On development

End of the war has brought Sri Lanka to a new era that is a fresh threshold of development. All are agreed on it. Yet have we really grasped its meaning? Have we understood what new responsibilities it places on our shoulders?

On the political stage there is much talk about development. Some have compared it to the victory gained in the war. War was won with the fortunate coincidence of two factors - the professional competence of the Security Forces and correct political leadership.

The rest of the citizenry provided moral support. In the development war it is somewhat different. Everybody needs to join and contribute his or her share. In the development war there could be and should be no bystanders including those that have fallen into the latter position through no fault of theirs. Do we want the politicians or the business community to deliver while we carry on as usual?

First of all there should be an attitudinal change. It is necessary to believe in the capabilities of Sri Lankans. The defeatist or negative attitudes should be dispelled. Development is a challenge and a huge one at that.

Taking up a challenge means taking risks. Are we ready to take risks? There could be no development without taking risks. That is how every successful entrepreneur has developed. Sri Lanka has to charter its own path to development. That means it is a trail blazer for us. It is necessary to give up conservative modes of thinking.

The private sector is supposed to be the engine of growth. However, compared to their counterparts in other countries Sri Lankan entrepreneurs have shown a reluctance to take risks. Like many youth who want the Government to provide them with everything the private sector too expects the Government to provide all facilities. For example, that is why it is not prepared to invest in certain physical and social infrastructure projects.

Looking at the experience of countries such as Malaysia, China, Israel and South Korea we find that development of human resources was a primary pre-requisite of development. Some of these countries had a scarcity of physical resources. It is through the development of human resources that they reached the developed state. South Korea, for example, devoted around 20 percent of its budget on education.

Development cannot be measured in terms of GDP growth alone. Growth should be equitable too. If development leaves large sections of the population unemployed, underemployed or in poverty such development has no meaning for most of the population.

An unfortunate situation in the country today is the presence of a large number of uneducated, including youth with potential prime labour power. Finding ways and means of providing gainful employment to the unemployed is a very big challenge. It is not only a result of education that doesn’t produce skills in sufficient numbers but is also a result of the economy stagnating without developing into new branches.

Another issue of concern is the growing malnutrition among children. Unless this alarming trend is reversed the future potential labour force will be not healthy. Such malnutrition is found not only in rural and estate areas. It is also an urban phenomenon. Perhaps the dietary habits also contribute to it as evidenced by the growth of non-communicable diseases among the population from young days.

Development also requires political stability and social harmony. Elections have brought a high degree of political stability. However, social harmony is yet to be consolidated. Though the fire of war has been doused there may still be hidden embers that could ignite due to ill winds or otherwise.

Above all development needs new thinking. It is time to end the practice of following strategies formulated by international financial institutions on worn-out and out-dated prescriptions that have at best the interests of the developed countries at heart.

Development also comes at a price. It comes with sacrifice. Without sacrifice, dedication and commitment no development could be attained. Here too the principle of equity holds. It cannot be crumbs for the majority and plums for a handful.