ඉවරා.......යි

[Sri_Sampath]

මම දන්නේ නෑ මචං උඹේ අදහස මොකක්ද කියලා මේක ගැන. මගේ මතය තමයි පාදෙණි‍ය ගෘප් එක GMOA එක කෑවා. වෛද්‍ය සදාරචාරය නැති කලේ එපිටකඩුවලා, නවින්ලා ඔක්කොම එකතු වෙලා. වෛද්‍යවරැ ගැන මිනිස්සුන්ගේ අපැහැදීමක් ඇතිවුනෙත් එයාල දේශපානයක් කරන්න ගත්ත නිසා.

 

[shaminda peiris]

Meka eththa kiyala sureda? Mun me rajaye niwedana gahanne fullscap kolawalada

 

[dath kimbula]

ඉවරායි නෙමෙයි බම්බුව. ඔච්චර ඉක්මනට සතුට සමරන්න එපා ලොක්කා. අවසානයක් දකින්න ඕනේ. අනේ හැබෑවට මටනම් විලි ලැජ්ජයි. EXCO එකේ පොන්නයෝ ‍රැල මේ සම්බන්ධව කිසි දෙයක් නොකල එකට. අපිත් GMOA එකේ මෙම්බර්ස්ලා විදිහට හෙලුවෙන් හෙට ඉස්පිරිතාලෙට යන්න හිතෙනවා. පොඩි කොල්ලෝ නිසයි මේක මෙහෙම මේ තත්වෙට ආවේ.

අනේ ද කියන්නේ.....
වැඩක් නැත කතා කොට.....

 

[fakerandi]

There have been many interpretations of what happened yesterday for the fast to stop and hopefully the decision to call off the class boycott.
I offered clarifications on the section on the abolition of SAITM as per the President’s communique on the solution to the SAITM crisis. There were suspicions on the ‘abolition’ due to various statements by various people. But it is clear in the 29 October statement that (abolition) in fact was the position. That all assets and liabilities as well as students will be taken over by a new non-state and not-for-profit entity upon agreement of current shareholders, financial institutions that have lent money and the to be agreed new entity. And thereafter SAITM will no longer exist. I explained that all current SAITM students will be absorbed to a special purpose vehicle of sorts that will have a specified sunset clause. And that they will continue their education over the remaining period. No new students would be admitted to this ‘sunset’ entity. After all current students complete their education, it would cease to exist.
I was pointedly asked the question as to whether the Government was trying to mislead the students by saying SAITM will be abolished but in fact attempting to establish a new entity and it was just a change of name? I said that I was not here to mislead nor to lie; that the government position as articulated in the communique is to establish a non-state not-for-profit entity that meets the (to be legislated) Minimum Standards. But that is separate from abolishing SAITM. Both will happen over a period of time.
It was indeed a mature political discussion where we all agreed on the abolition of SAITM. Of course certain groups (who oppose any non state higher education at all) were not in agreement of the envisaged medium term outcome. But we agreed that in a democracy we have the privilege to express differing views.
I thank everyone who assisted us in resolving this issue. I hope this matter is now behind us.

https://www.facebook.com/harshadesi...1835.322161727913812/1126992474097396/?type=3

 

[amilapradeep100]

There have been many interpretations of what happened yesterday for the fast to stop and hopefully the decision to call off the class boycott.
I offered clarifications on the section on the abolition of SAITM as per the President’s communique on the solution to the SAITM crisis. There were suspicions on the ‘abolition’ due to various statements by various people. But it is clear in the 29 October statement that (abolition) in fact was the position. That all assets and liabilities as well as students will be taken over by a new non-state and not-for-profit entity upon agreement of current shareholders, financial institutions that have lent money and the to be agreed new entity. And thereafter SAITM will no longer exist. I explained that all current SAITM students will be absorbed to a special purpose vehicle of sorts that will have a specified sunset clause. And that they will continue their education over the remaining period. No new students would be admitted to this ‘sunset’ entity. After all current students complete their education, it would cease to exist.
I was pointedly asked the question as to whether the Government was trying to mislead the students by saying SAITM will be abolished but in fact attempting to establish a new entity and it was just a change of name? I said that I was not here to mislead nor to lie; that the government position as articulated in the communique is to establish a non-state not-for-profit entity that meets the (to be legislated) Minimum Standards. But that is separate from abolishing SAITM. Both will happen over a period of time.
It was indeed a mature political discussion where we all agreed on the abolition of SAITM. Of course certain groups (who oppose any non state higher education at all) were not in agreement of the envisaged medium term outcome. But we agreed that in a democracy we have the privilege to express differing views.
I thank everyone who assisted us in resolving this issue. I hope this matter is now behind us.

https://www.facebook.com/harshadesi...1835.322161727913812/1126992474097396/?type=3

ඔය තියෙන්නෙ මහත්තයෝ... දැන් සැපද????