Lockdown

Rich man plays, poor man pays

Originally appeared on The Morning

By Dhananath Fernando

How we end up footing the bill for Government price controls

Purchasing alcohol was an expensive endeavour back in college. I remember the total alcohol bill being shared equally amongst those who drink and those who don’t. Sri Lanka’s fuel pricing mechanism is quite similar to this. The subsidised prices are a blessing for direct users of fuel who can afford it. The majority, who are secondary users, end up paying for the subsidy indirectly. Sri Lanka’s fuel problem is quite complex. If we are to overcome this issue it is vital that policymakers understand the concept of “markets” and “prices”. 

It is important that Sri Lanka integrates with global markets and continues to allow fuel imports. This costs the Government approximately about $ 3.5 billion per annum. Global fuel prices fluctuate based on market conditions, and it is crucial to understand why prices fluctuate and the indicators of these fluctuations. Some oil deposits in the world are located such that their extraction process is relatively easy and less costly. Some others are very costly to extract. The Middle East and the OPEC (Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) are reputed for their oil reserves, whereas the extraction of oil is comparatively more costly in areas like Alberta, Canada. Global oil prices are determined based on this ability of countries to supply to the global market. Political, economic, and climatic developments, and changes in these countries have a direct impact on global oil prices.

So what does the “price” increase communicate? It communicates to the consumer the scarcity of that particular resource within the particular time frame. So increases in global oil “prices” is an indication to consumers that fuel is becoming a scarce resource, and we have to use it optimally. It is also an indication to producers that they can earn more by producing more. This narrows down to the basics of supply and demand. Price is an indicator of scarcity. The “market economy” is not complicated, it is merely allowing the “price system” to work. This allows prices to indicate what should be done. Price is not just a number or a sum a consumer pays. Final retail prices are an accumulation of labour costs, material costs, scarcity, externalities, and factors of production. This is fundamentally why we must not intervene in the market price mechanism.

Sri Lanka has always ignored market principles. The island nation has been trying to artificially keep fuel prices constant despite the continuous fluctuations of global prices. We have failed to understand that such fabricated interventions to either inflate or deflate prices will only result in ceasing to keep up with global indications on whether the resource is scarce or not.

Sri Lanka’s fiscal discipline and stability has always been connected to fuel and the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation (CPC). As a result of fuel price changes, there are significant knock-on effects on all utilities, including electricity and water. CPC provides fuel at a lower price to the Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB), which is one of the main sources for electricity generation. As a result, the pricing of electricity is also now not indicative of scarcity. The CPC, which buys fuel at higher prices and sells it lower, now owes significant debts to most of the state banks. 

The debt incurred is in US dollar terms. A delay in payment or a default may adversely affect the entire financial system. The heavy impact this would have on the banking sector will consequently impact the Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL). It is no secret that the CBSL bails out the CPC and CEB through Treasury Bills, or by printing money. Therefore it is clear that by intervening, we have successfully exposed the entire financial system to deep peril.

The current Minister of Energy said the banks have informed the  CPC Chairman that they do not have foreign currency to pay for fuel imports. This was informed to the Secretary of the Treasury, who then summoned all the heads of banks, who collectively assured the payments for fuel imports. He further stated that the CBSL said it cannot offer any reserves, given the country’s economic woes. It is perplexing to say that the problem is really this severe. It is clear that intervention in the price system has caused a massive domino effect beyond comprehension. 

According to a World Bank report, the biggest beneficiary of subsidised fuel prices are the highest echelons of society. “The non-poor are the largest consumers of fuel and electricity (the top 30% of society consumes 70% of fuel. This is well ahead of direct and indirect consumption of fuel by the bottom 40% through public transport). The administered fuel prices are an effective subsidy to the non-poor funded indirectly by fiscal resources,” stated the World Bank in its Development Update for Sri Lanka in November 2017.

I see no difference in this fuel pricing phenomenon and how the final alcohol bill was shared amongst those who drink and those who don’t in my college days. The poor are bearing the burden of fuel subsidies so the rich can buy fuel for much cheaper. The weighed-down poor only consume fuel in the form of transport, electricity, and other secondary forms. We have to understand that the losses of the CPC have to be paid by someone. Currently, that someone is constituted by both the rich and the poor. 

One important aspect is that the Government also collects revenue through the consumption of fuel. Changes made to the duty waiver have caused enormous losses to the Government. Giving cash subsidies to the poorest section of society could have been a much better strategy than tampering with duty waivers and underpricing fuel, ignoring market signals.

According to the calculations shown in Figure 1, the recent price changes do not reflect market prices of diesel, as illustrated in Figure 2.

 

What is the solution?

 

The first solution lies in addressing the problem. As of now, Sri Lanka’s fuel prices fail to indicate scarcity, hampering the independent function of market prices. One way of doing this is by setting up a transparent mechanism and changing the prices to reflect market prices. It may be a price formula or a process where transparency is assured. 

Such a step will incentivise better resource allocation. Consumers will be able to shift between alternative choices and manage their decisions based on price signals. The previous administration introduced a pricing formula that was very poorly administered. The method of calculation was not properly communicated. 

I recall a time when elections were approaching, with a simultaneous spike in global oil prices underway. However, Sri Lanka’s oil prices remained the same. The same was seen when global prices reduced during the first lockdown, and the local consumer was deprived of the deflation. 

One common misperception on this strategy was voiced politically as: “Why do we need a Government if the prices are going to change according to the world market prices?” Simply because we are now experiencing the consequences of such control by the Government. As The Morning reported, the fuel fund has a negative Rs. 26 billion and there are many discrepancies over the numbers in numerous reports. 

Another common misperception is that based on the price changes of fuel, we are going to allow bus fares and other connected prices to change daily. It may be daily changes or it can be changes over a month or a quarter, and there are so many ways we can structure it based on market forces. We have all forgotten that we deal with so many daily price fluctuations. Vegetable prices, Gold prices, stock market prices, and even the prices we pay as interest for Treasury Bills and Bonds change everyday. Price changes for a reason: they communicate the market conditions, which is the ultimate objective of “price”, and allowing the markets to work. 

It is true that this price hike has an impact on the poor. The Government can consider direct cash transfers. The cost of cash transfers will be lower than the losses we collectively incur from the CPC, CEB, and other fuel-dependent state institutions. The current price hike is just another temporary solution; it does not fix the problem. 

Increasing the share collected by everyone at my university party does not change the unfair division of the cost. Likewise, a price increase without setting up a market system and price signals to operate won’t solve Sri Lanka’s fuel and economic crisis.Purchasing alcohol was an expensive endeavour back in college. I remember the total alcohol bill being shared equally amongst those who drink and those who don’t. Sri Lanka’s fuel pricing mechanism is quite similar to this. The subsidised prices are a blessing for direct users of fuel who can afford it. The majority, who are secondary users, end up paying for the subsidy indirectly. Sri Lanka’s fuel problem is quite complex. If we are to overcome this issue it is vital that policymakers understand the concept of “markets” and “prices”. 

It is important that Sri Lanka integrates with global markets and continues to allow fuel imports. This costs the Government approximately about $ 3.5 billion per annum. Global fuel prices fluctuate based on market conditions, and it is crucial to understand why prices fluctuate and the indicators of these fluctuations. Some oil deposits in the world are located such that their extraction process is relatively easy and less costly. Some others are very costly to extract. The Middle East and the OPEC (Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) are reputed for their oil reserves, whereas the extraction of oil is comparatively more costly in areas like Alberta, Canada. Global oil prices are determined based on this ability of countries to supply to the global market. Political, economic, and climatic developments, and changes in these countries have a direct impact on global oil prices.

