Speaker 1 00:12 Hello, everyone, and welcome again to another episode of Advocata Studio. And today we have a very interesting topic of medical education, and joining us here in the studio is Dr. Sujata Gamage, who is a leading voice in education policy to help us just unpack how a sustainable and inclusive, a credible model for education could look like in Sri Lanka today. Dr. Thank you for joining us. It is so nice to have you with us again. So just really going into the conversation we have on for today, because earlier this year there was a storm of controversy over this whole KDU of how they were not letting local students in, and it were only open to the military personnel and international students. So this whole policy thing they brought up. What was your take when you first heard about it? I expected that because private medical education for local students, we've had starts and stops since 1980, I think, right? 1982, and and I was waiting to for this to happen. Not not anticipated this. I expected this to happen. And just looking at the process of policy making, what would you say is like the from a policy making standpoint? What what is like this process? Was it a top down or was it only a decision made by the Ministry of Defence and not really a collaborative decision because it needs more collaboration between them and also just to be worked on and looked at, so how would you look at it from a policy making point? Speaker 2 02:05 Actually, it's been more about politics than policy, but to the government's credit, the government since you know 1980, there was a really good attempt for good education policy. The white policy, the white paper by mr. Ranibickram Singh in 1982, was amazing document. People who just you know school children, school children went you know were protesting. Nobody's read that. It was the first time a really comprehensive policy for education was laid out into a white paper for collaboration consultation. It was torn down, and there was actually the there were people who are not happy with the government, so it became an anti-government symbol, and it was just torn. It was just torn apart and ridiculed, and you know just demonised. Speaker 1 03:07 Then Speaker 2 03:07 from then on, I don't think any government ever produced any white paper. They learned from that. So since then, what we have is what I call stealth policy, and stealth policy because there is protests and opposition, illogical, totally politically moderate opposition. So in response, what you have is stealth policy. So stealth policy creates you know illogical responses. Illogical responses create stealth policy. So it's been you know self fulfilling thing, and so we don't have any good policy making since the white paper was trashed in 1982. If you want to know more about it, in 1982, along with a really good plan for public education, J. Javadan government introduced private medical education, ragama, but that was introduced in a stealthy way because they were they burned by the reaction to the wipe. So it was stealth policy, right? It was established, and there were no conversation about it. They had the power, so they established, and people went berserk. There were protests, and so I think one student was killed directly as a result, and so many others were killed. Their names are there. You know, they you can hear our students commemorating you know every year their deaths, and it had to be pulled back closed in 1989 and absorbed to University. So that's the first episode of privatisation attempts, health policy. But I wouldn't blame the government because they could not bring it otherwise. Also, then the second attempt was in psych 2008. Doctor Neville Fernando he sold his you know clinic his hospital. And he established, and somebody said, you know, if somebody we establish a casino, there won't be any protest. But he established. But again, it was not a straightforward thing because you could not have direct conversation. The government is scared to even talk about private education. So again, in 2008, they open, admitted students, they have a protest and non-stop. That the GMO joined in, and 2018, another government, 2008, the UPFA government, and 2008, the UMP government. They came for this patchwork where they were absorbed to the KDU, and of course it was to be Continued right. So, 2008, they absorbed. 2018. They absorbed. I think about almost 200 students were enrolled there, but and they started advertised for new batch of students in 2024. Very good process, right? But It is, I think, this government, you know, based on their track record, they have put a stop to that, but they have to give up explanation, right? So we are waiting for that. So this is a third time around, and I think we can't have the repeats of you know the first two, the Ragam incident and the Saitum. Here we have to have an open conversation and have a what I call a middle path for medical education. On one hand, students are in absolutely no private education, you know, and the other side saying, you know, freedom of education for also, and that we should we be saving money. It's mostly economic arguments on one side, equity arguments on the other side. You had to bring those together for a middle path. I think. Speaker 1 06:54 What's