Minister Of Environment Responds To Article

This refers to the article titled “More Free Rides: Sri Lankan Media And Journalistic Sloth” by Mr. Emil van der Poorten in The Sunday Leader of 7th March 2010.  This article contains a number of grossly inaccurate statement and distortions that needs to be corrected, not for my sake but for the sake of the readers.

Mr. van der Poorten castigates me for taking up the issue of the Canadian Government not issuing a visa for me.  This issue arose when the Canadian Government deliberately delayed to issue me a visa to attend a meeting of the Montreal Protocol to receive the ‘best implementer’ award on behalf of Sri Lanka which was awarded to Sri Lanka for taking necessary measures to preserve ozone layer.  This invitation was given to me in my official capacity as the minister in charge of the subject of environment of the recipient country.  In addition, I was later elected as the President of the Conference of Parties of the Vienna Convention, under which this Montreal Protocol was drafted and acceded.

Hence their delaying tactic is an obvious insult to Sri Lanka and is in no way an insult to me as a person.  It is our paramount obligation to uphold the dignity of the nation and should not hesitate to lodge the strongest protest when this kind of insult happens.  The protest was done through the proper diplomatic channels.   If Mr. van der Poorten is a logical person, he should have joined hands with us to uphold the dignity of the nation and not try to bring forth illogical arguments to justify their action.

The fact that many cities, would go under water is based on predictions based on models assuming the predicted sea level rises in the future.  It is one of the many examples cited by me to show the gravity of the problem.  The writer implies that I derive some malicious glee in this as it is a just punishment for the denial of the visa.  The two have no connection at all, and is a disanalogy brought in by the writer for his own sake.  It is perhaps relevant to mention that large parts of Colombo too would be going under water in such eventualities and this is also another example cited by me in my presentations to emphasize the dangers of global warming.

Mr. van der Poorten finds fault with me for re-opening the national parks to visitors but has no valid objections to make against this move.  The only problem he sees is the few elephants who come to the fence at Uda Walawe and the number of visitors to Yala.  At present all the national parks are open to visitors, which happened after 25 years.  It has to be noted that this move will ease pressure on the few which were open throughout.  It is not possible to allow only a fixed number of visitors to enter these places and the multitudes of people who can visit these places would appreciate our move.  I would like to reiterate that I was able to renovate all the abandoned buildings in Uda Walawe Park.  New buildings for Lunugamvehera and Ritigala and new park bungalows for Yala.  New buildings for Kumana and Wilpattu will be built in partnership with the private sector.

The issue of garbage is a matter for the local government bodies and the Central Environmental Authority (CEA) under my ministry has only a regulatory role.  That is we can only take legal action against violators.  How ever taking in to account the gravity of the problem a programme called “Pilisaru” was launched to help solve this problem by assisting the relevant local government bodies.  If Mr. van der Poorten  has a garbage problem, he should direct his complaints to the local government body that has jurisdiction over his area.   People like him should first get their facts correct before rushing on to blame others.

The issue of emission testing is similarly dealt with by the Ministry of Transport under the provisions of the Motor Traffic Act and he should take up the matter with the relevant authorities and it again shows that he has not bothered to gather relevant facts before rushing on to attack me.

It is certain that Mr. van der Poorten has, for reasons best known to him, is driven by hatred and malice towards me personally.  In his haste of using invectives, he has contradicted himself at times with the injudicious use of words and phrases.  An example is the word ‘xenophobia’ that he has hurled at me repeatedly.  This word means “undue fear of foreigners.”   If this was so, how could I have attended the numerous conferences and; let alone being elected unanimously as the President of the Vienna Convention?

The killing of a large number of elephants by Baker is stated by none other than Baker himself in his Rifle And Hound In Ceylon.  What I did two years ago (in January 2008) was to point out how these so-called pleasure hunters destroyed our wildlife wantonly.  Mr. van der Poorten seems to be offended by my pointing out these facts, again for reasons best known to him as evident from his painful plaintive cry.  However, it is patently wrong on him to state things such as every Britisher is liable for these actions.  Since nothing of the sort has been even implied by me in the article.

It is necessary to mention that being a person brought up under Buddhist values and ethics I had been taught since my tender ages to look at all beings with Meththa or loving kindness.  Hence, killing and hurting any living being is abhorrent to me personally and hatred is also an emotion alien to me.   This extends to even those who are unkind and unjust to me and I bear no malice towards anyone including Mr. van der Poorten.