So what does the “price” increase communicate? It communicates to the consumer the scarcity of that particular resource within the particular time frame. So increases in global oil “prices” is an indication to consumers that fuel is becoming a scarce resource, and we have to use it optimally. It is also an indication to producers that they can earn more by producing more. This narrows down to the basics of supply and demand. Price is an indicator of scarcity. The “market economy” is not complicated, it is merely allowing the “price system” to work. This allows prices to indicate what should be done. Price is not just a number or a sum a consumer pays. Final retail prices are an accumulation of labour costs, material costs, scarcity, externalities, and factors of production. This is fundamentally why we must not intervene in the market price mechanism.

Sri Lanka has always ignored market principles. The island nation has been trying to artificially keep fuel prices constant despite the continuous fluctuations of global prices. We have failed to understand that such fabricated interventions to either inflate or deflate prices will only result in ceasing to keep up with global indications on whether the resource is scarce or not.

Sri Lanka’s fiscal discipline and stability has always been connected to fuel and the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation (CPC). As a result of fuel price changes, there are significant knock-on effects on all utilities, including electricity and water. CPC provides fuel at a lower price to the Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB), which is one of the main sources for electricity generation. As a result, the pricing of electricity is also now not indicative of scarcity. The CPC, which buys fuel at higher prices and sells it lower, now owes significant debts to most of the state banks. 

The debt incurred is in US dollar terms. A delay in payment or a default may adversely affect the entire financial system. The heavy impact this would have on the banking sector will consequently impact the Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL). It is no secret that the CBSL bails out the CPC and CEB through Treasury Bills, or by printing money. Therefore it is clear that by intervening, we have successfully exposed the entire financial system to deep peril.

The current Minister of Energy said the banks have informed the  CPC Chairman that they do not have foreign currency to pay for fuel imports. This was informed to the Secretary of the Treasury, who then summoned all the heads of banks, who collectively assured the payments for fuel imports. He further stated that the CBSL said it cannot offer any reserves, given the country’s economic woes. It is perplexing to say that the problem is really this severe. It is clear that intervention in the price system has caused a massive domino effect beyond comprehension. 

According to a World Bank report, the biggest beneficiary of subsidised fuel prices are the highest echelons of society. “The non-poor are the largest consumers of fuel and electricity (the top 30% of society consumes 70% of fuel. This is well ahead of direct and indirect consumption of fuel by the bottom 40% through public transport). The administered fuel prices are an effective subsidy to the non-poor funded indirectly by fiscal resources,” stated the World Bank in its Development Update for Sri Lanka in November 2017.

I see no difference in this fuel pricing phenomenon and how the final alcohol bill was shared amongst those who drink and those who don’t in my college days. The poor are bearing the burden of fuel subsidies so the rich can buy fuel for much cheaper. The weighed-down poor only consume fuel in the form of transport, electricity, and other secondary forms. We have to understand that the losses of the CPC have to be paid by someone. Currently, that someone is constituted by both the rich and the poor. 

One important aspect is that the Government also collects revenue through the consumption of fuel. Changes made to the duty waiver have caused enormous losses to the Government. Giving cash subsidies to the poorest section of society could have been a much better strategy than tampering with duty waivers and underpricing fuel, ignoring market signals.

According to the calculations shown in Figure 1, the recent price changes do not reflect market prices of diesel, as illustrated in Figure 2.

 

What is the solution?

 

The first solution lies in addressing the problem. As of now, Sri Lanka’s fuel prices fail to indicate scarcity, hampering the independent function of market prices. One way of doing this is by setting up a transparent mechanism and changing the prices to reflect market prices. It may be a price formula or a process where transparency is assured. 

Such a step will incentivise better resource allocation. Consumers will be able to shift between alternative choices and manage their decisions based on price signals. The previous administration introduced a pricing formula that was very poorly administered. The method of calculation was not properly communicated. 

I recall a time when elections were approaching, with a simultaneous spike in global oil prices underway. However, Sri Lanka’s oil prices remained the same. The same was seen when global prices reduced during the first lockdown, and the local consumer was deprived of the deflation. 

One common misperception on this strategy was voiced politically as: “Why do we need a Government if the prices are going to change according to the world market prices?” Simply because we are now experiencing the consequences of such control by the Government. As The Morning reported, the fuel fund has a negative Rs. 26 billion and there are many discrepancies over the numbers in numerous reports. 

Another common misperception is that based on the price changes of fuel, we are going to allow bus fares and other connected prices to change daily. It may be daily changes or it can be changes over a month or a quarter, and there are so many ways we can structure it based on market forces. We have all forgotten that we deal with so many daily price fluctuations. Vegetable prices, Gold prices, stock market prices, and even the prices we pay as interest for Treasury Bills and Bonds change everyday. Price changes for a reason: they communicate the market conditions, which is the ultimate objective of “price”, and allowing the markets to work. 

It is true that this price hike has an impact on the poor. The Government can consider direct cash transfers. The cost of cash transfers will be lower than the losses we collectively incur from the CPC, CEB, and other fuel-dependent state institutions. The current price hike is just another temporary solution; it does not fix the problem. 

Increasing the share collected by everyone at my university party does not change the unfair division of the cost. Likewise, a price increase without setting up a market system and price signals to operate won’t solve Sri Lanka’s fuel and economic crisis.Purchasing alcohol was an expensive endeavour back in college. I remember the total alcohol bill being shared equally amongst those who drink and those who don’t. Sri Lanka’s fuel pricing mechanism is quite similar to this. The subsidised prices are a blessing for direct users of fuel who can afford it. The majority, who are secondary users, end up paying for the subsidy indirectly. Sri Lanka’s fuel problem is quite complex. If we are to overcome this issue it is vital that policymakers understand the concept of “markets” and “prices”. 

It is important that Sri Lanka integrates with global markets and continues to allow fuel imports. This costs the Government approximately about $ 3.5 billion per annum. Global fuel prices fluctuate based on market conditions, and it is crucial to understand why prices fluctuate and the indicators of these fluctuations. Some oil deposits in the world are located such that their extraction process is relatively easy and less costly. Some others are very costly to extract. The Middle East and the OPEC (Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) are reputed for their oil reserves, whereas the extraction of oil is comparatively more costly in areas like Alberta, Canada. Global oil prices are determined based on this ability of countries to supply to the global market. Political, economic, and climatic developments, and changes in these countries have a direct impact on global oil prices.

So what does the “price” increase communicate? It communicates to the consumer the scarcity of that particular resource within the particular time frame. So increases in global oil “prices” is an indication to consumers that fuel is becoming a scarce resource, and we have to use it optimally. It is also an indication to producers that they can earn more by producing more. This narrows down to the basics of supply and demand. Price is an indicator of scarcity. The “market economy” is not complicated, it is merely allowing the “price system” to work. This allows prices to indicate what should be done. Price is not just a number or a sum a consumer pays. Final retail prices are an accumulation of labour costs, material costs, scarcity, externalities, and factors of production. This is fundamentally why we must not intervene in the market price mechanism.

Sri Lanka has always ignored market principles. The island nation has been trying to artificially keep fuel prices constant despite the continuous fluctuations of global prices. We have failed to understand that such fabricated interventions to either inflate or deflate prices will only result in ceasing to keep up with global indications on whether the resource is scarce or not.

