2026-02-18 / debate: Special Commodity Levy Act Order, Customs Ordinance Resolution, Motor Traffic Act Regulations 2026-02-18
## Summary
Leader of the Opposition Sajith Premadasa challenged the Government over the operational status and independence of the National Commission on Women, presenting documentary evidence — including the relevant Gazette notification and pages from the Appropriation Act No. 23 of 2025 — to contradict the Minister's parliamentary statements. He highlighted the resignation of Commission Chair Dr. Ramani Jayasundere, citing lack of institutional independence, government interference in staff appointments, and the posting of a Ministry official as CEO, while contrasting the Commission's subordinate budgetary status with that of other independent commissions. Premadasa further criticised the Government's allocation of LKR 50 million to the Commission in 2026 as inadequate relative to the LKR 150 million requested, arguing it fell short of election commitments made to women voters. He also raised a procedural complaint, tabling correspondence showing that several of his questions to the Prime Minister and the Minister of Education — concerning Gampaha Wickramarachchi University, unappointed acting principals, and graduate teacher recruitment — had been disallowed, which he characterised as an infringement on the Opposition's right to parliamentary scrutiny.
Madam Presiding Member, what did we hear from the Government Chief Whip this morning? “Go and learn; don’t distort; I am ready to teach.” Why did he speak like that?
On 2026.02.03, I asked in Parliament about the National Commission on Women. Today the Minister answered. After she answered, we very courteously pointed out several facts. Whatever she says, I state clearly: the National Commission on Women has been gazetted under her Ministry—here is the Gazette. She denied it; we corrected the record.
Further, Dr. Ramani Jayasundere, Chair of the Women’s Commission, has resigned. Why? Because there is no ability to ensure the Commission’s independence, no provisions to appoint her own staff, and due to Government interference a Chief Executive Officer has been appointed—a person from a Ministry serving as CEO. The President’s Secretary would not even grant the Chair an appointment to discuss these matters.
We showed that other independent commissions operate as separate special spending units. I now table pages 8, 9 and 10 of the Appropriation Act, No. 23 of 2025, to confirm this.
I will distribute all these documents to the media to substantiate what I have presented—evidence- and data-based. Yet when we present facts, we are accused of creating problems and being rowdy, and our mouths are to be shut.
Madam Presiding Member, the Women Parliamentarians’ Caucus—of which you are a member—submitted two needs in January 2025 to the Women’s Commission. At a Geneva conference focused on ending discrimination against women, the Minister for Women’s Affairs said all was ready to operationalize the Commission. Today she says in Parliament that budgetary provision can only be made in May 2025, while the Commission was established in September. Even if there has been a lapse, supplementary estimates can be moved for essential independence—office space, staff, funding. That was not done.
Only after we raised this in Parliament did the Women Parliamentarians’ Caucus—again, including you—meet the President’s Secretary and arrive at some understandings. Now, LKR 50 million is to be given in 2026—one third of the LKR 150 million requested. Based on your election pledges to women, you should be giving three times that amount—not one third—given the support women extended to this Government.
What happened this morning is clear: the Government took away from women the right to an independent Women’s Commission by placing it under the Ministry and turning it into a subordinate institution. And then we are told to “go and learn.” I have nothing to learn from the Chief Whip. We too speak here with understanding.
I must also inform the public, Members, and the media of this: when we try to ask questions today, different rulings are shown and our questions on Education have been rejected. I wished to ask the Prime Minister about the plan to close the Postgraduate Faculty at Gampaha Wickramarachchi University of Indigenous Medicine—disallowed. I wished to ask why 1,216 acting principals, who have passed their exam, have not been appointed—disallowed. I wished to ask about recruiting graduates to the teaching service and the proposal to set the validity of their CHS to 31 December 2025—disallowed. I will table all the related documents. This is all being prohibited.
Questions about whether archaeology graduates and those with international studies can teach History, and other education matters to the Prime Minister and the Minister of Education—Sajith Premadasa, the Leader of the Opposition, is not allowed to ask them. Here are the letters stating we cannot ask, and the reasons.
Are these indecent questions? Are these obscene websites? Why are they being blocked? This is an attempt to stop us exercising our right to question. When we ask, calmly and factually, the Chief Whip jumps in with lectures—telling us to learn from him.