By Vipula Wanigasekera –

Dr. Vipula Wanigasekera

The recent appointment of the Tourism Advisory Committee by the NPP government has sparked discussion within Sri Lanka’s tourism industry. While the move has been widely publicized, many questions arise regarding its effectiveness, given the government’s initial stance on tourism governance and its stated policy objectives.

The newly formed 14-member committee is undoubtedly well-versed in the industry, with some members personally known to the author. However, despite the initial recognition and publicity, they risk becoming mere pawns in a larger game, with true power concentrated in a select few who ultimately call the shots. The committee is expected to guide the government on strategic and sustainable tourism development in line with the National Tourism Policy. However, the fundamental question remains: what real authority does this committee wield?

The NPP government was highly critical of the existing Tourism Act of 2005 and strongly advocated for its urgent revision. If that is the case, why has this advisory committee been appointed under the very act it deemed inadequate? This contradiction raises concerns about the sincerity of the government’s approach to tourism reform. If the act was considered ineffective, shouldn’t the government have prioritized its revision before forming a committee under its provisions? This inconsistency undermines confidence in the government’s ability to execute its own policy agenda with clarity and conviction.

The fact remains that the advisory committee lacks executive power—it cannot make binding decisions, allocate funds, or even approve a minor financial transaction. Will its recommendations translate into actionable policy, or will they be merely documented in meeting minutes with no tangible outcomes?

The NPP government previously proposed the establishment of a National Tourism Council, intended to unify various entities involved in tourism development, including the Wildlife Department, Forest Department, Archaeological Department, Coast Conservation Department, the Urban Development Authority Etc. Has there been any progress on this initiative? If so, how does it align with the advisory committee’s role? And if not, what is causing the delay in implementing a policy that was championed as a game-changer for tourism coordination?

Even if such a council were formed, significant coordination challenges would persist, as each of these institutions operates under distinct legal frameworks. Simply grouping them under one council does not necessarily resolve the deep-seated bureaucratic hurdles that have long hindered tourism development. Would the new council have legislative backing to enforce cooperation among these entities, or would it be another advisory body with no real authority?

A key pillar of the NPP’s tourism policy was prioritizing the country’s tourism promotion campaign. However, reports now indicate that Sri Lanka’s branding strategy is under review, with suggestions that a complete rebranding exercise for the entire nation is being considered. Does this mean that the initial promotional plans have either been shelved or significantly altered? If so, it casts doubt on the government’s commitment to its own policy initiatives for tourism. If this is true, Sri Lanka risks losing momentum in a highly competitive global tourism market, even if visitor numbers increase annually without a corresponding rise in value-added tourism.

Historically, new governments have often dismissed the work of their predecessors, only to realize later that systemic issues persist beyond political leadership changes. The real test lies in whether the private sector—the true driver of Sri Lanka’s tourism and hospitality industry—can take proactive steps in addressing pressing challenges. Rather than appeasing political leaders, the industry is expected to focus on advocating for meaningful change that addresses fundamental issues such as infrastructure, policy consistency, and global competitiveness. Having held various positions  including board seats, it is futile for some industry professionals to later criticize the administrative functions of the authorities.

The industry is hopeful that the NPP government remains committed to its own policy document rather than resorting to superficial moves under an act it has heavily criticized. If the government genuinely believes in reform, it must explicitly demonstrate consistency between its words and actions.

Discussions between two former Director General of Sri Lanka Tourism prior to elections:

*The writer is a former Diplomat, Tourism Official, Academic in Tourism and Management, Author, YouTuber, Meditation and Reiki Healer