charindra chandrasena 00:05 Hello, Anuska. Hi, Chari. Hi, Indika. Hi, Chari. We, I, I'm going to talk to the audience today because I usually have at least Riyadh Dananth here. Since I don't, I can't, I can't play off one of you because both of you are new to this. But basically, they are having Speaker 1 00:24 extended our holidays. They extend charindra chandrasena 00:26 out the holidays. They are having some fun out there. So, just by way of introduction, Indika is a former journalist and a former business journalist as well, and Anushka is a policy analyst. Anushka is of course from Advocata Institute, and Indika is he brings us that external view. So welcome to the both of you, and how were the holidays? Speaker 1 01:00 Good, good. No Speaker 2 01:01 bad, just pretty hot. Pretty hot, no. Pretty hot, yeah, yeah. The the weather, but I think it started raining, so I think there's a little bit of hope. Yeah, certain charindra chandrasena 01:11 certain areas are. Is it raining for? Speaker 1 01:13 Yeah, I think last night it rained a little bit. I think before that there weren't like never much rain. Yeah, but yesterday it was a Speaker 2 01:22 little bit of hope. Speaker 1 01:22 I'm a little bit worried about my electricity bill. charindra chandrasena 01:25 So this is the first full month that we are going to get with the electricity bill revision. No, it happened in early April, right? It was announced in April, in the start of April. Because I think Speaker 1 01:39 a lot of people are worried about the electricity bills because I think even though the government says asks us to use electricity sparingly, I think a lot of people who have air condition at home they tend to use that especially during the night. So that is the situation because of the hot weather. charindra chandrasena 02:03 Unfortunately, President Trump decided on the worst time for Sri Lanka to embark on this excursion, in his own words, to Iran because now we are all affected, and and it's the it's the worst time of the year for us to have to use electricity sparingly, but that actually nicely segues into what we want to talk about today as a first step. Also, the energy ministry is proposing is set to propose according to the Sunday Times, they are set to propose electricity price divisions to happen annually, as opposed to the nearly quarterly system that is in place. Anupa, you have done some work on this. First, tell us how it happens currently? Is it actually officially quarterly? Speaker 2 03:04 Yes. So currently it happens quarterly. So we have the revision at the start of the year, and then it goes to the next revision starts in April, and then we have July, and then October. So quarterly our revisions happen. So the CEB sends its proposal according to its forecast and its estimates estimates to the PUCSL, and then they they look at that, and then it's just that the CEB ensures that it doesn't make a loss with the given prices, and yeah, so that determines what our price is price is going to be for the next two to three months. So that's how it works. charindra chandrasena 03:41 This annual revision is this model used in so it's used not just in Sri Lanka, right? It is used in other countries. What are those countries? Speaker 2 03:54 So I've specifically researched about Australia and being there and living there, I realised Australia has a completely different system to how Sri Lanka works. They do have the annual pricing method, but they also have the choice of having a dynamic pricing as well. We call it time of use pricing. So firstly, we need to understand that the way the Australian market works and the way the Sri Lankan energy market works is completely different. So ours is a PO monopoly. Yes, we have unbundled into six different entities, but still we are 100% state-owned. But in Australia, it's privatised, but it's regulated. It's well privatised and it's regulated. So Australia has a separate provider for the generation of electricity. Then it has a separate provider called the retailer who purchases the electricity, and then it has the supplier where the electricity electricity is being transmitted. So because of this, they have consumers have the choice, and the the retailers have the choice to the the ability to give the choice to. Consumer of whether they are going to give annual price depending on whether the consumers want that or whether they are going to give time of use. charindra chandrasena 05:06 What do you mean? If so, the consumers can opt in to one of the systems. Yes, Speaker 2 05:12 they can select. They have about four to five retailers, if I'm right, and they have the consumers have the choice to either select whether they want annual pricing or whether they want the time of use. So, in the sense, charindra chandrasena 05:23 do they do that by selecting the provider? Speaker 2 05:27 Yes. So they they the consumers have the chance to the choice to select the retailer. That is the provider, right? And then within the retailer, they can select which way they want. So basically, what charindra chandrasena 05:38 you're saying is every retailer offers the two options. Yes. Right. Speaker 2 05:41 And the retailer does not generate electricity. The retailer purchases electricity from the generator, who are again private suppliers of technically private power