Experience on rebuilding funds: Selective amnesia?

THE Government's announcement of the establishment of the “Rebuilding Sri Lanka Fund” generated a lot of attention, mostly of the wrong kind.

- By Prof. Rohan Samarajiva

To their credit, former Minister Patali Champika Ranawaka and the Chair of the Committee on Public Finance Dr Harsha de Silva raised the issues of compliance with Article 148 of the Constitution and the Disaster Management Act, No. 13 of 2005.

These flaws were more important by an order of magnitude than representation or gender balance in the governing council or management committee. The issues raised by Ranawaka and De Silva were not new as they had been debated in Parliament and before the courts in the past two decades.

Laws and funds

Sri Lanka is no stranger to disasters and rebuilding, despite the stories we tell ourselves. But it is only in the months following the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami that the Government rushed through the Disaster Management Act, No. 13 of 2005, specifically designed to manage all aspects of disaster risk reduction and management, including the mobilisation of funds for rebuilding.

Section 4(a) of the 2005 Act specifies that one of the functions of the Disaster Management Council shall be that of recommending how funds should be allocated from various Government agencies and from the Reconstruction and Rehabilitation Fund. This fund was established under the Reconstruction and Rehabilitation Fund Act, No. 58 of 1993, with a Board of Governors that has the Prime Minister as Chair and includes the Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition, the relevant subject Minister, and key officials (section 3).