Sri Lanka’s fiscal discipline and stability has always been connected to fuel and the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation (CPC). As a result of fuel price changes, there are significant knock-on effects on all utilities, including electricity and water. CPC provides fuel at a lower price to the Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB), which is one of the main sources for electricity generation. As a result, the pricing of electricity is also now not indicative of scarcity. The CPC, which buys fuel at higher prices and sells it lower, now owes significant debts to most of the state banks. 

The debt incurred is in US dollar terms. A delay in payment or a default may adversely affect the entire financial system. The heavy impact this would have on the banking sector will consequently impact the Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL). It is no secret that the CBSL bails out the CPC and CEB through Treasury Bills, or by printing money. Therefore it is clear that by intervening, we have successfully exposed the entire financial system to deep peril.

The current Minister of Energy said the banks have informed the  CPC Chairman that they do not have foreign currency to pay for fuel imports. This was informed to the Secretary of the Treasury, who then summoned all the heads of banks, who collectively assured the payments for fuel imports. He further stated that the CBSL said it cannot offer any reserves, given the country’s economic woes. It is perplexing to say that the problem is really this severe. It is clear that intervention in the price system has caused a massive domino effect beyond comprehension. 

According to a World Bank report, the biggest beneficiary of subsidised fuel prices are the highest echelons of society. “The non-poor are the largest consumers of fuel and electricity (the top 30% of society consumes 70% of fuel. This is well ahead of direct and indirect consumption of fuel by the bottom 40% through public transport). The administered fuel prices are an effective subsidy to the non-poor funded indirectly by fiscal resources,” stated the World Bank in its Development Update for Sri Lanka in November 2017.

I see no difference in this fuel pricing phenomenon and how the final alcohol bill was shared amongst those who drink and those who don’t in my college days. The poor are bearing the burden of fuel subsidies so the rich can buy fuel for much cheaper. The weighed-down poor only consume fuel in the form of transport, electricity, and other secondary forms. We have to understand that the losses of the CPC have to be paid by someone. Currently, that someone is constituted by both the rich and the poor. 

One important aspect is that the Government also collects revenue through the consumption of fuel. Changes made to the duty waiver have caused enormous losses to the Government. Giving cash subsidies to the poorest section of society could have been a much better strategy than tampering with duty waivers and underpricing fuel, ignoring market signals.

According to the calculations shown in Figure 1, the recent price changes do not reflect market prices of diesel, as illustrated in Figure 2.

 

What is the solution?

 

The first solution lies in addressing the problem. As of now, Sri Lanka’s fuel prices fail to indicate scarcity, hampering the independent function of market prices. One way of doing this is by setting up a transparent mechanism and changing the prices to reflect market prices. It may be a price formula or a process where transparency is assured. 

Such a step will incentivise better resource allocation. Consumers will be able to shift between alternative choices and manage their decisions based on price signals. The previous administration introduced a pricing formula that was very poorly administered. The method of calculation was not properly communicated. 

I recall a time when elections were approaching, with a simultaneous spike in global oil prices underway. However, Sri Lanka’s oil prices remained the same. The same was seen when global prices reduced during the first lockdown, and the local consumer was deprived of the deflation. 

One common misperception on this strategy was voiced politically as: “Why do we need a Government if the prices are going to change according to the world market prices?” Simply because we are now experiencing the consequences of such control by the Government. As The Morning reported, the fuel fund has a negative Rs. 26 billion and there are many discrepancies over the numbers in numerous reports. 

Another common misperception is that based on the price changes of fuel, we are going to allow bus fares and other connected prices to change daily. It may be daily changes or it can be changes over a month or a quarter, and there are so many ways we can structure it based on market forces. We have all forgotten that we deal with so many daily price fluctuations. Vegetable prices, Gold prices, stock market prices, and even the prices we pay as interest for Treasury Bills and Bonds change everyday. Price changes for a reason: they communicate the market conditions, which is the ultimate objective of “price”, and allowing the markets to work. 

It is true that this price hike has an impact on the poor. The Government can consider direct cash transfers. The cost of cash transfers will be lower than the losses we collectively incur from the CPC, CEB, and other fuel-dependent state institutions. The current price hike is just another temporary solution; it does not fix the problem. 

Increasing the share collected by everyone at my university party does not change the unfair division of the cost. Likewise, a price increase without setting up a market system and price signals to operate won’t solve Sri Lanka’s fuel and economic crisis.

Screenshot (6).png


The opinions expressed are the author’s own views. They may not necessarily reflect the views of the Advocata Institute or anyone affiliated with the institute.

The bottomless pot of Sri Lankan monetary policy

Originally appeared on The Morning

By Dhananath Fernando

A student asked their teacher: “What’s the most amazing, incredible thing in the world?” The teacher responded: “The most incredible thing in the world is that we see people leave all around us, but we never think it’s going to be us. It’s an everyday experience, that people known to us and loved ones leave us. Even experiencing it every day, our mind can’t think that we would also be one of them. Isn’t that incredible?”

Sometimes, it is the most obvious things that we fail to understand. Sri Lanka’s monetary policy definitely falls into this category of things. We see it and experience it every day, but still fail to understand or notice the big elephant in the room. 

The monetary policy is the set of rules under which a monopoly state agency produces paper money. The public is forced to use the money because the government has given it a monopoly and arrests anyone who keeps large volumes of foreign money. There are also restrictions on keeping deposits in foreign money to protect against inflating and depreciating money.

Good central banks will produce stable, low-inflation money. Bad central banks will produce large volumes of money, which generates high inflation and also results in foreign exchange shortages and depreciation.

Some people who run central banks try to avoid printing excess money, if they believe that high inflation and currency depreciation is bad. But sometimes, the Finance Ministry will pressure them to print money to finance the deficit or keep interest rates down.

And central banks will be forced to follow the orders of politicians. To avoid this kind of pressure, which is called fiscal dominance monetary policy, central banks ask for independence from the Finance Ministry.

But there are other activist central banks that will try to push growth on their own by printing money and artificially pushing interest rates down. Such banks will create monetary instability regardless of whether they are given independence or not. 

Some countries have solved this problem by putting controls on their central bank so that its officials are unable to print excess money, whatever their ideology or economic beliefs are. To do this, it is necessary to reduce discretion and bring them under the rule of law.

One such law is a strict inflation targeting law of around 2%. To target inflation, however, it is necessary to have a pure floating exchange rate.

Countries with central banks that create the most trouble or instability usually have pegged exchange rates. They are usually called soft-pegged exchange rate regimes.

The simplest way to restrain them is to fix the exchange and take away their ability to manipulate the interest rate by prohibiting the purchase of domestic securities. This is done by a currency board law which results in a fully credible peg or a fixed exchange rate.

The exchange rate can also be fixed to a great extent by having a wide policy corridor and managing the ability to control short-term interest rates on a daily basis.

The more discretion that is given to the central bank, the more tools they will use to inject liquidity to manipulate interest rates and then create instability. 

A third way is to dollarise. That is to allow foreign currency issued by a better central bank – such as one that is restrained by an inflation targeting law, or a currency board law – to be used in the country. It can be extended to allow multiple foreign currencies to be used as well.

Then, there cannot be any Balance of Payments crises anymore. This is what the Colombo Port City has done. It will be a multiple currency area.