plants. charindra chandrasena 05:53 Yeah. But now in this system, the consumers would not have that choice. Yeah. Speaker 2 05:59 Yeah. charindra chandrasena 05:59 Right. If it's annual, it's annual. Yeah. Right. Yeah. Indica, you said you're worried about your electricity pricing. Would you be less worried if it was annual? Or can you plan better? Speaker 1 06:17 The way that I look at this proposal is a little bit different. I mean, these. What I feel is that okay, whether it's quarterly or annually, it's a it's a it's a technicality, right? So, but I think the question the that we should ask is whether it doesn't matter whether it's annual or the quarterly, or every six months, or whatever. I need to have transparency. I need to see how this is calculated. Whether it's annual distribution, whether it's annual or quarterly, doesn't matter. So there should be transparency. So where is the transparency? Is my question. I mean, because anyway, there should be some kind of rationale for the power ministry to propose this, from making it from quarterly to annual. I don't still I don't know the rationality because I didn't see that rationality in the what they're saying is there are like price spikes every three months or whatever. So to avoid that, either I don't know whether so it's going to be an average or something like that. It is. It is. Yeah. So it can be an average. So so so there is a formula now. charindra chandrasena 07:38 So what that what the the logic of the energy ministry is that in the first half of the year the cost of generation is Speaker 1 07:49 higher. Okay. charindra chandrasena 07:50 In the second half of the year, the cost of generation is lower. Speaker 1 07:54 That is because we are using a lot of hydro. charindra chandrasena 07:56 Yes. Speaker 1 07:56 Okay. charindra chandrasena 07:57 So hydro use is greater in the second half of the year due to the monsoons. First half of the year is largely a dry period, and therefore the cost of generation is higher. So instead of giving high prices in the first two quarters and lower prices in the second two quarters, they are going to average it out so that throughout the year it's neither very high nor very low. Speaker 1 08:24 So as I and also charindra chandrasena 08:26 that it makes it easier for for companies even or even households to plan. Speaker 1 08:31 True, true. That that I agree. That predictability is important. For example, for a for a business, so they budget annually, right? So it's I mean their electricity bill that component, I mean given the prices here, tariffs here, it's pretty big, right? So it's good to have that predictability for sure for businesses. So in that sense, it makes a lot of sense. But what I am saying is, but that is not the question for me. My question is, where is the transparency? Because we should know as consumers that how these price revisions are calculated, right? So I don't know why it. I mean, it's the same with the the fuel prices also. So they are saying, you know, they are revising it every what three months again? No, that charindra chandrasena 09:29 fuel prices revise every month. Every month, Speaker 1 09:31 okay, right? So they are revising it every month, but we don't know the formula, right? So there, what they are saying is there is a formula. There charindra chandrasena 09:38 is a formula. Speaker 1 09:39 There is a formula, but we don't know the formula. So what I am saying is, you know, transparency is really important as consumers. So as he said, so what we have is a monopoly. So it's very important to have the transparency. So let's have that transparency. It doesn't matter for me personally. Matter whether it's quarterly or annually, it doesn't make a lot of difference. I don't know for consumers whether it makes a big difference for household consumers. Maybe for businesses. For businesses, it does. I think for budgeters, yes. For budgeting and all that, yes. So you know, let's have a transparency first, and then we can talk about these things. That's my position. Right, charindra chandrasena 10:24 Anushka. In terms of that that point also about transparency. Yeah. First, now I think it's we don't have a lot of transparency in Sri Lanka, but say Australia. The example that you took is that transparency. Speaker 2 10:41 I mean, since it's since it's a competitive market, transparency is the only way they can win, right? So the re it's it it's a it's a three player game in the Australian market. If the retailer can provide a good service at a good price, the consumer will get choose that retailer. If the generator, that is the power plants, can give good power and sound solid power without interruptions at a good price, the retailer will choose that power plant. And if the it's called the distribution network, if the distribution network provides seamless energy supplies to the consumer, then there won't be complaints from the retailer because the retailer has the right to complain. And since it's regulated, they'll have a look, right? So since it's a three-player market and there there's choices, you have to be efficient, you have to be transparent, and you know you have to be cost reflective. You have to give them the choice, so it's a win-win both for the suppliers and the consumers. Yeah, charindra chandrasena 11:47 and and generally