would what would you say is your take on equity in medical education? Just maybe diving more towards that. Speaker 2 07:01 Yeah, equity is take USA. You know, there's actually equity in medical education there in this way. If you take the highest rank university, Harvard Medical, our highest rank medical college, Harvard Medical School, their application rate is 3% So that yeah, 3% the applications are entertained, and their MCAT, the qualifying exam, the minimum is 520. And if you go to the lowest ranked university medical college, say Mississippi used a Mississippi Medical College. The acceptance rate is about 37% but MCAT they ask for 500 or more. Okay, so you can borrow. It's very expensive. You borrow and you pay. Anybody can borrow if they meet this 500 to 520 MCAT. So they have a specific standard, and doesn't matter how whether you have money or not, you have to meet that. So I think in Sri Lanka, I think we don't have that. So equity would be we somebody has to set a stand. Say for a medical education is so competitive, certain standard and say doesn't matter whether you have money or not. You need to meet this standard. Speaker 1 08:28 Standard. And in terms of like this whole why they wanted to not include local students was the whole internalisation the the the university. So what would your take be on like how the doors are open for international students, but not really the local students? Speaker 2 08:47 Yeah, that's not fair. That's not fair. But also, it's a military school. Speaker 1 08:51 Yes. Speaker 2 08:52 So technically, you know, it's like you know we should have a good. We can have a really good military school, but you know, in Sri Lanka, we have workarounds because there isn't enough investment, public investment in higher education. We have to have, you know, additional investments, and this is the way to bring it in, right, in various insidious ways. So, Minister of Defence opened it for non-military students for other subjects, law, and you know there are other subjects. So yeah, and that's because you really you know it's can't bring private investment. This is just another part of the government which is has more autonomy, they brought in. They should not have, but you know that Sri Lanka. We we need to expand higher education opportunities. So I think so. It's really capricious to say you know you can have for law and not. For medical education, but then, as I said, you can take medical education and take that separately and say, okay, but is there equity in the way the admissions are made? In other cases, also no law. I guess there are people who would not. We don't have a standard for law education like for medical education. Say in the U.S. I think even law may have a LSAT. No, yeah. When it's highly competitive, these these standards are sort of set. You know, naturally they get set. So yeah, we if that's highly competitive, we need to have a national standard and stay within that. KDU says when you look at their numbers, they actually have pretty good standards, but it's like Caesar's wife. You know, they have to be, you know, better than the best. You know, they have to be above it. So I think the way to go is to for them to get their standards approved by a government authority. Right now, the UGC sets standards for all the medical faculties for different districts. You have a different cutoff. I think why have it for all the private institutions as well, right? They have to be given standards within this. You you know this is the minimum you need to enter Speaker 1 11:21 KDU. Speaker 2 11:22 You should have it set not by KDU, but by some other authority. Speaker 1 11:27 Authority, and even with IZ scores, because ISED scores are very. It's different across the districts we have. Yes. So, do you think that's a very not a very fair way to assess in a national point of Speaker 2 11:42 view. No, I think it takes both merit and need into account. So it's fair. I think it's a fair way to assess, but it's been compromised because people who study in Colombo they go and apply from you know different districts, but district basis is for equity. Speaker 1 12:02 Okay, for equity. Speaker 2 12:03 So to enter University Colombo from the Colombo district, I think you need about. I just looked up this 2.5 or something minimum. And for Norilia district or somewhere, it would be much less. I think there's a formula they use to determine Speaker 3 12:19 that. Speaker 2 12:20 For private schools, maybe they don't need to go district wise. But as I said, in the U.S. it's set by the market. Speaker 1 12:28 Market. Even you know Speaker 2 12:29 from Mississippi, they say no, we won't accept anybody below 500 Speaker 4 12:34 MCAT, Speaker 2 12:34 right? But in Sri Lanka, we don't have enough of a market, so we really need authority to determine what is a minimum, and I think even KDU should abide by that. Speaker 1 12:48 And you mean all, even the state and the private universities both need to abide by the standard. Yes, Speaker 2 12:53 but the thing is, another thing is another thing that the students and those who are against private education, when I say they have to come to the middle, so we are saying no. We need ZCO, accept the C score, accept those standards, and even the private schools should