2026-02-20 / Adjournment Motion: Coal procurement for Lakvijaya Power Plant at Norochcholai (Part 2) 2026-02-20
Speaking in defence of the government's position on an Opposition adjournment motion concerning a coal tender, Ms. Hemachandra argued that the Opposition had failed to identify any specific procedural irregularity, noting that no appeal had been lodged against the tender award and that quality-related shipment rejections do not in themselves constitute corruption. She challenged the Opposition's sole concrete allegation—made by Hon. Marikkar under parliamentary privilege—that funds connected to the deal were deposited in an account linked to a Minister's wife's mother at a Homagama bank, demanding that he either table supporting details (account number, sums, and dates) or refer the matter to the Bribery Commission, and criticising him for leaving the Chamber without doing so. She contrasted the current procurement process, conducted through a proper tender board determination, with past practice in which energy-sector contracts were awarded by Cabinet paper according to political preferences, which she argued was the historical source of corrupt commissions that inflated electricity tariffs. The approximately USD 150 million tender, she maintained, was conducted transparently, with contractual penalty clauses as the established safeguard against supplier non-compliance.
[4.53 p.m.]
Thank you for the opportunity, Hon. Presiding Member.
We are debating an Opposition adjournment motion alleging wrongdoing in the coal tender. In truth, there is little left to add after the Hon. Chief Government Whip’s clear explanation. The Opposition has offered only a “story.” They have not identified where any irregularity occurred in the tender process, who was barred from participating, or who appealed—because no one appealed. Instead, they spin a tale that lower coal quality automatically means corruption. In the past too, shipments were rejected for quality; that did not mean corruption then, nor does it now. Sri Lanka imports coal; we cannot mine domestically. The safeguard is contractual: if a supplier fails to meet specifications, penalties apply—the penalty clauses are in the contracts. Why make this simple mechanism so convoluted?
The only concrete allegation today was Hon. Marikkar’s claim that money related to this deal was deposited in an account of the Minister’s wife’s mother at a bank in Homagama. That is a serious charge made under parliamentary privilege. He must either table full details—account number, sums, dates—or, at minimum, submit them to the Bribery Commission. Having made the allegation, he left the Chamber and has not returned. Is this the Opposition’s sense of responsibility?
Let us be clear: this coal tender is around USD 150 million. Historically, energy-sector supplies have been marred by irregularities that drove up electricity tariffs. Previously, “awards” were made by Cabinet papers—politicians’ preferences—rather than by the tender board’s determination. That is where “commissions” arose. Even for 2023–2024 there were attempts to deviate by Cabinet paper. We, however, conducted a proper procurement and made the award accordingly. Having done so, we are now lectured by those who once bypassed tenders.
What public harm is there in a transparent tender and public discourse?