what happens with competition is that with competition is that the consumer is the winner. Speaker 2 11:55 Consumer is the winner, exactly because charindra chandrasena 11:57 you have greater choice. Yeah, and that's what Advocata has been talking about for 10 years now. Yeah, that greater competition helps consumers have better choice, and therefore, because when it comes Speaker 2 12:11 to the CEB, it's a not just a monopoly as well, right? It's a PO monopoly, right? So, when we when you look at it in that perspective, charindra chandrasena 12:20 and it's a pure monopoly, even after the unbundling, Speaker 2 12:24 because it's at the end of the day, yeah, yeah, it's just, it's just at the end of the day, one family again, right? So, even if they make losses, they can just increase the price. They can just increase the electricity bill, even if they're inefficient, even if there's mismanagement, even if they import poor coal, right? Even if they use too much thermal power by burning diesel to produce, they'll just increase the cost, and we won't have a choice. And we would know, especially in annual. That's the problem that we'll face because when it comes to a quarterly, at least we can be happy that we know what has happened. For example, if we expect the April prices to be high, maybe we can look back at the last three months and see, okay, what has happened? Okay, there has been a crisis in the Middle East. There has been attacks on fuel storage. You know, so there has been issues. But then, when it's annual and it's one price, one year you see a one price, and then next year you see a massive increase. Firstly, people forget, even if there has been a crisis in like the second, third month, and then, you know, then we, you know, there's a lot of outrage as to why the prices are high. I Speaker 1 13:39 think Anush Anushka has a point there because I mean, for example, what's happening right now, right? So there will be spikes in global prices. For example, these are law, napta, whatever. So then, if we are pricing annually, so what is the provision? I mean, I'm I'm sure they will work it out somehow. But then again, in instances like this, how are we going to you know adjust prices and all that? Like even there's a spike in the global market, but then again the annual price provision. Then how are we going to cope with? I think I I I really don't see other than for businesses as we discuss. I don't really see a point why the the basically the necessity of doing something like that. Whereas I mean, the we need to have the transparency. I mean, in terms of priorities, I think transparency comes first, and then these things. These are like technicalities, right? So these things. So I see a kind of a you know mixing of priorities here, or or else some other. Maybe the government or the authorities may be thinking of some kind of political gain out of this. I think charindra chandrasena 15:07 I think I'm wondering whether it is to limit transparency that they're doing it because, like Anushka mentioned, people forget. Speaker 1 15:17 Yeah. charindra chandrasena 15:17 So when you average it out, who's going to remember? So let's assume this happens in January, the revision, say first of January or whatever. Then are you going to remember what happened last January, right? And also there are so many variables, right? Geopolitical events, weather-related events, and then you're paying this year for what happened last year. So whereas if you're paying this quarter for what happened last quarter, it's a it's a bit more understandable. Speaker 1 15:55 And I think for the government, I think it sort of cuts out a slogan, providing a slogan for the opposition every three months or whatever, every four months, because now it's it's going to be annual. That's the thing. Yeah, so that's why I'm saying. So I mean, this is more political than anything else. charindra chandrasena 16:14 Because the slogan then would come in January, and a lot of people have a lot of things going on in January, year has just started. Whereas if it's happening, yeah, every quarter, then you present them a slogan every quarter, and also now with with and also in Speaker 1 16:32 terms of CEB's health, I think it's good to have this. I mean, if we can have monthly price revisions, that will be good. I mean, better. I feel that because you know, now there are profitability losses and all that. It's good to have. I mean, annually. Sometimes, if there's a spike, then you know, you have to correct that whatever loss in the next year. Then, right. So in this case, if you do it quarterly, you can correct it the next quarterly. Exactly. So it's I mean in in that way it makes sense for me quarterly rather than rather charindra chandrasena 17:09 than only yeah yeah because Speaker 2 17:10 likewise just as we're talking about price hikes, there's always the other side also charindra chandrasena 17:15 of course Speaker 2 17:16 right. So what if there's more rain right? What if you know fuel prices, coal, crude oil prices, coal prices drop, so that benefit is not passed down to the consumer. That benefit will technically be used to cover up the inefficiencies or to cover up the losses, the poor management or the poor decisions they have made. Simply because it's one year, so longer the lag, lesser the