The Central Bank’s recent strategy has to be evaluated with its policies over the last few months and in recent weeks. Below are a few decisions taken over the last few weeks:

 

  1. Over the last week, the Central Bank urged the private sector to borrow foreign currency offshore funding and promised to give a zero-cost swap facility. Put simply, this means private firms are encouraged to borrow money in foreign currencies and “sell” it to the Central Bank for rupees. The Central Bank gives them the foreign currency back at the same exchange rate they sold it at a specified future date – say, one year, at the exact same rate. However, if the rupee rates are very low, it is doubtful whether this will be a very profitable activity. Companies that could borrow in foreign currencies can invest in Sri Lanka Development Bonds and government securities which are denominated in US dollars

  2. In another news story, Sri Lanka requested and received a $ 200 million swap facility from Bangladesh. Interestingly, the IMF (International Monetary Fund) approved a $ 732 million facility for Bangladesh in May 2020 as emergency assistance to address the Covid-19 pandemic

  3. In another move, the Finance Ministry has raised the limit on borrowing through treasury guarantees to 15% of GDP (gross domestic product) from 10% of GDP. This will allow the Government to borrow more off the balance sheet through state-owned enterprises and spend it through those enterprises. So the loans taken through treasury guarantees will not come under central government debt. Central government debt is already at 101% compared to our GDP, so space is limited for the Central Bank to borrow. The Bangladeshi Central Bank has also asked for a treasury guarantee, according to reports in newspapers in that country

 

When evaluating all these moves, it is clear that Sri Lanka is drifting towards a very hard situation on raising foreign exchange, as it has been highlighted in this column as well by many experts during the last 12 months. 

We have to ask ourselves: “With so many reactive and stringent measures such as import controls, why are we struggling to fix this problem?” That is where we have to recall the story of the student and the teacher. Sometimes it’s the most obvious thing that we fail to understand. That is, our monetary policy. That is, demand and supply of money. Our Central Bank has been supplying money following MMT (Modern Monetary Theory) utilising the space of low inflation. It is true the inflation is low, but the excess money we print will chase behind imports. It is the same as trying to fill a pot without a bottom. 

Let’s consider a simple example. Even if I grow all the food items that I require in my backyard, the moment I switch on a light at my home, I am spending on imports in the form of fuel for electricity. The moment I switch on my internet router, which consumes electricity, it is the consumption of imports. The moment we build flyovers, highways, and even a simple act of giving away 1 kg of dhal to an affected family mean we are spending on imports. So the only way to cut imports, if we really want to, is by minimising our consumption. 

Or else, we have to increase taxes. The Government has clearly stated that they do not intend to increase taxes. Even increasing taxes will not be a solution without fixing government expenditure, however. Currently, 86 cents of every rupee of tax collected is spent on government employees.

So to minimise consumption, the Central Bank has to absorb money from the system by selling the treasury bills they have rather than buying it from the market. When the Central Bank buys treasury bills, we call it money printing or quantitative easing. The more money we inject into the system, the more we spend, and we will spend more on imports. That is the Balance of Payments crisis we face at the moment, and that is why so many hard and well-intentioned efforts by the Central Bank haven’t seen the expected results materialising. 

Many are of the view that reactivating tourism and attracting higher foreign direct investments (FDIs) will be a permanent solution for this problem. Increased numbers in tourism and FDI will help to ease the situation, but it is not the permanent solution. There have been grand expectations expressed at the recent Sri Lanka Investment Forum to bring the per capita GDP to $ 8,000 by 2030 and a list of very aspirational goals. All the outputs are welcome, but without fixing our monetary policy and failing to understand the most obvious reason why we are failing, Sri Lanka will remain where it is today for the next decade. We must remind ourselves of the story of the teacher and the student on how we have failed to understand the obvious realities and realise that current policies have failed while trying to fix all the other issues in the periphery. Monetary stability is not everything, but without monetary stability, everything is nothing

The opinions expressed are the author’s own views. They may not necessarily reflect the views of the Advocata Institute or anyone affiliated with the institute.

MV X-Press Pearl: lack of preparedness fanned the flames

Originally appeared on The Morning

By Dhananath Fernando

There have been many sentiments expressed on social media that Sri Lanka did not have luck in the recent past. Adverse weather, a third wave of Covid-19, and the sinking ship are just the most recent incidents from a much longer list. I was reminded of the meaning of luck when I was watching a documentary on Hollywood star Will Smith. Smith recalled his father’s advice on his successful career from his humble beginnings. “There is nothing called luck. Even if there is anything called ‘luck’ it is where opportunity meets preparedness.” Smith recalled how his father used to call him at 3 a.m. after seeing his box office numbers.

When I think about Sri Lanka; it is true we really haven’t had any luck for the last decade, but I believe it is simply because we haven’t been prepared. So when the opportunity comes or even when a crisis occurs, we are not prepared. The delay in preparing our policies costs us each time.

Reforms in the shipping and maritime industry is one such area of policy reform that we have postponed for too long. With the X-Press Pearl sinking near the “Pearl of the Indian Ocean” in our territorial waters, it is clear that the economics and our policy of a maritime hub have to be re-evaluated.

One may be surprised at the connection I am implying between a fire in a feeder vessel and the country’s shipping and marine policy, and one may even wonder what economics has to do with it. Whilst it is true that there is no recipe or economic model to douse a fire, economic policy can create an economic ecosystem where we have many firefighters, technology, and partners capable of dismantling an emergency of this scale or even at a bigger scale. If we did have such a policy, it could have presented may options, which in turn could have helped us avoid such a catastrophe for the economy, our invaluable marine environment, and our pristine beaches. 

How good policy could have helped

An incident like an emergency fire and an event of this scale and the ability to avoid it will undoubtedly have numerous variables. It is a rare incident. There are thousands of feeder vessels and mainliners passing our Colombo Harbour and Sri Lanka ranks 24th on the list of “Best Container Terminals” in the world, so how is it that we did not have a system in place to fight a fire? This is a question we have to ask ourselves as a nation aspiring to become the centre of the Silk Route.

The adverse monsoonal weather and the Indian fire brigade vessels taking about two to three days to arrive, have fuelled discussions surrounding “luck”. However, something that should be explored immediately is why Sri Lanka did not have sufficient auxiliary services such as maritime fire brigade services, especially in a backdrop where the Port of Colombo is a regional transhipment hub.  

It is not a question of our commitment to overcome this particular emergency but about the absence of policy to bring in technology and international businesses to arrest the situation. Undoubtedly, it is one out of many alternatives. There are incidents where even with superior technology, ships have been sunk into deep depths.

The economic argument brings in the question of what alternatives could have been available to us to control the fire and avoid damage to marine life. The Sri Lanka Port Authority Fire Brigade and Sri Lanka Air Force did their best to stop the fire at its initial stages. In one reel of footage it was clear the officer in a helicopter was throwing some chemicals from bags to douse the fire. While their efforts are appreciated, in the modern world, there are more advanced helicopters, aircraft, and vessels for fire-fighting, and our Air Force helicopters or Navy vessels are not crafted to fight a fire of that scale. In the industry of shipping there are more and more companies that provide such facilities. The shipping industry is an ecosystem and container transhipment is just a one tiny part of it. 

It is easy to point fingers at the Government and ask why it can’t have such high-tech vessels and aircraft to combat fires at sea. The answer is simply that it is not the Government’s responsibility to douse fires nor does our Government have the money to make such massive investments. But it is the policymakers’ responsibility to create a business environment in the shipping industry where such supportive services can be established within our country. 

There are many reasons why such companies do not establish their businesses in Sri Lanka. One main reason is that there is no reason for smaller, supportive businesses to enter the Sri Lankan market when none of the bigger shipping companies or principals are based in Sri Lanka. Then, we have to ask the question why the main shipping companies or giant players are not entering the Sri Lankan market. The reason is there is a law that 51% of the ownership of the company has to be kept with a local agency. There is no reason for a globally reputed big shipping company to enter Sri Lanka by offering 51% of the ownership to a local company where there are many better options available in the region and globally.

