He also says if President Kumaratunga fails to do this, then the next option of moving the impeachment motion against her would automatically be brought in.

He says the new government under Ranil Wickremesinghe has taken a unique approach to solve the ethnic crisis. Moragoda believes mere constitutional changes are not instruments that could be used to bring peace. "We must be sincere. If we are sincere, we do not need amendments to the constitution and two thirds majority in parliament. Keep your heart warm and your head cool. All the problems would be solved," he told The Sunday Leader in an interview.

By Wilson Gnanadass

Q: With the UNF government taking the initiative to usher in an era of peace, how confident are you that the government will receive the necessary support in parliament in the event of a change in the constitution, given the fact that the UNF has only 114 seats?

A: Firstly, I think this should not merely be looked at as a constitutional problem. My feeling is that politicians and lawyers by and large have in a way confused this matter far more than anybody else. It is a matter dealing with Sri Lankans of different cultures being able to live together, being proud of their own diversity and identity and at the same time live together within an overall Sri Lankan identity. That is the challenge.

We think constitutions that were introduced by the British would bring an end. You see, even the British have changed but we have not. Let us look at it in very simple terms. We have diverse cultures and religions in this country. Let us see our diversity as a strength and not as a weakness. My view is that this is the beginning of any discussion. If we talk of legislation and parliamentary majority and all that, I think we will not be able to solve any problem. If we can collectively look at this issue that way, then I think we can make a start. If we don't, then I don't think there is much of a future for Sri Lanka.

As far as the peace process is concerned, the basic objective is to find out how to build confidence between two sides that are completely distrustful of each other. Even innocent gestures on either side are misunderstood because of the history of this conflict which has been extremely violent and basically seeped in hatred and bloodshed. Because of this we are going through a process of trying to build confidence to show the other side that we are sincere. Our hearts must be warm, open and sincere, but our heads must be cool.

There will be steps forward and steps backward. But I believe if we are sincere we can go ahead. This time around I should say at least the intentions are good. Even after the ceasefire was declared, the incidents have been less. Even the atmosphere has been that. But we do not know. Because of the nature of mistrust, anything can happen. But our objective must be to keep moving this process forward. Various divisive elements in our society may try to do many things to obstruct our way but we must not give up. I am cautiously optimistic that the people of Sri Lanka have given the prime minister a mandate for peace.

Q: Though the government is looking into the possibility of de-proscribing the LTTE, a section of the country still believes that the LTTE should not be de-proscribed. What are you views on it?

A: Proscription, deproscription and all such words fall to my earlier thinking. I mean proscription is not a word that was invented in this country. These are all ideas that are being brought from abroad. What we should ask is whether we are interested in peace.

Secondly, we must find out as I said earlier, whether we are prepared to go with a warm heart and a cool head. As a nation this country should not be broken. That is the basis on which any government should go for any settlement. If we are confident of what we are going to do, we need not worry about these words. The British introduced various phrases, the Americans introduced various phrases and we also bring them into our situation. Today the prime minister made a statement in which he says that we should work according to the present situation. The idea is that there has to be a dialogue at some stage. The prime minister clearly said that we must have an open heart to this problem and equally keep our heads cool. That self confidence must be there.

We must have a clear vision and an agenda. The problem is when we don't have an agenda, we become victims of somebody else's agenda. Our behaviour in every situation is as if we don't have an agenda. Somebody else can come and tell us what to do.

Q: As a confidence-building measure, what has the government got to offer the LTTE for them to have the confidence to come to the negotiating table?

A: Sincerity. In the past month we have done very much on the ground to show that we are sincere. The prime minister, Minister Peiris and I have been working together to ensure there is sincerity in every effort we make. In my view this is not a deal. This is a situation where two cultures, basically within the same country, two ethnic groups, are trying to live together. I don't think you can live in harmony through deals. There must be trust and sincerity.

Q: The LTTE says that the ban imposed on them should be lifted in order to ensure they are equals if they are to participate in meaningful negotiations with the government. Do you think the LTTE claim is justifiable?

A: So far the LTTE has not made any official intimation to this effect either directly or through Norway. So far we have only dealt with the confidence-building measure. These are issues we have to anticipate. Justification or not is again a subjective point of view. I always bring it down to the family level. The conflict becomes far more acrimonious when people don't know each other. So one should see this as a 'disagreement' in a family. Whether it is justified or not, whether it is realistic or not, the reality is that we are a family and we have to live together. There is no choice. They can't go and live somewhere else, at the same time we too can't go and live somewhere else. We have to live here. The ultimate outcome of war is to achieve peace. So the war is fought to bring peace. This is how I look at it. Basically we must find a solution where all of us come out as winners or all of us equally come out as losers. So we have to live together.