transparency. We have the CPC's monthly formula where we can't provide transparency. We can't expect any better from an annual price formula. And this other thing that I've also found when we have annual prices, when we set the prices just the single price for a year, especially when it comes to something like energy, it gives no incentive to the people because we always push towards having cost reflective pricing. Right? We've said that if prices lie, we are just welcoming another crisis. Right? So a price is technically a signal. Right? If the price is high on things like energy, on things like petrol, right? So that's a signal to the consumers to use less. So if you look at the even the months now, we have less water, right? So that means that the power generated through hydro is less. So when there's less hydro power that comes to the grids, we have to burn more diesel and we have to burn more coal, coal and then diesel, right? So, if it's still the same price, regardless of the CB burning coal or using hydro, if it's still the same price, no matter what, consumers will use as much as they want, right? Because, for instance, if right now we are being given a dynamic pricing method, so we have been told that from this time to this time, you know, you're being charged a different rate compared to what's being done now. Right now, it's completely different. If you are a higher user, you have a different unit, and if you are lower user, you have a different unit. So, what happens is that we we don't mind because we know okay regardless of whether the CEB is burning coal or whether it's using the hydro to gain the power to the grid, we would still be just using whatever we want to use, and that would result in the CV, causing, resulting, and gaining more losses, which will eventually roll up to the consumer the next year. So, like we always say, any loss the government makes today is paid by the taxpayer tomorrow. So, that's also there, which is not taken into account because the price has to act as a signal. That's why even when. Pricing. If we have less storage, if the world has less oil, then we have to have high prices, right? The supply and demand has to work. But you know, when the supply changes, but we don't change the demand, that's when the crisis comes. So, at a time like this, when there's no rain, right? There's poor, like less. The our reservoirs are dry. We have less hydro power coming. We are technically pushing the CEB to like keep importing more fuel, keep importing more coal, and give us the power because we don't mind. We will be still paying the same price, even if it rains or even if it's as hot as it is nowadays. So this just gives the CEB more losses, and eventually, even though we can be happy about it for now, they'll catch it up next year. charindra chandrasena 20:54 Yeah, it'll pass on to the consumers. Speaker 2 20:57 Yeah, is charindra chandrasena 20:58 there anything else relevant to to Sri Lanka that you found that that can be implemented in terms of electricity pricing. Speaker 2 21:05 Yeah, I think moving to a digital system is important. Like I said, this time time of use pricing is what's been used in like very developed countries, and it has been it has proven to be actually great for consumers and the suppliers, because if you take times like let's say 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. we can assume that's the peak. That's where the children are home, the parents are home, the washing machines are being used, everything. The cars are being, the phones are being charged, electric cars are being charged. That's the peak. So, what happens in Sri Lanka is electricity. If we measure it through kilowatts, right? Different users are being charged different prices for the same kilowatt. If you are a business and you consume a lot of electricity, you are considered as a high user. If I'm just a household with two people in it, I'm considered as a low user, but we need to understand that the cost it takes, regardless of whether you use hydro or non-renewable, the cost it takes to produce a single kilowatt is the same for everyone. It's the same for you, even if you're a business. Same for me, even if I'm a small household. But what we currently do is, we charge different prices. If you use, for example, if you use 1000 kilowatts a month, and I use 10, the charge I get per kilowatt is different compared to you. You'll be charged 100 per kilowatt. I'll be charged 10. Right. So what this technically does is, we are using the rich people's money to subsidise the poor. Well, that's okay. I mean, that's how technically an economy runs, right? We tax the rich and then we, you know, pay for the poor. But this is this is this distorts the market because we have different prices for the same product, right? We need to make sure that the price of producing, if the price of producing one kilowatt is 100, we need to ensure that everyone pays the same price. charindra chandrasena 23:12 But the logic, Anushka, there is that if you are above, if you are the top tier, okay, charindra chandrasena 23:18 the top band, that means you are affluent, wealthy, well-off, whatever you want to call it, and therefore you can bear that extra cost per unit. Whereas if you are in the lowest tier, you can't. And isn't that the logic that the government