by K Godage

The residence in Geneva was in such a state of disrepair that it was about to collapse; fortunately President Premadasa, when informed, immediately sent out a team to assess the situation and ordered that workmen be sent from here and a complete repair and restoration undertaken.

My byattention has been drawn to a news item captioned ‘HC in UK Clarifies". The news item related to the residence of the High Commissioner in London.

The situation with particular reference to this residence would not have been any different from what happened in Geneva and Washington. The Geneva residence was rented by the Sri Lanka Government for several  decades before Ambassador Jayantha Dhanapala was able to obtain money intended  for France that had not been used by that mission. As has been the practice elsewhere, the house which was bought in the mid- eighties was not maintained and gradually went into a state of disrepair.

When Ambassador Bernard Goonetilleke went to Geneva in July 1992 he found the residence in a very poor state; the all too familiar curry smell was embedded in the carpets of the living room. Paint was peeling and some of the windows were without glass panes resulting in rainwater coming into the house and termites making their way up to the second floor. The roof which was slate had a layer of green moss which transformed the residence to something like a farmhouse. The 'Carve' was more like a dungeon, with discarded passion fruit tins (gallon size), empty bottles of ayurvedic oil and for some unknown  reason many trash bags full of garbage stored in the cellar. The previous ambassador had been a political appointee!

The residence in Geneva was in such a state of disrepair that it was about to collapse; fortunately President Premadasa, when informed, immediately sent out a team to assess the situation and ordered that workmen be sent from here and a complete repair and restoration undertaken. As stated earlier, that residence was neglected by a political appointee who like the rest of them could not be held to account as he was not a member of the public service. The man lived by himself in a part of the house, never entertained there and had a single servant; most unfortunately it was the very same story in Washington - in this instance too a bad appointment of someone who was totally unsuitable for a diplomatic assignment though he had been excellent in his own profession, led to the ruination of the residence. These premises at a prime location have now being restored and the ambassador has already gone into residence there.

The responsibility for this situation rests not only with the head of mission but with the ministry itself for no funds are provided for regular maintenance. It is only when there is a breakdown is money made available for such repairs. I recall that at the time Gen. Sepala Attygalle was HC in London how he had brought the need to effect some major renovations to the residence, including the entrance itself, to the attention of the ministry but funds had not been forthcoming. He even complained that necessary insurance had not been taken out. I am therefore not surprised that the residence in the years that followed went to wrack and ruin and became unsuitable for a head of mission.; perhaps the only period when some renovation work was undertaken was when Mr. Mangala Moonesinghe and his house proud lady were in residence. I recall that it was suggested about this time that the old residence be pulled down and a new residence erected on the premises as the property was extremely valuable and the address perfect for a head of mission but this was not done.

The official residence of the High Commissioner at 35, Avenue Road, London, remains in a dilapidated state and as such it became necessary for the incumbent Head of Mission who also held the post of Deputy High Commissioner for two and a half years up to four months prior to assuming duties as the High Commissioner, to continue living from February 2005 to March 2007 at the residence she used in her former capacity. Living in the house taken for the Deputy High Commissioner was undertaken as a temporary measure in order to institute the required renovations but since the government did not effect the necessary repairs and renovation, which is indeed a shame, I am informed that the HC had been compelled to rent premises suitable for the head of mission. The Ministry and the VVIPs who travel via London at the drop of a hat should take responsibility for this situation. Incidentally it would be recalled that the same fate befell the Students Centre and Ceylon Tea Centre which was located at the prestigious Piccadilly Circus; this is perhaps a national failing.

In March 2006 the President appointed a committee headed by none other than Mr. .M.D.D. Peiris, who needs no introduction, to study the working of our missions and to rationalize our diplomatic and consular representation abroad. The committee completed its report within the two-month deadline set and submitted it to the then Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera, in June 2006. Nothing has been heard of that report since. I presume it is gathering dust in the dungeon of the ministry and may well have been eaten by rats.

That report covered the following areas, (a) Rationalization --- the strengthening of our representations, (b) The re-sourcing of missions (c) The maintenance of mission premises (d) The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (d) Inter-ministerial coordination of international relations (e) Security (f) Trade (Dept of Commerce) and economic representation.

As stated above a two-month deadline was given for the completion of the report (it could have been far more comprehensive had more time been given) and it was thought that this was because the ministry sought to effect reforms on an urgent basis. But one and a half years have gone by and it does appear that, as stated earlier, the report is gathering dust in some corner of the ministry’s basement.

The issue of purchases of buildings, the sale of buildings and the maintenance of building was also studied and it was found that "there was no evidence of a regular maintenance plan. This presents a poor image of the country. There is also an unnecessary deterioration of valuable assets, resulting in the need for very large sums of valuable foreign exchange for repairs and restoration." The report went on to say, "Funding should be a function of the annual budget process, the committee also recommends that a practical and focused mechanism be established to deal with the issues relating to funding for maintenance".

In this regard it is of relevance to recall the policy followed by the late Lakshman Kadirgamar as foreign minister. His policy was to buy one property each year; this is no more. Had this policy been followed, we would have owned a good number of new properties by now. Buying properties is one thing; maintaining them is another matter. He sought to have a percentage of hypothetical rent put aside for maintenance purpose.

Ambassadors   have many qualifications. But they are not civil engineers with maintenance savvy. Therefore it is necessary for a team of officials (Buildings Dept., FO to visit countries where we have properties at regular intervals (say every three or four years) to ascertain the condition of properties owned by us and  to ascertain what kind of maintenance work is required.

There is today a problem of following procedures to undertake repair work. Missions are required to call for three quotations. These quotations have to be evaluated; depending on the cost involved, either a ministerial or cabinet tender board must meet. Once they decide, approval is granted followed by an allocation and an imprest. Most often, having gone through all   these processes, the imprest never materializes. This for instance was the situation with regard to the roof of the Washington residence. I am reliably informed that they are still waiting for an imprest from early this year. Meanwhile cracks have developed on the walls and the rear section of the building is likely to detach itself from the main structure. The last Ambassador in Washington, in the circumstances understandably moved to a rented building.

Apportioning blame or blaming heads of missions for the state of our residences is both unfair and also without basis, it is time the ministry assessed the value of the properties we own and prepare a plan not only to maintain such properties on a regular basis but to also to purchase properties in cities where we pay huge sums as rents and where we would remain for years to come.

In conclusion I could state without fear of contradiction that none of the premises owned by the GOSL have been maintained over the years.