abide by that. Then they are really against having one authority to regulate all. Right. I was involved in the national education policy framework by the previous government, mr. Krimzingers, and one of the things is to establish a higher education commission which addresses, which is really account is serves the education seekers, all education seekers. You know, we are not born with private, public, you know, scratched on our forehead. No, we are all-all the youth are, you know, youth of this country, whether they go to public or private. So there was real big resistance to that. I think that's another conversation we should have: why we need one authority to regulate all, because you know it's not only well-to-do now who go to these private schools, you know, all kinds of people, youth from all walks of life go to these. So one authority, but right now at least we have something called non-state education division in the Ministry of Higher Education. Speaker 1 14:21 Okay, so Speaker 2 14:22 they can do that, but they have to. UGC is supposed to deal with only Speaker 1 14:26 the Speaker 2 14:26 public. Speaker 1 14:27 Yes, Speaker 2 14:28 and they are serving the public institution. They should be serving the the public. Speaker 1 14:32 Public Speaker 2 14:33 higher education seeking public. So, but at least we have some mechanism, and I think they should set something. I think going forward, because they said it's temporary suspension. They are considering, so we really need to make representation to government, saying you know, no, you can't just you know scrap these. Like this, you need to maybe bring in new standards. Speaker 1 15:03 Standards. So you mentioned something about the non-state division. So what do they really regulate? Is that Speaker 2 15:09 the non-state institutions? Okay. Yes. Yes. There are so many. The university grants commission kind of wash the hands of saying as long as these, because they don't award local degrees. To award a local degree, they have to go one programme at a time and get approval from the UGC, UGC, SLEED, Sri Lanka Institute of Information Technology. So they got so many approved, but it's easier for them to offer a foreign degree, Speaker 1 15:41 okay. Speaker 2 15:42 So then the criteria is if that's registered with the there are two registers, international registers. If they're in the register, then you can follow those programmes if they're offered locally. So there's other than that, there's no regulation of the private space. Speaker 1 16:01 Yes. Okay. Speaker 2 16:01 Right. If one of these close overnight, and what do these students do? They spend for two years of education, so there's no safeguard. That's really, really unfair. That's not really not democratic. So, yeah, we do need a good regulatory institution for all institutions. All Speaker 1 16:21 institutions. When it comes to medical education in Sri Lanka, what would you say is like in terms of privatisation or the private investment we come in? Do you think that's a good way moving forward to bring in Speaker 2 16:37 absolutely? Because in Sri Lanka, compared to other countries in the region, we spend higher percent of our education budget on university education. This was pointed out by World Bank in 2003. I've been talking about it since 2003, and that percentage I've been calculating. So, like 600 billion was the amount for last year for all of Speaker 1 17:07 education. Speaker 2 17:08 I think for education it was close to 100 billion, right? But that percent as a percent that percentage has been increasing, and what's going into school education? Take this for A level classes, only 1/3 of schools have the science stream, and we've been talking about it since 2003. I mean, we had to put money there, right? Actually, they have been putting money, but the governance issues. But we have to have that. You know, I'm saying start by putting more money, but changing the governance structure. But anyway, that's you know, without doing that, we are putting more and more money into higher education. So I think the argument I would make is more money for school education. We have to can't the public sector should not be investing more on higher education because we have we have so much. Next year we are going to have less money because the growth this year is less than expected. So there'll be real issues coming for the budget next year. So what I'm saying is, investment private investments are a must. Maybe we don't have to advocate. The government will realise it by next year when they do the budget. So, private investments have to come from the private sector, and that has to be allocated in an equitable manner. That's where we learn from the opposition, those who oppose, because we have not been looking at the equity side. We are saying more; we need more investments. But let me give examples. Say somebody the cut off is 1.85. Somebody who gets 1.84 in the third attempt does not go to get to a public university, but doesn't have money. What about that person? Okay, but then somebody who has 1.48 or something gets admission because they have money, right? So there is a real iniquity there. So so we need to set make no that person with the 1.45 may not be, yeah, you know they should be able to borrow and for