and the university board are working on. Speaker 2 23:45 No, true. So if you use more, you have to be able to pay more. That is obviously true. But the fact that you are being categorised into different segments is the problem here. charindra chandrasena 23:58 No, but aren't you being categorised based on your ability to consume and therefore food. Speaker 2 24:06 Yeah, for sure. But if we are talking about helping the poor, then we have to switch to different methods, right? Maybe cash transfers or maybe you know. Oh, of course, of course. charindra chandrasena 24:16 Whether this is targeted or not is a different matter. But I think even even electricity, sorry, even the subsidies, the targeting of the subsidies, one of the most optimal ways to do it that has been discovered so far or recommended so far is through the electricity bill. Yeah, right. Okay. So, for example, one of the biggest problems with Samurdi was that it was terribly targeted, And now with Aswa Suma, the ideal system is to look at electricity pricing, right? Because that doesn't really lie that much. Okay, and therefore you look at that. You look at the the general usage levels per month. And then you decide, okay, this is a vulnerable household. This is a affluent household. It's not the size of the house or anything like that. Those qualitative things don't matter anymore. What are you using? Speaker 2 25:14 Using. So that's the thing. So when we look at usage and charge, and not have it, you know, dynamic because anyway, like I said, it costs the same even if we give it to the poor person or even if we give it to the rich person. So let's just say I have a four-story house with a swimming pool, but it's just me and my mom living there because everyone's abroad, right? So regardless of my status, I will be a low user, right? I will fall under the low user. So still, it'll be the big businesses, the industry subsidising me. charindra chandrasena 25:50 Of course, right? There are exceptions like that. Yeah, for me Speaker 2 25:53 to fill up my pool, for me to you know keep my CCTV cameras on. So technically, it's bad economics in one way, and it also discourages businesses to be productive, right? Because we say the more you use, the higher we charge, and it's not only that. I've also researched and found that the fixed cost. So there's a fixed cost component in our electricity bill that is regardless of whether you are a high user or low user, you have a fixed cost. So the fixed cost also increases depending on which threshold you fall. So if you are a high user, you have a higher fixed cost. I don't know how and why that works, but charindra chandrasena 26:27 I don't think there is a technical logic to it. Yeah, exactly. I don't think it's that fixed cost is based on higher input costs for that bigger house, right? I think it's just a model where they can afford, therefore they must pay. These people can't afford, and therefore we must not charge too much from them. Yeah. So, Speaker 2 26:51 yeah, as much as. But I charindra chandrasena 26:54 completely understand your point about okay. So two people living in a mansion will if they if they are not going to leave the lights on in every room and the AC on, they will get a small bill, and therefore according to that method that has been recommended for targeting, they might fall into that bottom there. So that's why electricity is not going to work in isolation, right? But electricity is one of the main components that should be used. Should be part of that mix and maybe the main part of that mix because it it lies less. Speaker 2 27:33 Yeah, not that it doesn't lie. It lies less. It charindra chandrasena 27:36 gives a more accurate picture than I mean income even honestly because how do you measure income sometimes with the informal economy it becomes very difficult with the notes passing so that's just what I believe is that electricity should be a main component of it so coming back to what you were saying in certain cases, I don't like the targeting. Sorry, I don't like the differentiation between okay, they they are the haves and these are the have-nots, and therefore we must like that tax the rich or eat the rich or whatever. I don't particularly enjoy others, but I but in this case in New York City, I I feel like it makes sense. Speaker 1 28:20 And also, I think we shouldn't forget about there is subsidised tariffs are being charged on religious establishments and all that. So, as I said, I mean it's the same cost a kilowatt. Why charindra chandrasena 28:36 are they subsidised? A Speaker 1 28:37 kilowatt. Yeah, exactly. Speaker 2 28:38 A kilowatt is a kilowatt. A kilowatt is Speaker 1 28:40 a kilowatt. Whether it's it's it's your home or your temple or your business place, so I completely agree with that. So I mean, because of that, you know, this can be even controversial, and people aren't really. I mean, even the government isn't talking about it because we can see that, right? Some of these religious establishments-they, I mean, even if the government comes and say, "Okay, use electricity sparingly during these times, because you know we are using a lot of diesel. There is a crisis happening, and all that. I mean, these religious establishments-we go and switch off our lights and all that at our places, but they don't care about these