Q: The UNP previously was keen to impeach both the chief justice and President Kumaratunga. But no steps have so far been taken in that direction after forming the government. Why?

A: I have not been concerned with the subject but I assume those ministers who are concerned are at it. This issue was discussed at the last party group meeting too.

Q: Do you feel both President Kumaratunga and chief justice Sarath Silva deserve to be impeached considering the magnitude of charges levelled against them?

A: My attitude is this country requires a healing process. That means we need a government of national reconciliation -- everybody working together, for that healing process to get off the ground. But if that does not happen then the options of impeachment come in. Because, the reality is that in one year the president could dissolve parliament. If the president sits there and says, "I will only give these fellows six months," then as a government, we should not restrict any options available. We have a mandate from the people and in the interest of that mandate we have to protect ourselves. If on the other hand the president is willing to work with the prime minister and the government, then I would say, "give it a chance."

Q: As the minister of science and technology and economic reforms, what plans have you to improve information technology in Sri Lanka?

A: As far as information technology is concerned the question that should be asked is what is the role of government in the promotion of IT. My view is that the government's role is to facilitate and catalyse IT development and not to start interfering. Look at India which has succeeded in the field of IT. The role of government must be judiciously selected. There is a tendency on the part of the politicians to superficially do IT promotions without looking at the substantive issues. In my view one of the major bottlenecks for IT development in Sri Lanka is telecommunication. Unless this bottleneck is removed it will be difficult for Sri Lanka to become a successful exporter of IT-related services.

One of the issues is the cost of telecommunications and the other is the band width. Unless that matter is addressed as a priority, this bottleneck is going to remain. What should be done is to increase the competition in the telecom sector, deregulate more aggressively and ensure costs are brought down. Today there are a large number of Internet Service Providers (ISPs) that are active in Sri Lanka but none of them are making money. So there is a fundamental bottleneck that has to be addressed and it should be an urgent priority.

The other challenge we face is how we could take IT to the villages. Unless we do that we cannot offer hope to our young ones. Today all our youngsters are going for private classes and looking for opportunities. They have not fully seen what the opportunities are. And if we are to take IT to the village, then there are again challenges; challenge of training availability and challenge of community communication. Unless one does this, I don't think there is any future for IT development in Sri Lanka.

If you look at the Indian technology revolution, the IT minister in India was appointed only a couple of years ago. The IT revolution in India was started by the Indian expatriates who joined young enterprising Indians. IT was pushed to the grassroots by dynamic chief ministers and local government ministers who saw the opportunity set up the infrastructure. The lesson is there is an important role for the government. But in my view the role of government is operational. It could be a facilitator and catalyst. If you look at training, I frankly do not think the government should go around opening centres all over the place. Under the UNP governments, President J. R. Jayewardene opened the economy to have an open economy in Sri Lanka, President Premadasa took the globalisation and industry to the village and Mr. Wickremesinghe's challenge is going to be as to how he is going to take computer to the village.

Q: Though the UNF government pledged to give a major relief to the people after coming to power, the party has not been able to do much where the cost of living is concerned. What are the causes?

A: Basically the cost of living cannot be brought down. What we can do as a government is to increase the economic growth. Increasing economic growth is to increase the money in peoples' hands. Economic growth creation is not something short term. It is wrong for politicians to give short term expectations. I feel, that to turn this economy around it will take at least 18 months. To do that I think we will have to go through a very difficult period. There will have to be restructuring in every sector. Definitely there has to be an increases in tariffs. These are realities.

The electricity board is losing 600 million rupees a month. Where are we going to find that money? Today we are paying more for petroleum than America. Not because of anything but the loss of about 20 billion incurred by the petroleum corporation should be recovered. This is why we say the petroleum corporation must be liberalised which the government is committed to do. Through liberalisation we could create competition. We must not try to create a monopoly but competition. Only through competition will the consumer get the best possible deal. Otherwise what will happen is in order to recover the petroleum corporation losses the whole of Sri Lanka -- every citizen -- is paying a certain amount.

Our industrial electricity cost is becoming one of the highest in Asia, including East Asia also, that is Singapore. Even in Singapore this much is not used. The reason is the inefficiency of this organisation. So we have to create competition in the private as well as public sector. This process is painful and would take some time. But if we don't take hard decisions, in another two years, the economy of this country would be worse. And the people would be hurting more and more.

Q: The unlimited importation of rice, a decision the government took last week, is threatening to hit the 8.5 million farmer population in Sri Lanka. The farmers who are already hit by the purchase of a kilo of paddy at the rate of Rs.13 by the government are going to face more problems. Why did the government take such a rash decision, without giving consideration to the farmers?