medical education they can. But we need to address that issue. Somebody because they have a lower mark and a but a lower more money and lower score going into medical education, that is an issue. What would Speaker 1 19:45 so your would your suggestion or recommendation would be more towards bringing in a standardised way of Speaker 2 19:52 yes for private also get them yeah the KDU is established in this what. Minimum C score. No, it should be established by the same authority that establishes the minimum scores for the private public institutions. I think that would be a, I think, way to get out of the equity situation. Speaker 1 20:16 And moving into a bit more interesting is looking at policy and politics. I think you would have a lot to say on this, but really seeing and trying to understand because we we talk about how we could become an education hub, and really get more people coming into Sri Lanka for education. But when something like this with KDU happens, where they just close off the doors for the local students and only be very inclusive, or be exclusive. Sorry about this. So, would you say that this would really bring in a disadvantage where more people would want to move out of the country? Speaker 2 20:50 Absolutely. I mean, you know, we all know somebody who's gone, yeah, and paying for their education. But I think the University of Colombo and all of them should have a certain percent set set apart for fee paying students again meeting their z score criteria, right? So they should no. Then why would they if they meet no, not 2.54, and then say anybody within falling within say point 1% of that or 1% of that they can pay Speaker 1 21:27 income. Yes. Not Speaker 2 21:28 anybody says it's 2.5. Then anybody between 2.4 and five they can pay income. So so then it's not like you know just because you have money you can go, but you are because why would somebody with 2.50 and 2.49? What's the difference, right? So I think the rationale would be those who just could not make, who are close to making the cut off, should be allowed to pay and so that will inject a lot of more money into the public system, and those could be international students also. Speaker 1 22:05 Also, Speaker 2 22:06 right. Speaker 1 22:07 And even with this decision, they are they which they announced. Do you think it was a decision which was politically driven, or was in an ideology, but not really consulted among the doctors? The and it's not only one ministry, right? It has the defence ministry in there, the health ministry, and the education ministry. So, what would your take be on in terms of that? Speaker 2 22:30 It was 100% political decision. I don't think anybody even looked at any numbers. Nothing. It was 100% political decision. Speaker 1 22:39 And to do something like this at a stage where there are doctors moving out of our country, and there is a shortage of doctors in our country. And if it's not allowing the local, the local students who are willing and wanting to study but are not being allowed, is I think something which we all need to think about. And I also feel like the mandates across these ministries are very overlapping. Would you? Would you? No, actually, Speaker 2 23:07 this government. I did a TV show on this. No, it's one of the most scientific ministries you can have. Scientific cabinets you can have. That I have to say, right? Verity Research did something on. There are 10 sort of subject areas, and and within those 10 there are sub areas. So you can sort of break the main areas into several sub areas, and actually accept media always gets thrown around. I think media is with the health ministry, right? Because somebody who they think is a good media person gets that media, and something else gets tourism. Some gets thrown around. There's few like that, but otherwise, this is one of the most scientific cabinets, right? Don't there's no overlap. We have one minister of education, minister of Health, they have to, of course, coordinate about medical education. No, I think it's not an issue. It's just that. But I think the the spokesman said that this is going to be considered. So I think this is a really good time to put forward a good brief from outside policy brief, because I don't think I don't know maybe this government has haven't hasn't shown us that they have any kind of preparation for making policy decisions. So there's really a case for making a good policy brief, as I said, how to come to a middle path here. When Speaker 1 24:45 you mean middle path, if you could maybe explain that a bit. Yes, Speaker 2 24:49 as I said, the proponents of private medication looking at the economics of it, and the opposition looks at the equity side of Speaker 1 24:59 it. Speaker 2 24:59 So I think. Bring in those both concerns together, economic and efficiency decide that we need more doctors and so on. So we need to bring both concerns together, and I think both sides have been just not hearing each other in that regard. I was on this side arguing for economic side, and then I realise there is an equity concern. There is indeed, so we need to address that. Speaker 1 25:26 And equity concern is not only for the medical education, but just higher education in general. Speaker 2 25:32 It's equity really comes in when