things, right? Absolutely, because I mean, because they get it almost free, right? So, so I mean, it doesn't make sense to me. I mean, and a lot of these incentives and all these things given. I mean, you can't justify. Yeah, that's what I'm saying. There's no charindra chandrasena 29:44 economic rationale whatsoever. It's just that they are considered untouchable in the sense that because they are, you know, there's a sentimental value, there's religious, you know, considerations. But I mean. I'm with you, and that's that's not an Advocata view that we are expressing. We are just saying that it doesn't make economic sense. Speaker 1 30:09 Exactly. charindra chandrasena 30:10 I want to move on to the next topic also because we have about 15 minutes. Did you hear about President Trump's alleged insider trading issue. Speaker 1 30:28 So BBC has done something, and a lot of other. A lot of charindra chandrasena 30:33 people are talking about it, Indika. But I think BBC has done the most comprehensive analysis of it so far, And there are multiple sides to the story, but one side is how easy it is when you are in power to game the system and manipulate the markets, and even if there is nothing flowing directly into your account, and of course, it must be said that nothing has been proven. These are just suspicions at the moment, but there are suspicious transactions happening on a regular basis, just before a change. You Speaker 1 31:18 can connect the dots. charindra chandrasena 31:19 You can connect the dots. It could be a case of so just just because the if the audience is not familiar, basically throughout this second term of President Trump, traders have been and when we say traders we mean capital markets traders have been betting millions of dollars on certain stocks or assets just before President Trump makes a major announcement. So it it could be oil, it could be some other assets, it could be stocks, whichever it could be defence stocks, but this there's a pattern that has been growing. We are not new to insider trading in Sri Lanka, are we? Speaker 1 32:13 Yeah, I mean we also had episodes of anyway inside trading, front running, you name it. So all these things, we are not like new to these things. But I mean, the scale that we are talking about in America is, I mean, that's it's huge. Huge scandal that it can create is also like massive. So that is where I think it's really interesting. And the one thing about this this topic that we are talking about, I think, when the the second Trump administration came in, what they did was basically to sort of dismantle the whole regulatory or like loosen the regulatory processes and all that deregulation, Speaker 1 33:02 deregulation, right? With all that, all these like things that we call betting platforms or whatever. So they have like sort of mushroomed and like expanding and all that. I think Trump Jr. is also an advisor of one of these. charindra chandrasena 33:22 He he's not an advisor of one of these. Okay. So these are predictions markets. Yeah. Right. Poly Speaker 1 33:30 market or something. Yes. He's an advisor on poly market, if I'm not mistaken. Yes. charindra chandrasena 33:34 So basically, one of them is. Yeah, I'll find it. But basically, two two companies. Speaker 1 33:47 Okay, charindra chandrasena 33:47 and they're predictions markets. You you predictions firms, if I'm not mistaken. Basically, you can bet on anything, and it's not just about stocks. You can Bet that say for example somebody is going to war, somebody is not going to war, somebody could be taken in the meaning arrested. Somebody is not going to be arrested. So things that are not tangible in the stocks kind of sense where stocks are not tangible, but I mean you know the more established ones. Here you can actually bet on events. Speaker 1 34:30 Yeah, for example, right now on polymarkers the main the the people are betting on U.S. Iran permanent peace deal by when? charindra chandrasena 34:42 Then Speaker 1 34:43 what? Then on crude oil they're betting the prices. Then straight to homeows traffic returns to normal by end of April. So people are betting like $5, $7, or whatever you know what you have. So people are betting. So. Interesting thing is, I think lot of these platforms are like cryptocurrency is the is the is the what you call currency there. So it's very difficult to track trace who are the? I mean, for example, in poly market, you don't have to, you know, let's say Charindra, you don't have to register as Charindra, so you can register as anyone basically, right? So, so the the anonymity has given lot of incentive to fraud and all that. So some of these accounts now, for example, these oil oil prices and all that. So that could even be related to people in the government in the U.S. government officials who are taking so the the two charindra chandrasena 36:02 the two that we were talking about are polymarker and Kashi. Speaker 1 36:05 Okay, charindra chandrasena 36:06 I forgot the name Polymarker and Kashi. Those are the two big players in the predictions market space. Those are both are predictions markets, and both of them, Donald Trump Jr. is either involved in an advisory capacity or in a director capacity. So, what does that tell you? So, when they asked about this, the those companies they say that I mean