As a result of Sri Lanka not transforming to a maritime hub because it is sticking to its archaic laws, none of the advanced technologies or support services that exist in the industry will enter Sri Lanka, and we will have the same discussion even in five years unless the reforms are made. 

Our snail’s pace movement in a dynamic industry has driven Sri Lanka away from becoming a maritime hub and we have become just a port with high container transhipment volumes – which is also now coming to a saturation with delays in operationalising the East and West Container Terminals. The lobbying against reforming these laws is very high, as there are many beneficiaries in the current system. Policymakers who attempted to do the reforms have failed or are set to fail. 

There has been another discussion on getting a reasonable insurance claim for the damages caused to our marine environment through this recent incident. Some policymakers even mentioned that the claim will be supported to overcome national financial difficulties. However, we have to re-evaluate whether our policymakers have enacted the supporting legislations on global conventions under the International Maritime Organisation, in our Parliament. Since the ship is still within our territorial waters, it is the domestic legal framework that the shipping company has to abide by. But without the necessary legal framework in place to become a maritime hub, facing such incidents in Sri Lanka with the big insurance companies and their experienced lawyers will be challenging. They will always find legal reasons to escape from paying compensation, the same as our motor insurance companies. Ultimately, poor Sri Lankan taxpayers have to bear the entire loss that will be caused to our pristine beaches, marine environment, fisheries sector, tourism sector, and all industries and livelihoods connected to the incident.

Many Sri Lankans are of the view that during the incident, luck was not on our side. If Will Smith’s father was right, it is true that Sri Lankans did not have the luck of combating the fire; it was that the opportunity in the form of the fire met our lack of preparedness for decades in the shipping and maritime industry. The rest is history.

The opinions expressed are the author’s own views. They may not necessarily reflect the views of the Advocata Institute or anyone affiliated with the institute.

Education and economic success: How Covid-19 could have saved us

Originally appeared on The Morning

By Dhananath Fernando

It’s been over a year since the Covid-19 pandemic hit Sri Lanka. The pandemic entered our nation at a time when all Sri Lankans, regardless of their party politics, had very high hopes about a change in the political economic system – a “system change”. While Covid has posed a real challenge for any system change, it could have been interpreted as a blessing if we were to shift our gears from “needing a system change” to working on “implementing a system change”. In my mind, education reforms are probably the best place to start.

We tried to restrict Covid to being a healthcare crisis without letting it spill over to become an economic crisis, but to no avail. Now there is another crisis brewing in the corner, which hasn’t been given much attention – the “education crisis”, which has been exacerbated by the Covid pandemic and its economic aftermath.

Let’s understand the crisis first.

Even before Covid, it was not a secret that our education system was not supporting our economic aspirations. Starting from preschool to tertiary and vocational education, the education reforms have been mere promises; they have been limited to the pages of election manifestos, without any real work happening on the ground. This education crisis is far more complicated than ever before. There are significant flaws in the education structure as well as in the content taught.

Sri Lanka’s inability to produce complicated products and services is a good case study to evaluate our education system. What we have been taught over the years does not satisfy the areas of knowledge that are in demand. People who have had the talent and acquired the skills that meet global demand have been offered citizenship and very attractive opportunities all over the world, and Sri Lanka has not even thought of attracting them back.

The more serious problem is that we have not been taught the things that are important for the present and future. From my experiences, we haven’t been provided with the opportunity to really learn by ourselves, even if we wanted to. Most content and many curriculums are outdated and so we have been made incompetent and unable to meet global competition. From 2000- 2015, Sri Lanka has introduced only seven HS codes to our export basket. Our competitor Vietnam has introduced 48 and Thailand has introduced 70 HS codes to its export basket. Therefore, one of the main contributors to our ailing economy is education.

As a result, even after 70 years of independence, we are finding it difficult to compete, and our inability to compete and understand the market dimensions have pushed us into a corner. In order to counter our own lack of competitiveness, we are building walls of protectionism against a far more competitive world, which has further isolated us as a nation in a fast accelerating world.

It is not only about our knowledge of technical subjects; human values and qualities such as empathy, equality, caring, taking responsibility, self-discipline, and many other soft skills have not been developed to levels at which they should have been. The way our senior educated officials and some trade union leaders, who have had a science and technology-focused tertiary education, are attempting to manage a global-scale pandemic, is a classic case study to understanding the gaps in our education system.

With all these flaws we have continued on the same journey without making improvements. With the pandemic, our preschools, universities, and most of the tertiary education institutes have been closed or operating virtually for more than a year; some have adopted online teaching methods but some of the students who do not have internet or device access have been completely left out. Some students and families have been completely left out due to being unable to afford the internet (even though Sri Lanka is one country with comparatively low data charges), and for practical reasons such as a few kids requiring to study online at the same time. Additionally, learning how to learn online is the first step for a productive online learning experience, rather than just sharing the same notes online and delivering the same content in front of a camera.

Education reforms are complicated, but it is one area that can bring us significant economic benefits in the future – if done right, and in line with global education standards. To do this, reforms sacrifices in terms of political capital will have to be made.

Implementing such reforms will bring in newer opportunities.

First, the tertiary and university education system could have expanded through a new online platform. One of the main complaints has been the capacity of our universities. An online mechanism with proper online examinations could significantly increase the numbers getting enrolled at our universities. A parallel curriculum change could have been done with industry consultations, as the post-Covid economy in the world has opened more opportunities for hundreds of new subject streams. Even world-reputed universities such as Harvard and MIT are now offering new courses with the same credibility online at a very reasonable price.

Secondly, the teachers are at home, and this time, they should have been better utilised for teacher training and curriculum changes to uplift education standards.

To overcome the current crisis, ideally a special curriculum could have been made for primary and secondary schools with special focus on the critical content from the existing curriculum. That would have helped students focus on the important subjects and themes and catch up for time they already lost due to Covid. The same special curriculum should be the gateway for updating our education system and curriculum.

While we work on long-term curriculum changes and online education methods, teachers and the school administrations should be identified as frontline workers and vaccination drives should prioritise them so that schools can be reopened faster.

There have been attempts to utilise the current television network for education purposes, but it seems to have not been done in an organised manner. In the third wave, we are back to square one in facing our educational challenges and it is obvious that we have not learnt anything from the first and second waves of the pandemic.

We have to remember that reviving the economy from an education crisis is far more difficult than recovering from a healthcare crisis. If our people’s brains don’t work at the right speed and in the right direction, there is no way that we can drive the economic engine in the right direction.

That may be why former late South African President Nelson Madela eloquently said:

“Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.”

The opinions expressed are the author’s own views. They may not necessarily reflect the views of the Advocata Institute or anyone affiliated with the institute.

Work Together or Die Alone

Originally appeared on The Morning

By Dhananath Fernando

How the pandemic highlighted the greatest benefit of globalisation – co-operation

The provision of Covid-19 vaccines has become a serious issue, not only in Sri Lanka, but in all parts of the world, but governments could have faced this issue better if they had understood the economics behind it – especially because it is the science of managing scarce resources by making the right choices in resource allocation.

Understanding this is much more important today because Covid-19 vaccines have become a limited and scarce resource globally. Sri Lankans who got the first jab of the Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine is now in a stage of confusion, as they have lost access to the second jab. This is mostly due to the unfortunate Covid uptick in India, which is globally the main manufacturer of vaccines.

Let’s rewind to about a year ago. This was when Sri Lanka managed the first wave of Covid-19, with a strict lockdown, active contact tracing, and effective quarantine mechanism. The number of infections and fatality cases in the USA, Italy, and some other European countries were very high during the same period. But things have changed. 