there's a high demand, right? So for arts faculties, you know, the men are voting with their feet. It's 90% women now in some faculties. Seven on average was 75, and the rest of the men actually a lot of priests there. Right? Think about finding a partner going into university. Okay, forget that. So no equity issue. You get intensified when there's a lot of competition. When there's a yeah, when there's a lot of high demand for any sector, so it's there. But medical education stands out for some reason. Engineering, it's not so much engineering. We have the Institute of Engineers, which been given given qualifications for those with NDT for them to get the chart, engineering charter. Somehow, for engineering, the demand does not seem to be so much, but for medicine, yes, because there's always the math side and the biological side. There's always the math side is merit. You know, it's a little harder to get in. So, but the biological side, there's so many people who qualify, and there's such a demand for the medical profession. Speaker 1 27:02 And do you think it's also important, like the outputs? For example, when doctors or anyone are supposed to do exams, how do you think we could improve in terms of our structure when it comes to the outputs of like exams and accreditation and things like that? Speaker 2 27:18 Yeah, well, our medical sector is by the doctors for the doctors of the doctors. Our Sri Lanka Medical Council. I've written an article on that, comparing you with the UK Medical Council. There are no doctors in the UK Medical Council. Our Medical Council is composed 100% of doctors. Medical deans, GMO has representation and various specialties. They're all doctors. Actually, should be with the uses of the medical service should be in the medical council. Speaker 1 27:51 So that is, Speaker 2 27:54 we should at least get 1/3 of the members in their LFC from outside. So there you go. I mean, just some. There's no input from the patients, from the users, into the medical how medical those decisions are made. So that is the first place to connect. We need. I don't know whether this government will do it. I don't know politically how we have to think about it, but the political argument for that. But that is the place. No, we are spending so much money on, you know, on curative medicine and the preventive medicine side, non-communicable diseases on the rise. You know, and there should be so much education about nutrition, about good habits. That's not happening. The public Speaker 1 28:46 health side of it, Speaker 2 28:48 you know, we have clinics in the remotest parts of the country, and we are doling out, you know, cholesterol, medicine for cholesterol, and for pressure and for sugar. Any, but you know, but the intake of sugar in the country, you know, who's speaking for that? You know, you put three teaspoons of sugar in your tea, you know. So no, I think there's really no public input into how our medical system is run. It is totally run by doctors for doctors, so that is the first place to start the Sri Lanka Medical Council. Speaker 1 29:29 Council, and they make. I mean, and they do take the strongest decisions out there as well. So absolutely, Speaker 2 29:36 yeah, it's a trade union. You know, it's a. So we have a trade union making policy, medical policy. So there's a serious issue there. But when it comes to medical education, at least we care to, you know, we are not talking about system change anymore. You are change thing one thing at a time. So, but medical education, I see ways of. Bringing the two sides together, Speaker 1 30:04 and would would you have any other like any other way the government could have done this differently, in terms of Speaker 2 30:10 the KDU or anything to do with higher education? Actually, since this government came to power, I decided I'm not going to talk about higher education because I thought it's let them make the decisions in because of internal contradictions. Let something happen because the truth is this government came to power thanks to their thanks to them unsettling, creating you know chaos in the university system. They they came to power through that. You know, the 6% for education was a big argument, which is nobody. You know, 6% of GD for education when a whole budget is sometimes less than 10% 10% I mean, those kinds of arguments, and then the ragging. You know, all that was behind how this political movement was built up. So, but this government has, you know, been pragmatic. So I'm hoping that when the time for the next budget comes, they will the reality of you know balancing the budget will make them high better higher education policy? But as is, I think this was inevitable. You know, they came this protest item. Protests were big part of Speaker 1 31:38 the the build up of JVP, Speaker 2 31:40 right? So this was at least this is this pausing of this application. This is a pause. They said is inevitable, but I think with enough civil society intervention, maybe we can, you know, make some modifications in that. Speaker 1 32:00 They've also mentioned how it's gonna be a defence university for Lawnful as well. I think the Prime Minister mentioned that in Parliament. What would you think about that? Speaker 2 32:12 Yes, but you know, then are we going to