they have a lot of advisors, and he he provides insights on the growth of this industry, on how predictions markets can grow, but who knows what is? Speaker 1 36:49 I think you have to remember that some of these companies are, for example, if I'm not mistaken, polymarket is banned in lot of European countries, right? So some of these companies are very questionable. So I mean, and and before Trump administration, they had very limited operations also within U.S. I mean, I mean they were under regulatory control. So now it's like at at a different level. Now you can see that with Donald Trump Jr. going going in like adversary capacities or whatever. So that means you know they are they're gaining influence and they are being strength. And and and that's what has happened in the throughout the U.S. charindra chandrasena 37:30 Where everybody wants access to the Trump family now. This includes media. This includes investing firms. It includes everybody in every industry because they know that proximity to the Trump family will get them better deals, better prospects, and all of that. This is something that that you didn't. I mean, we didn't see coming in America maybe 20 years ago. There was a lot of corruption even back then, but this level of blatancy. Exactly, that's what Speaker 1 38:06 I mean. Brazenly, brazenly, brazenly they are doing it. I mean, without. I mean, I mean, even like someone else would be a little worried. Okay, when when the next administration comes, you know, there'll be repercussions, but it seems that these guys aren't really worried about it at all. You know they're just going at it. For example, now if you take Jared Kushner, who is Trump's son-in-law, he doesn't have any capacity within the government. He does not operate. But then, then he's a charindra chandrasena 38:39 he's the he's one of the chief negotiators. Exactly, Speaker 1 38:42 and he has a lot of business interests in the Middle East, right? So these things directly, I mean, the decisions that Trump takes directly influences his business interests. So there is a clear case of conflict of interest in that sense. charindra chandrasena 38:54 Yeah, and even with this war, that so Steve Witkoff and Jara Kushner are negotiating on behalf of the U.S. They are the same two people who were negotiating with Iran the day before they were bombed. It's just february 28, february 27. Oman, which is mediating, actually said that we are close to Speaker 1 39:18 a deal. charindra chandrasena 39:19 The next day, bombs are railing down on Tehran, and there's no wonder that they can't. I mean, as we record today, there's still no clarity on whether Iran is going Speaker 1 39:32 to Pakistan. Yeah, I mean, it's really ironical because all these things are like a game right now. People are making money, betting you know whether the oil prices will go up or down, whether they will bomb Iran or not, or they will basically destroy all the civilian infrastructure Iran. All that they are betting. It's like a game, for instance. I mean, I remember something like this in. Early 1990s, I think. If you guys can remember, there's this Bosnian war, Bosnia. That so this this city of Sarevo, right? The Sarevo siege for about four years. The city was Completely surrounded, so there are claims I think in Europe that certain European wealthy people they paid money to go to Sarevo and have that have the have these what you call sniper safaris they are called. Like so, basically they, the the surrounding mountains from the surrounding mountains, they shoot at the people in Sarevo city, children, women, whoever. So it's like a game. For that, they paid like millions of dollars or whatever. Like small game. Yeah, exactly. Right. So for some people, woe becomes a game, absolutely, and a way to make money. Right, so the same thing happening here. So charindra chandrasena 41:09 here, the other thing is with insider trading. Coming back to that, because prediction markets is also technically inside trading, but it's not officially insider trading because there's a bigger play there. Speaker 1 41:22 Yeah, you have to investigate. charindra chandrasena 41:24 Yeah, exactly. But the problem, Indigenous, is that inside trading is so hard to prove because I mean, like there is no text message sent by these stocks. I'm making an announcement in 10 minutes, right? It's usually verbal, and therefore there is no paper trail. And I think what you were mentioning about them doing it brazenly and fearlessly, I think the reason for that is that they feel they have impunity, because even if there are suspicions, who can prove it? Because it's all verbal, Speaker 1 42:05 unless you wiretap or something. For example, this Raj Ratnam's case, the SEC, the USAC, they wired up his phones and all that. So the investigation was on for about three years without Raj Raj Ratam and his associates knowing, right? So that is how you do an investigation. But in this case, you can't do anything like that. As the president, exactly. Who's going to who's going to wire that? charindra chandrasena 42:34 Yeah, and then I mean even the SCC, the SCC of the and Speaker 1 42:39 you have to remember that their funding has been cut. That's the thing. A lot of these regulatory bodies, their funding has been cut drastically by the Trump administration. So, they