Economically, this was the time Sri Lanka embraced self-sufficiency. Many argued that globalisation and global convergence have come to a standstill, and that we have to go for self-sufficiency, and even for a homemade recipe for Covid-19 pandemic management. 

After one year, the entire world – and even the Sri Lankan authorities – has unanimously agreed that the best solution to manage the pandemic is vaccination. At one point, some policymakers even questioned and argued, saying: “Why are we making our people guinea pigs for vaccination testing of the products developed by other countries?” However in just one year, it was proven that global cooperation is needed for us to prosper; and the main vaccines currently in use in Sri Lanka, namely Oxford AstraZeneca, the Russian-developed Sputnik V and Chinese-developed Sinopharm are the result of global cooperation. 

The vaccines Sri Lanka received as a result of Covax are part of a global co-operation programme, where many countries and international donors contributed to developing the vaccines at a rapid pace. The US invested about $ 4 billion in Covax, as did the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. The Coax programme is a global mechanism, where countries and donors donate money to the programme, similar to the Paris agreement, for the vaccinations of middle and low-income countries. 

However, it is true that as usual, the countries with deep pockets received an additional advantage of securing more doses than middle-income countries. It is a classic case of “higher the investment, higher the return”. In this case, the higher return is in the number of doses for countries that invested billions of dollars for vaccine development and manufacturing. 

First world countries including Canada, the USA, Japan, and the UK have made multiple bilateral deals with many pharmaceutical companies, and have managed to secure doses more than they require for the entire population. Those countries made the risk of investing in multiple companies in case of the failure of certain vaccines during the development process. As a result, some countries like Canada have now reserved enough vaccines to vaccinate 8.7 times the doses required by their population. The UK and USA have reserved vaccination doses for about 7.7 and 4.0 times the sizes of their population. 

Globally, this has created a debate on the waiver of patent rights for vaccines. Some economists and policymakers have requested a waiving-off of these globally so that  the developing world will be able to produce its own vaccines – thereby increasing the supply of vaccines and bringing the pandemic to an end. 

However, intellectual property (IP) rights is a big component of pharma manufacturing. Companies and scientists embraced taking such a significant risk because of the large returns they could have made. Requesting a waive-off on these IP rights may affect the incentive of developing similar high-demand pharma products in the long run.

In this context, the question is what Sri Lanka can do to accelerate the vaccination programme. 

First, we have to realise we are already late to catch the train. The cost of the delay is a serious economic storm to an already ailing economy. Ordering vaccines and rolling out vaccinations could have started about six to seven months before. However, what we can do now is to open up the vaccine rollout to the private sector. With the global agent agreements, private sector companies may be able to secure some doses, so those individuals who could afford a vaccine may be able to get it by paying a higher price. 

Thereby, the most vulnerable sectors who can’t afford a vaccine could have access to the government programme. Big corporations and exporters in Sri Lanka most likely will pay the vaccinations for their employees. This is the same as PCR testing at the initial stage. The private sector was not allowed to conduct PCR testing. As a result, even someone who could afford a PCR test had to stretch out the resources of the Government, and as usual, it is the most influential people who got a preference in the government system. 

Most healthcare providers currently conduct PCR tests in collaboration with the private sector, which has helped immensely for active contact tracing and quarantining. The same actually happened for the vaccines as well. With the absence of a proper priority list, many who could afford to purchase a vaccine, and who could have survived without a vaccine for some time, got preference over someone who was deeply in need. 

We also have to admit that global co-operation in the modern world is a normal thing, and depending on each other is not a weakness, but a strength.

The opinions expressed are the author’s own views. They may not necessarily reflect the views of the Advocata Institute or anyone affiliated with the institute.

Are we getting the Port City Right?

Originally appeared on The Morning, Daily News, Lanka Business, Daily FT

By H. Dabarera and K.D. Vimanga

The Supreme Court determination on the Colombo Port City Economic Commission Bill will be announced by the Speaker to Parliament today (18) and the Bill will be debated in Parliament tomorrow (19) and Thursday (20).

Over the last few weeks, Sri Lankans have contemplated if the proposed Colombo Port City is the messiah that will rescue the country’s economy or whether it is another Trojan Horse that will throw firewood into the already smouldering regional geopolitical furnace. 

The Port City as a model has the potential to be a driver of growth. For that, it must be governed well within a globally accepted, transparent and accountable regulatory framework. The project can bring in much needed foreign investment and kickstart growth especially at a time when the state of public finance is weak with a looming risk of default of debt. 

The major part of the investment for the Colombo Port City is already made, hence there’s no option other than making use of it and making it work. However, it must be done in a manner that does not compromise the best interests of Sri Lanka and our regional partners. 

The proposed bill aspires to have a financial centre within the proposed “special economic zone” in the likes of financial centres such as Singapore, London and New York. Then it is crucial that such a centre maintains a separate legal and regulatory framework that is unhindered by the delays and loopholes in the local court system and is established in accordance with international norms and practices. If implemented correctly, a financial centre can open up opportunities in investment banking, insurance, off-shore financial services, hedge funds, institutional investors, clearing houses, etc. A financial centre combined with international living standards and financing options can also be attractive for tech startups especially those aspiring to operate in the South Asian region. This creates opportunities for ambitious Sri Lankans for jobs they have to now go overseas. 

However, this is a process that is protracted over a longer period of time and is dependent on the confidence and trust that the project invokes for investors. The key to building trust and confidence is dependent on two main factors. One, having a sound financial regulatory system. Two, having global recognition and acceptance for the governing law. As a matter of fact, most financial centres resort to a framework based on English Common Law. 

 

Challenges 

The comparative advantage Sri Lanka has compared to regional financial centre’s such as Dubai, Mauritius, Singapore, Hong Kong, etc. is limited in its strategic location, hence attracting investors to bypass established financial centres will take significant effort. The comparative advantage Sri Lanka offers must be unique to attract the global investor! 

The island’s geographic proximity to the sub-continent and the present geopolitical landscape of securing friends and off-shore assets by the regional super powers makes a compelling case for many to develop the Colombo Port City as a regional hub to manage money from the heavy rollers in the region. 

However, becoming such a magnet for investment can only be done by building bridges with our regional partners. But the question is, is that simply enough? One might argue yes, as Sri Lanka’s economy is only a shade above $ 80 billion. However, the question arises if the global financial elite such as HSBC, Deutsche Bank, Citibank, Bank of China, IOB, JP Morgan etc, will enter Colombo Port City to do business. 

Is providing tax concessions simply going to bring in these reputed banks? Observing the behaviour of these banks simply illustrate that a vast majority of these banks make big investment decisions such as opening onshore operations by assessing a whole range of factors including the regulatory environment, especially in the case of emerging markets. 

So, is the proposed financial regulatory arrangement sufficient? At present the act vests power onto the proposed commission to regulate and monitor and steer banking operations within the area of the Colombo Port City with the concurrence of the identified national bodies such as the Minister of Finance and the Monetary Board. Therefore, the bill lacks a regulatory framework conforms with international best practices set out by institutions such as the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision and the Financial Action Task Force (FATF). This is done in order to facilitate such capital flows due to the serious concerns on money laundering. So, it is vital that this issue of a lack of a supervised financial regulatory system is addressed, if the Port City is to be operated as a productive financial centre. 