take away the other opportunities for other students as well? Because I think it should be at the end of the we should not take away opportunities unless you create something else, you know. So I think yes, they should go there. Maybe they should have a some plan to maybe in 10 years it becomes a military university, totally good defence university. But you know why take away opportunities when we should be creating more opportunities? Maybe it should be done gradually. That's a good idea. I mean, I don't know. We should have done that soon after the 2009 end of the war. You know, capitalising on you know our experience in that war. Maybe it's now. I don't know whether we have the expertise or the credibility to establish a top-rate defence university, but that we can't do that overnight and just again displace all the students, civilians who are enrolled in the system, because I think that equity and opportunity-I mean, both those have to be considered-and Speaker 1 33:28 also just maybe going back a bit, maybe understand a bit more on the sitem issue. What would you say? I mean, obviously, it's it's a lot of politics in there, but a lot of people were impacted through that, and I think a lot of it was a bit uncertain at that time on what would happen to the students. But how could we have avoided something like that from happening? Speaker 2 33:52 Yeah, I mean, look at the politics. So, 2008 to 2018, 2008 to 15, we had an all-powerful government, so this was the only way they could, you know, protest against the government. So I don't, and I think that 2008, the government supported every time the government behind the scenes, government supported, you know, establishing a sitemap. Could we have set up a private education act at that time? Because Bangladesh came up with the private education act in 1980s, right? Formally recognised private education, set up a regulatory. I think the Rajapaksa government had the, you know, had the chance to do that, but they were playing a sort of double game, you know. Yes, so definitely not Gotabay government. They also did nothing. They thought they could, you know, ride it with force. And the Rami Kriem government, they always sidestep the issue. They don't express. No, I don't think we could have brought a policy. I think if anybody can, I think maybe this government can, right? So yeah, I think by addressing the KDU issue, if we can get civilly local students admitted to honour in a manner that is acceptable, that takes equity considerations. So some of the people who applied and got qualified may not be able to come for the 2020 take. They're sorry, we have new criteria. I don't know whether they go to the courts, and you know whether they get on a human rights, their rights have been violated on an individual level. I actually checked with the lawyers with the bar association whether this could be a rights issue, fundamental rights. But the argument was that no, the KDU could argue as a policy issue, but individuals could go to for their individual application, maybe human rights commission and so on. But I think we'll have to say, even KDU only certain number within this score will qualify, will go a bit. So, yeah, I think if we can come to that, that that would have been at least we have we people know what to expect. Like in the U.S. as I said, it's you know if you can't don't have an MCAT score between five and five and 20, you can't go to medical school. Don't matter how much money you have, I think we should have the same same assurance here. You know, unless you have a CSCO and CSCO error exam is not good exam. That has to those who write the exam and qualify and go to medical school. I forget which there was an article paper that they actually fare very poorly. They fare in the theoretical side of the exam in UK, but not the other papers that deal with the socio-emotional and other aspects of the medical profession. So it is not a good qualification. It's not the best CO. It's not the best indicator. KDU has an interview. So there's a better process. I don't think we can ever have an interview process here in Sri Lanka. It's too small country, and you can't. I think that's always going to be influence and interference. So we have to go with the C score. It can be improved. The A level exam can be improved. Right now we offer 5060, plus subjects. Depend on. I don't know how they said this. In two papers for most subjects in three languages, you know, they must be just copying and pasting at a rate. So the Chinese Gao Kao, yeah, Gao Cao, the Chinese equivalent has only 12 subjects. Speaker 1 38:14 Subjects, Speaker 2 38:15 right? Speaker 1 38:15 60 is a lot. 60 is a lot. So Speaker 2 38:17 we can reduce the number of subjects and elevate the quality of the papers, so that can be done. But for the time being, I think we can live with that. But like them, cat have one system for everybody, public or private. I think that would be one step in the right direction. I think Speaker 1 38:37 because at the end of the day, we really need to think about who this is impacting, and these are the students who are wanting to study, but because of just change in regulations and just, I mean, like imagine a rural student somewhere in Ratnapura, somewhere who would want to study medicine, has