I congratulated the opponents of the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement with India (CEPA) for initiating a needed public debate back in June 2010. I also suggested it would be better if they focused on the message instead of on the messengers.
Lies
That was then, this is now. Their debating tactic is now clear. Utter a lie. When it is refuted; do not apologize. Utter another. When that is refuted . . . Go on ad infinitum. Now that CEPA negotiations are restarting, the lies will start again.
An illustrative list:
*A leader of the anti-CEPA campaign was quoted in this journal on May 30, 2010: “Under this set up any professional even an Indian barber can come with his family to work in Sri Lanka.” : Sri Lanka has offered Mode 4 binding (the technical term for legally committing to allow “natural persons” to come to Sri Lanka to provide services) for only computer and related services (with lots of conditions and qualifications) and ship-building services (where there is a serious shortage of personnel and where most of the sales are to India). Without CEPA in place, Salon Nayana and Ramani Fernando Salons have established operations in India under Mode 3 (technical term for supplying services by establishing commercial operations where the buyers live) and have sent Sri Lankans to cut hair in India, not vice versa. These entrepreneurs would have it easier if we had a legal agreement in place.
*With great passion the opponents claimed that Sri Lankan cinemas were to be given over to Indians. Fact: The government entity in charge, the Sri Lanka Film Corporation, had, in writing, requested that Sri Lanka request Indian investments in a percentage of cinemas because the industry and consumers will benefit from high-quality multiplexes like they have in major Indian cities.
*In a TV debate, they claimed that Sri Lankans were to be left only with money lending, pawn broking, retail trade investment with investment of less than $1 million investment, coastal fishing, and so on. This odd list jogged my memory from when I was involved in writing the Joint Study Group Report on CEPA. It was a list of business activities that the Board of Investment would NOT permit foreign investment in. It had simply been folded into the CEPA text. To say that Sri Lankans were allowed to engage ONLY in these activities was utterly false. If there was any problem with this list which is still on the BOI website, they should have raised them with the BOI in the 1980s, and not now, in relation to CEPA.
All false; all misleading; all refuted; none apologized for. The newest is that there are 40 Indian CEOs in Sri Lanka and that we will be awash in Indian CEOs if we sign the CEPA.
Red herring
Indian companies are major investors in Sri Lanka. We welcome foreign direct investment because it creates jobs and exports; because investment is essential if we are to reach the high levels of economic growth the government has promised. Surely, we can also understand the need to have Indian CEOs along with the investment?
When I was Director General of Telecommunication 10 years ago, people came to me complaining that the telecom industry was awash in foreign CEOs; six of the seven major companies had foreign CEOs, they said. I asked about the sole exception: the 28-year old Sri Lankan who headed Dialog. I said that a 100 % Malaysian-owned company had appointed a Sri Lankan, while the government-owned company was headed by a Japanese. Things will settle down, I said.
We then had less than a million phones; now we have over 15 million. We now have only two foreign CEOs, despite there now being another major player, Indian-owned Airtel Lanka. The government-owned SLT and Suntel have foreign CEOs. All others, including Airtel, are headed by Sri Lankans. Things have settled.
The CEO question was a red herring. The real question was the efficient supply of telecom services. With six foreign CEOs and one Sri Lankan, the foundation was laid. Many millions of US dollars in foreign investments later and with six Sri Lankan CEOs and two foreign CEOs at the helm, we have 75 % of households with some kind of telephone. Having the foreign CEOs, including at SLT, which needed a cultural transformation, helped in giving our people the services they need at prices they can afford.
Even if there were 50 Indian or other foreign CEOs, it would not matter as long as the companies they headed were efficient enterprises that created wealth and employment. But behind this puerile argument is a larger problem.
Self-esteem
Here is another CEPA opponent: “Top managers from India demand high salaries and would not leave India for the limited opportunities offered by Sri Lanka. That would leave the door open for mediocre professionals . . . . But would Sri Lankans go to India? . . . . The chances of Sri Lankan managers being selected when competing against thousands of Indian applicants are slim.”
What is being said here? That Sri Lankan companies would hire mediocre Indian professionals? Mediocre ones maybe, but why would a good company do such a thing? That Sri Lankan professionals are incapable of competing in India? Aitken Spence is managing hotels in India and Oman; Jetwing in Vietnam. We have Sri Lankans holding all kinds of senior positions throughout the world. But the CEPA opponents don’t think our professionals can cut it in India.
In the end, this one issue divides the opponents and proponents of CEPA. The opponents lack confidence in themselves; they want to make a little protected puddle with big fences around it that they can be big frogs in; and they want the consumers to pay for their pleasure through high prices and poor quality. They demean Sri Lankan professionals in the process.
The proponents have self confidence. They may not always succeed, but they’re ready for the big game. Let’s focus on getting the rules right without running away with the ball before the game starts.
(The writer, a former DG at the TRC, is a proponent of CEPA). |
E-mail
