would enable you to enjoy an array of other services such as Member Rankings, User Groups, Own Posts & Profile, Exclusive Research, Live Chat Box etc.. 
Home
Sorry about posting yet another article, but I thought this would be interesting to some of us. Has there been a response from Daily FT?
--------------------------------------------
With reference to Daily FT’s response (published on 9 July 2012) to Opposition Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe’s comments in Parliament on 5 July 2012, he made a further statement on 18 July. Here is the full text of Wickremesinghe’s statement made in Parliament on 18 July:
"I want to raise one issue. On Thursday 5 July (2012) Chief Government Whip (Dinesh Gunawardena) raised a question about a speech that had not been covered in the Daily Mirror. At that time I also referred to a speech that I had made, which had received only one sentence in the Financial Times. If at all it is a question of correcting it. Anyway I find on 9 July there has been a reply and if whatever I said is wrong, they could have corrected it or they could have taken some other position. I don’t mind but I find that this statement involves all the Members of the House. They want to educate all the Members of the House on what the Financial Times has done and about the economy. Now that is completely uncalled for.
If I have said something and they want to talk about me, that is a different matter. I can always reply. So we must stop this habit of the newspapers which feel that they can educate the whole House. I know some of us have been here from the time the economy was opened out and different debates we had. The second round of liberalisation in 1989/90, when the economy had a downturn, had a negative growth in 2001, thereafter how the money were spent, how the economy was handled during the war. Even yesterday (17 July) I made a statement to which Hon. (Dr.) Sarath Amunugama replied. Today (18 July) there was an argument between the Government and the Opposition. So if there is anything more that the Financial Times can contribute other than a swollen head, I am sure that we are more than willing to listen.
Secondly, when a statement is made to say that you want to draw attention to something that is wrong, there is no problem in it as long as it doesn’t amount to misreporting. Firstly they said that it is recently that I started speaking on these issues. I want to tell the Hon. Deputy Speaker I have been speaking about these issues in Sinhalese both outside the House and in the House. It is only recently I addressed this issue in English. Therefore, anyone who reads the Sinhala and Tamil media could have followed it, and I am sorry if the Financial Times Editor and the staff are unable to understand Sinhalese or Tamil.
Secondly, he has said that the charge I made is that these people are covering up the manipulation in the stock exchange and they will not expose it because they are a part of it. He has claimed he had done it and given a whole lot of exposure. But none of them have any reference to the share market being manipulated; it is just a tale of prices and comments. Once they said when the stock exchange was dipping the Browns shares were purchased by the State. There were a few references to the LAUGFS Gas, but nowhere have they said that there was manipulation or that some people suspect it. If they have done that, I have missed it and I would certainly be happy to stand corrected on that matter.
On the same day Monday 9 July when they replied I find that they have also taken two pages to defend the stock exchange in a way that even some of the members of the private sector are quite ashamed of. But I don’t want to go to details on it. As far as I am concerned in the Financial Times or any other business page, there has to be ethics for the journalists, ethics for the editor, and ethics for the directors. If the Financial Times has those ethics, I will be more than happy if they can publish it. Then we can judge their professionalism. Without that we cannot. There are the ethics for Members of Parliament and when we do not follow it everyone shouts from inside the House and outside the House. So if they have the ethics, first publish it. Then we can see whether they have followed it.
When I happened to be travelling to Beijing on a visit, I did meet the Editor of the Financial Times. He was going to the IATA conference on a delegation, which was with the SriLankan Airways (SriLankan Airlines) delegation. There was a representative from the Daily News business page but it is a State enterprise, I will not talk about it and the Editor. SriLankan Airways as you know in this House has made losses. The Government might defend it. We will attack it. But those are issues that have to be discussed in any financial paper. So if you are found travelling on it whether Financial Times paid for the ticket or SriLankan Airways paid for the ticket, I do not know. That is certainly not a position that you should be in. So if they tell their ethics then I would like to certainly judge them by their standard. I do not want take any more of your time.
For people who wanted to educate this House, all I can say on behalf of the House is, the fool who knows that is he is a fool can for that reason be a wise man. But the fool who thinks he is wise is indeed a fool. The second applies to the Editor. With that I conclude."
Editor’s Note
The Daily FT will respond to Opposition Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe’s statement via the Speaker of the House.