this at school, but has no option of like getting into such funded universities. Speaker 2 39:02 There's always that. I mean, there are so many schools. I have people in the U.S. who can't get more than 500, and you know they're out. You know, and you have more than 500, then actually you can borrow money and go to medical school. I think even here it's a case, right? For medical profession, I think you can still borrow money and go to university. So of course you can't. You know it's a highly competitive field. There's limited number of places and not everybody's, but we do. But we have to make sure that it appears to be equitable. You know across across the board. Right now it is not actually. You know KDU. It's there are people who could not one as I said. You know it should be say minimum cut off and within a certain range. We should allow not anybody lower than that. So KDU. I'm sure there there be some people. People who would be there because they can pay. Speaker 1 40:04 Any other recommendation you would like to share, doctor, in terms of just medical education or just education as a whole in Sri Lanka, and how maybe the next 10 years, even for this current government, and what would you suggest or recommend? I think Speaker 2 40:18 we're spending too much time talking about higher education because they are the ones with the loudest voice. I think school education should be our priority, and primary education. There are curricular reforms happening, but the exams, the three exams, have to change. Doesn't matter how much you know. We really don't need too much change. The curricula we looked at the curricula. It all depends on the exam. The teachers teach the exam, so the three exams have to change. And this government is-I don't know-but that is a key issue, and decentralisation. Yes, you know we have 10,000 schools, and actually, as I said, 97 only 300, 360 are national schools. But they are also managed and assisted by the provincial councils. Education is one area where I think the provincial system works. So we need to, and there was a plan to cluster the schools, say about 10 schools in one cluster, where they you know have where there's flexibility in sharing teachers. All those decentralisation plans are there. These are not happening because people in the ministries they like to stay in Colombo. That we have a ministry which really most of departments. I don't know why they exist. We don't need because we have really good capacity at provincial zonal level to run the school systems, so I think decentralisation and reformate Speaker 1 42:06 people as well who are willing to wanting to really lead the next generation. Speaker 2 42:10 You mean in the provinces? Yes. Yeah, I'm really surprised there are some really good, capable people. I just personally know two provincial directors. It turns out there's just one batch of, they were recruited at the same time. These are amazing people. These two ladies, one in the eastern province, the other one is the Sapulum province. We are we are working with both of them on a project. You know, amazing. So there's so much innovation. So actually, what we need is we have nine provinces. The centre just has to, you know, like orchestrate Speaker 1 42:48 it, orchestrate everything, Speaker 2 42:49 set KPIs, and you know, reward them Speaker 5 42:53 accordingly. Speaker 2 42:54 So that's what I like to see: the centre being the coordinator, the Speaker 1 42:59 facilitator. Speaker 2 43:01 You know, I told you about jam rereading. Small is beautiful. Actually, it's not just about all small. You know, it talks about the balance of the small and the global and the national. You know, we need the freedom of lots and lots of small units, but the unity and coordination by at some unity and coordination at the global and national Speaker 1 43:22 level. Speaker 2 43:23 So right now our government is trying to do everything central government in education, especially really because the the school system they they they can function on their own. The provinces are doing a good job. So decentralisation of really decentralisation of administration 100% to those smallest units and reform the exams. That's Speaker 1 43:50 yes. Those two Speaker 2 43:51 things is all you need to do. Speaker 1 43:54 Thank you so much, Doctor. I think it was very insightful just to really see how a well governed system that just not only meets the country's healthcare needs but respects the public investment and also the students and who maybe having open equitable opportunities is always the best way forward. Would you have any other closing remarks on this whole topic we've spoken about Speaker 2 44:21 yeah no just equity and efficiency we need to balance the two Speaker 1 44:25 okay Speaker 2 44:26 so saying the two sides in this particular debate you know stuck on two side we need to bring the two together Speaker 1 44:33 thank you so much doctor and thank you to all of you for tuning in and listening to us all this time, please subscribe and share across all our platforms. We do very interesting topics across all our platforms: Advocata Plus, Advocata Kural, and Advocata Institute. Stay tuned and stay curious, stay critical, and we'll catch you in the next episode. Transcribed by https://otter.ai