A second serious drawback of the drafted bill is the lack of an accepted global recognised governing framework such as English Law. If we are going to benchmark ourselves with established financial centres such as Singapore and Dubai, the said financial centre must be framed around English Common Law. The rationale for this stems from the fact that, English Common Law underpins the legal systems of the world’s four top international financial centres – London, Hong Kong and Singapore. This is further exemplified by how the Dubai financial centre functions as an independent jurisdiction governed by an English Common Law framework which is distinct from the rest of the UAE. Such a framework will bring in operational and cross jurisdictional mobility. This is because the global financial sector already functions on an English Common Law dominated platform. Moving to complaint jurisdiction with the same legal norms is the standard best practice. 

In fact, Sri Lanka ranks poorly in the World Bank’s Doing Business Indicator (99 out of 190 countries), due to the country’s fledgling legal system related issues and has fallen behind regional peers such as Nepal and India. 

So to attract the global banking elite such a framework is preferable and will not only open the core financial sectors such as banking, securities and derivatives, but also related sectors such as insurance, shipping, international trade, commodities and logistics. 

 

The legal framework for settlement of disputes 

For resolution of disputes the Commission is expected to establish an “International Commercial Dispute Resolution Centre.” Any dispute that arises within the Port City between the Commission and other entities within Port City shall be resolved by way of arbitration. Further, all agreements made by every authorised person with the Commission should have a provision on mandatory reference to arbitration for any dispute that arises within Port City. The International Arbitration Centre shall be the sole authority to hear all such disputes within the Port City. 

However, with regards to disputes that authorised persons within Port City can face over business activities carried out with other entities from all over the world, they will have the discretion to resort to any form of conflict resolution; litigation or any form of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanism in any jurisdiction of the world. Hence, the reputation of our International Arbitration Centre will matter immensely. Especially if we are to ensure that these disputes can even be heard within the Port City in the form of ADR. This will bring in much needed business to the arbitration centre while reducing the cost to the investors within the Port City as other centres such as London, New York, Singapore, Hong Kong, Dubai, etc. will be a costlier option than Colombo. 

International Arbitration Centres in Singapore and Hong Kong have gained worldwide recognition as leading arbitration hubs. They have made a significant contribution to the economic growth of these countries and helped them attract international business, trade and FDI. Thus, if strategically utilised, an international arbitration centre can be complementary to the growth of international business within the country. However, in order to ensure such results, it is essential that the International Arbitration Centre has in place a proper set of rules and principles to ensure swift resolution of disputes and ease through predictability and consistency to the business community. 

The current International Arbitration Centre in Sri Lanka, despite being based upon the UNCITRAL model law of Arbitration, has ultimately failed in winning over the confidence of the public and investors due to the arbitration proceedings dragging too long (as long as three years in certain instances). In the world of finance, time is money as money never sleeps. So special emphasis must be placed on maximising efficiency within the arbitration centre. Additionally, constant political instability in the country and the failure of the judiciary to uphold rule of law has also acted as hindrances to propel Sri Lanka as a global hub for International Arbitration. 

Drawing from these failures, it is evident that if the Port City is to become like Singapore or Hong Kong as an International Arbitration Centre it needs to introduce sound principles that are able to win over the confidence of the business community. 

 

A case for legal neutrality and jurisdictional independence 

It is also important for the International Arbitration Centre at the Colombo Port City to establish legal neutrality in the eyes of international stakeholders. Legal neutrality is of utmost importance for a financial centre as impartiality is key to attract investors and reputed financial institutions. Hence, ‘trust’ in resolving disputes impartially and transparently will be a deal maker for the Colombo Port City to become a success. Especially as it will be competing with financial centres in the region, of the likes of Dubai and Singapore who enjoy reputational synergies due to the merits of maintaining neutrality and also efficiency. This further makes a serious case for the Colombo Port City to be an independent jurisdiction within an English Common Law framework. 

An International Arbitration Centre, manned by local expertise may not deliver the credibility investors seek from a virgin financial zone that has to compete with established facilities that operate with a proven track record on efficiency, transparency and infrastructure. Hence, the International Arbitration Centre can be opened to accommodate foreign professionals with a proven track in arbitration. The addition of such provisions to the existing Bill can make the International Arbitration Centre at the Colombo Port City attractive and marketable to become an alternative financial centre for the South Asian region. Further the inclusion of English Common Law which the international financial markets are very well versed in can bring in significant benefits when functioning as a financial centre. If this fundamental issue is not addressed the Colombo Port City will yet again be a case of missing the bus yet again. 

The opinions expressed are the author’s own views. They may not necessarily reflect the views of the Advocata Institute or anyone affiliated with the institute.

Budget 2021 : A good or bad kettle?

Originally appeared on The Morning

By Dhananath Fernando

Then school principal of my alma mater, late Rev. Fr. Bonnie Fernandopulle used to mentor students through the use of anecdotes and examples. One of his favourite questions for students he was mentoring was: “Do you know the difference between a ‘good kettle’ and a ‘bad kettle’? They both look the same. They both sound the same. They both serve the same purpose of boiling water. But only time will tell which one is which.” He used to say: “It is not the ‘term-end exams’ nor the ‘semester-end test’ that are the difficult tests of life. The ‘test of time’ is a test that you, as students, should train yourselves to face.” I hold this advice dear and remember it up to date.

One year into a global pandemic calls for a litmus test on the effectiveness of our economic policies and the presented “Budget 2021”. This will help one evaluate where Sri Lanka stands in the “test of time’ metric. 

The Annual Report of the Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL) for 2020 provides some statistical insight for evaluation. Our economy has contracted by about 3.6%. Our debt-to-GDP ratio has increased above 101%. Government revenue has shrunk from about half a trillion rupees. Revenue as a percentage of GDP has shrunk to 9.3% from 12.6% in 2019. The present revenue-to-GDP ratio is among the lowest for countries at our level of development. This would induce us to print more money in the near future, while additionally we have printed about Rs. 650 billion. By contrast, in the year 2019, Sri Lanka printed only about Rs. 4 billion. The two lockdowns and the mounting economic woes that the island has been facing for decades have led us to where we stand now. These figures do not come as a surprise. The end of 2020 left all of us with severe concerns and reasonable estimations of the country’s sorrowful performance of the year.

The 2021 Budget presented Sri Lanka with a good opportunity to take necessary measures to curb the approaching economic downturn. Looking back at the Budget, five months later, it is somewhat evident that we could have done better in certain policy areas.

This column previously highlighted two main loopholes in the 2021 Budget. One was the inadequate allocation of resources and the lack of a solid plan for healthcare services to combat Covid-19. The second was a credible action plan on debt servicing challenges for Sri Lanka. It was evident that without combating Covid-19, mitigating the impact on the economy will be difficult. Some sentiments expressed by members in Parliament questioned the need for the resources for vaccines which were produced by some other countries and highlighted the need for making Sri Lankans guinea pigs for vaccines by multinational pharma corporations. It was personally alarming for me to watch business leaders speaking at budget discussion forums with excessive emphasis on their respective businesses with no regard extended to the larger economic adversity at hand.

As a result of these poor policies and mitigating strategies, we are now in the midst of a raging third wave of the virus. This continues to affect the economy, proposed budget promises, and businesses adversely. Simultaneously, the global demand for vaccines has skyrocketed. Therefore, it is evident that Sri Lanka will have to wait for some time to receive the required amount of vaccines.

The 2021 Budget did not successfully address Sri Lanka’s problem of debt servicing. The only thing concealing the severity of this issue is the burden placed on the country’s healthcare sector at the moment. 

