poverty alleviation required both relief and development. ‘Aswesuma’ ignores this lesson, according to Prof. Jayawickreme.

To make the programme more effective, he proposed a series of reforms aimed at integrating livelihood support into ‘Aswesuma.’

These include mandatory skills training by linking beneficiaries to institutions such as the National Apprentice and Industrial Training Authority (NAITA) and the Vocational Training Authority (VTA); providing access to microfinance and small business grants by partnering with banks to offer low-interest loans for ventures like poultry, farming, agriculture, or retail businesses; and deploying public servants to monitor and support 50-100 families each to ensure a transition from dependency to self-reliance. 

However, Wijerathna noted that although ‘Aswesuma’ lacked the skills development component, it was not entirely absent from the attention of the authorities. “Livelihood development is currently managed by the Samurdhi Development Department. We share our beneficiary data with it and it is already implementing livelihood programmes based on this data,” he said.

The path ahead

Wijerathna noted that the Government had worked hard to secure the support of the World Bank to successfully carry out the ‘Aswesuma’ programme. 

He explained that the World Bank played a dual role in supporting ‘Aswesuma,’ providing both technical assistance and reimbursing 15% of the total budget. He noted that this partnership significantly enhanced the programme’s monitoring and implementation capacity, ensuring better oversight and more effective delivery of services.

Although the involvement of the World Bank may entice criticism over external influence on domestic welfare policies, it is prudent to have international monitors sharing guidance and expertise, and potentially quelling corruption as well.

Addressing the challenges faced during implementation, Wijerathna acknowledged that not all trade unions had been fully cooperative, and certain areas of the system still required further development. Despite these constraints, he emphasised that his team was managing the situation effectively by adhering closely to implementation plans.

‘Aswesuma’ has undeniably provided critical support to millions during Sri Lanka’s economic crisis. However, for it to become a true poverty-eradication tool, it must evolve beyond monthly handouts.