---------------------------------
Source: http://www.ft.lk/2012/07/20/ranil-wickremesinghes-statement-in-parliament-about-the-daily-ft/
Cheers!
--------------------------------------------
With reference to Daily FT’s response (published on 9 July 2012) to Opposition Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe’s comments in Parliament on 5 July 2012, he made a further statement on 18 July. Here is the full text of Wickremesinghe’s statement made in Parliament on 18 July:
"I want to raise one issue. On Thursday 5 July (2012) Chief Government Whip (Dinesh Gunawardena) raised a question about a speech that had not been covered in the Daily Mirror. At that time I also referred to a speech that I had made, which had received only one sentence in the Financial Times. If at all it is a question of correcting it. Anyway I find on 9 July there has been a reply and if whatever I said is wrong, they could have corrected it or they could have taken some other position. I don’t mind but I find that this statement involves all the Members of the House. They want to educate all the Members of the House on what the Financial Times has done and about the economy. Now that is completely uncalled for.
If I have said something and they want to talk about me, that is a different matter. I can always reply. So we must stop this habit of the newspapers which feel that they can educate the whole House. I know some of us have been here from the time the economy was opened out and different debates we had. The second round of liberalisation in 1989/90, when the economy had a downturn, had a negative growth in 2001, thereafter how the money were spent, how the economy was handled during the war. Even yesterday (17 July) I made a statement to which Hon. (Dr.) Sarath Amunugama replied. Today (18 July) there was an argument between the Government and the Opposition. So if there is anything more that the Financial Times can contribute other than a swollen head, I am sure that we are more than willing to listen.
Secondly, when a statement is made to say that you want to draw attention to something that is wrong, there is no problem in it as long as it doesn’t amount to misreporting. Firstly they said that it is recently that I started speaking on these issues. I want to tell the Hon. Deputy Speaker I have been speaking about these issues in Sinhalese both outside the House and in the House. It is only recently I addressed this issue in English. Therefore, anyone who reads the Sinhala and Tamil media could have followed it, and I am sorry if the Financial Times Editor and the staff are unable to understand Sinhalese or Tamil.
Secondly, he has said that the charge I made is that these people are covering up the manipulation in the stock exchange and they will not expose it because they are a part of it. He has claimed he had done it and given a whole lot of exposure. But none of them have any reference to the share market being manipulated; it is just a tale of prices and comments. Once they said when the stock exchange was dipping the Browns shares were purchased by the State. There were a few references to the LAUGFS Gas, but nowhere have they said that there was manipulation or that some people suspect it. If they have done that, I have missed it and I would certainly be happy to stand corrected on that matter.
On the same day Monday 9 July when they replied I find that they have also taken two pages to defend the stock exchange in a way that even some of the members of the private sector are quite ashamed of. But I don’t want to go to details on it. As far as I am concerned in the Financial Times or any other business page, there has to be ethics for the journalists, ethics for the editor, and ethics for the directors. If the Financial Times has those ethics, I will be more than happy if they can publish it. Then we can judge their professionalism. Without that we cannot. There are the ethics for Members of Parliament and when we do not follow it everyone shouts from inside the House and outside the House. So if they have the ethics, first publish it. Then we can see whether they have followed it.
When I happened to be travelling to Beijing on a visit, I did meet the Editor of the Financial Times. He was going to the IATA conference on a delegation, which was with the SriLankan Airways (SriLankan Airlines) delegation. There was a representative from the Daily News business page but it is a State enterprise, I will not talk about it and the Editor. SriLankan Airways as you know in this House has made losses. The Government might defend it. We will attack it. But those are issues that have to be discussed in any financial paper. So if you are found travelling on it whether Financial Times paid for the ticket or SriLankan Airways paid for the ticket, I do not know. That is certainly not a position that you should be in. So if they tell their ethics then I would like to certainly judge them by their standard. I do not want take any more of your time.
For people who wanted to educate this House, all I can say on behalf of the House is, the fool who knows that is he is a fool can for that reason be a wise man. But the fool who thinks he is wise is indeed a fool. The second applies to the Editor. With that I conclude."
Editor’s Note
The Daily FT will respond to Opposition Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe’s statement via the Speaker of the House.
---------------------------------
Source: http://www.ft.lk/2012/07/20/ranil-wickremesinghes-statement-in-parliament-about-the-daily-ft/
Cheers!