Moreover, Sri Lanka faced international pressure in terms of human rights violations coupled with geopolitical tensions which brings its own economic constraints and impact. As stated by the Central Bank Annual Report 2020, the destinations of more than 60% of our exports are the US, India, Japan, Australia, and the European Union (EU). All these nations have expressed concerns over Sri Lanka’s reconciliation efforts. 

Unlike the first-time shocker of the Covid-19 pandemic, after one year, some countries have made progress even with gigantic challenges. So from the perspective of investor sentiment and businesses, over time, the innovators and early adaptors, who are good to do business in the region and globally, are getting noticed. The attention and priority we received in the initial Covid-19 wave from investors, businesses, local donors, international donor agencies, and the rest of the world may not return during this new wave. Especially if our  policy decisions lack foresight and common sense. The current story published on PublicFinance.lk is that only 6% has been spent from the Yuthukama fund which was set up for Covid management and the availability of Rs. 1.7 billion remaining as the balance is just one example. The fund was supported by many Sri Lankans, and now, local and international companies may doubt the seriousness of our efforts.

We are between two hard choices which will have equally bad negative consequences. Minimising the mobility of people impacts our economic activity but increasing the mobility affects the Covid-19 spread which hits back again on the economy and people’s livelihoods. We need vaccines to control the spread of the virus but we should be able to get the vaccines first, while also balancing our foreign exchange. Economic policy formulation and execution is a team sport. It is not only the right policy but also the execution that matters. Even if we have a good execution team, if we are implementing the wrong policy prescription, the results won’t stand the test of the time. Unfortunately, five months after the Budget 2021 none of our policies nor our policy execution was able to stand the test of time. It is not only the Budget for 2021; the previous budgets and our economic policy over the years have failed to make a positive impact. We should pause for a moment and think about which sort of kettle we are. Are we a good one or a bad one? We should ask ourselves: “Have we been able to stand the ‘test of time’ with the economic policy we have been practicing?”

The opinions expressed are the author’s own views. They may not necessarily reflect the views of the Advocata Institute or anyone affiliated with the institute.

Understanding economics, understanding life

Originally appeared on The Morning

By Dhananath Fernando

Why Sri Lanka needs to comprehend economics to tackle its other problems

It is said that when John Lennon (the singer/songwriter) was five years old, his mother used to say that happiness was the key to life. When he went to school, the teacher asked him:  “What do you want to be when you grow up?” John replied: “To be happy.” The teacher told him: “You didn’t understand the question,” to which John responded: “You haven’t understood life.” 

John Lennon’s thinking is valid in economics as well. When we fail to understand economics, most of the time we just don’t understand life. 

It is a more serious problem for the common man’s life when our policymakers don’t understand economics. Asking the common man to pay for someone else’s decisions and choices is not the right way to think about economics. 

Sri Lanka’s continuous battle with Covid-19 is a good case study, not only in economics, but also in understanding what is happening to our quality of life. Especially with the risk of a Covid-19 third wave at hand. 

Public Health Inspectors (PHIs) have recommended another lockdown. A record number of patients have been reported per day, far exceeding our testing capacity. Newspapers have reported about a UK variant and asked the public to keep a two-metre physical distance, instead of one metre, to combat the new variant. 

As the nation went through a second lockdown, this column highlighted why Sri Lanka cannot afford another lockdown. 

Simply put, our government revenue is declining, our foreign currency debt repayments are mounting, our channels of foreign currency earnings have been interrupted negatively, and most of our economic challenges have reached a boiling point. 

None of these problems have quick fixes. The only quick fix we can apply is to buy more time. All the above are symptoms of wrong economic thinking rather than problems that cannot be solved. The right economic thinking is more important than ever before, as we slowly drift towards the brink of a third Covid-19 wave.

Economics is the study of maximum utilisation of scarce resources that have alternative uses. On the health care front, our hospital beds, PCR testing capacity, ventilators, vaccines, and oxygen supplies have now become crucial, scarce resources. 

If we fail to utilise these scarce resources to their  maximum, as a country we will face a health care crisis. This is taking place in the backdrop of a grave economic crisis that has been multiplying over the years. Globally, vaccination is in high demand, and even the slightest delay to place an order could cost human lives. To get vaccines faster, we need foreign currency and a good working relationship with other countries to get the vaccines down. Unfortunately, things are a bit difficult at the moment.

When resources are scarce, the only way to maximise that resource is to prioritise them – this means removing barriers for more players to enter the market and allow market forces to work, thereby allowing new channels of supply to be established. 

On the demand side, we have to constantly build public awareness on action on better sanitisation and minimise the spread of the virus.

During the first lockdown, this column recommended a strategy of testing based on symptomatic cases and asymptomatic cases, with the ability to do contact tracing and random testing. Basically, to highly prioritise the symptomatic contact traces, and assign low priority to the asymptomatic cases that are difficult to contact trace. 

The column also recommended conducting regular testing for frequent commuters and touch points such as taxi drivers, bus conductors, and others who interact with many people. During the initial wave, the testing was only allowed to be conducted through government hospitals, while the private sector was not allowed to conduct PCR testing. That decision was later relaxed.

Similar restrictions and guidelines were available for health care and treatment by private hospitals. What economics teaches us is that when resources are scarce, the actual cost of utilising that particular resource is the cost that we have to forego for the usage of the same resource. 

When it comes to PCR testing, when everyone is attempting to get the test from the government system, we have to forego the opportunity cost of someone with the disease getting tested, and someone who could afford to get the test done with a payment. 

The more we overstretch the government system, it is the more affluent and politically connected who get the opportunity of obstructing the poor man’s opportunity. 

Now the context has changed. Our existing problems remain as they are, a similar situation has occurred on our hospital beds, oxygen, and vaccines. The solutions to these problems have to be evaluated in multiple facets, as there are many dimensions. What often takes place in Sri Lanka is considering all aspects except economics. 

Given the scarcity of hospital beds, we now have to consider all methods of increasing the number of beds, PCR testing, and getting vaccines on the supply side.

At the same time, we must restrict the spread by continuous public education to manage the demand side. After seeing news stories from India, we may have to look at opening our health system for more private sector involvement. This can be through requesting hotels and unoccupied tourism properties to convert to hospital wards based on their consent as a backup plan, and allowing regulatory relaxation to bring down life saving medication. 

That is just healthcare economics. Vaccines and all medical equipment require money to purchase and upscale. We need both local currency and foreign currency. We have to think about financial resources on the other hand. To save foreign currency, policymakers are running a marathon of banning some import product categories every week, without understanding the overall impact the public has to face. 

Last week, it was fertiliser, and the week before it was palm oil. There have been many on the list. All these controls have a ripple effect, and impact the economy and public life. 

The ban on tyre imports has created a new market for secondhand tyres, which is a serious road safety concern. The ban on palm oil adds additional risk of multiple usage of coconut oil, which also adds to health risks and increasing the smuggling of coconut oil. As a result, the little quality of life we have is diminishing everyday. 

According to John Lenon’s understanding of life, we should not misperceive economics only in monetary terms. Economics is the science of maximising scarce resources with alternative usage. It is everywhere in life. 

We see the importance in healthcare economics better now than ever before due to the pandemic. The objective of economics is to take more people out of poverty by utilising our resources. Controlling imports or defending our current account is not a form of economic governance. It is important to understand the problems and the symptoms of the problem. But we need to comprehend economics to understand the problems first. 


The opinions expressed are the author’s own views. They may not necessarily reflect the views of the Advocata Institute or anyone affiliated with the institute.

Get in Touch

subscribe to the advocata monthly FOR UPDATES ON THE SRI LANKAN ECONOMY AND MORe!