don't have that that kind of you know wherewithal to do certain things. charindra chandrasena 42:53 Absolutely. I I read somewhere that the entire SCC budget is about the same as Amazon's budget for tech, right? Subject to correction, I don't. I don't remember exactly whether that was the IT budget, but just to show you the scale, how small it is. So it's it's just a very interesting development globally, and you know we are talking about it because it will help some people understand what the game really is. It's not what we see. There's a lot going on behind the scenes, and by the time this video is put out on YouTube later today, things could have changed because President Trump's deadline for ceasefire negotiation, ceasefire period is ending on Wednesday, which is Wednesday U.S. time, which will be Wednesday late night in Sri Lanka. What whether he will extend? He has said that he is not going to extend. So if he says he's not going to extend, in fact, today about few hours ago he said, "No, I'm not extending. It's done. It is the deadline. So now, with people believing that, if they make their investments that way, and then suddenly he makes that change, there are a lot of people who are going to make a killing? So yeah, very very interesting. It's it's relevant to Sri Lanka as well because we've been through that Speaker 1 44:30 lot of and you shouldn't you should I mean anyone could notice that I mean a lot of these statements whether it's social media activity by Trump or Trump, and some of these key decisions are made during the weekends. charindra chandrasena 44:46 Yes, Speaker 1 44:47 and so it could it generally affects the market when the markets open on Monday. So, I mean, if you are a responsible. Leader, I mean, there are certain things that you do in public, certain way that you. I mean, there are certain protocols you follow, right? So in Trump's case, he doesn't give a damn about protocols or any. I mean, that's why I think the I think the French France President Macron said, you know, just you know, don't be childlike. Yeah, don't act like a don't don't don't act like a child. I mean, you are talking about like the lives of millions of people and the global economy, right? Oil prices and now now see, we are like 1000s of miles away from the conflict area, but we are being affected right now. So, I mean, as the as the world leader, U.S. should act a more responsible way. But you can't expect that from from charindra chandrasena 46:00 the the the irony of all of this is that he came to make America great again, right? Everything he is doing, the reason he can do it and get away with it, is because of what previous presidents had built. There's no strength that he built independently. Yes, he's better at using that strength because for the longest time when I was growing up, I used to think, why does America even need everybody's agreement? They can just go ahead. That was a child in me thinking because they don't actually need it. So that's what he has shown that they don't need it; they can do whatever. But then there are consequences later on in indirect way, Speaker 1 46:40 exactly. charindra chandrasena 46:41 So, all that muscle that he's throwing around, all the flexing he's doing, that's not muscle that he built by going to the gym. Somebody else went to the gym, built the muscle, and then he's just doing the flexing. Speaker 1 46:53 And also, like because the muscle is there, you don't always have to go and you know flex that muscle. Exactly, charindra chandrasena 46:59 exactly. Right. So Speaker 1 47:00 I mean, there's something called soft power. When you, when you, when you, when you are at that level, you don't really flex muscle and do things. Right, it's the soft power that you use to do a lot of things. Exactly. I mean, that is kind of in in a subtle way you do certain things. But unfortunately, the Trump administration, I think this this morning the third resignation or the from the Trump's cabinet was announced. I think. Oh, I didn't say that. Who is it? I can't remember. There's a SMS that I got. I think after Pam Bondi's firing, someone else has resigned. Oh charindra chandrasena 47:41 yeah, labour secretary. Labour secretary. So that's that's basically labour minister. Speaker 1 47:44 Yeah. charindra chandrasena 47:46 Okay, and then already been replaced also. Speaker 1 47:48 Yeah. charindra chandrasena 47:50 Yeah. Speaker 1 47:51 So I mean, interesting things are happening in the U.S. right now. So we'll have to wait and see. Yeah, charindra chandrasena 47:57 it can happen in the U.S. but it's affecting us. Speaker 1 47:59 Exactly. charindra chandrasena 48:00 That's the problem. The rest of the world also, but yeah. So yeah, out of time. Thank you guys so much for coming and contributing to a very insightful conversation. Not the usual faces, of course. Hindika is a is a regular on the podcast scene, but it's the first time he's taking part in an advocats. So very pleased to have you and Speaker 1 48:30 thank you for inviting. charindra chandrasena 48:31 And Anushka, thanks for stepping in with the research. I'm far far more formal with you guys than I am with my two usual guests, I don't thank them myself. But yeah, thanks, guys, and thank you everybody for tuning in. We will see you next week. Transcribed by https://otter.ai