With Local Government elections scheduled for early May, political parties across Sri Lanka are gearing up for a contest that could reshape grassroots governance. Among them, the Ceylon Workers’ Congress (CWC), led by Jeevan Thondaman, is seeking to reclaim ground following a disappointing performance in the November 2024 General Elections.
In this wide-ranging interview, Thondaman speaks about the setbacks faced by his party, the controversial rejection of nominations in key constituencies, the reasoning behind forming alliances with former political rivals and the deep-rooted systemic challenges faced by estate sector workers—particularly the women. His contention is that without secure land rights, better education and healthcare, the community will continue to be trapped in cycles of poverty, regardless of political promises.
Q: The Local Government elections are scheduled for early May. The CWC and NDF suffered a notable setback in the November 2024 General elections. What went wrong and how are you working to regain political ground?
A: For the first time in our history, our nominations were rejected in Maskeliya and Kothmale—two key constituencies where we traditionally perform well and where there’s a significant voter base. We’ve appealed the decision and are awaiting a ruling from the Court.
This year, more than 420 nomination lists were rejected, and I firmly believe that many were unfairly dismissed. While I have immense respect for the Election Commission, I don’t think the officials overseeing ground-level operations always acted fairly or uniformly. But it’s not my place to comment on legal matters—that’s for the Courts to decide. The problem with legal proceedings is that they take way too long. I believe the Election Commission should consider introducing a mechanism to resolve technical issues without resorting to legal action. With the experience and competence available within the Commission, it’s entirely possible to create an appeal process that offers quicker redress.
That said, the rejection of our nominations has given a clear advantage to the Government and the Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB). I hope the SJB makes good use of that opportunity.
Beyond the nominations issue, we’ve fielded a strong line-up of young, educated candidates—many of whom have been active organisers for over five years. So they bring energy and experience. People are clearly tired of old political faces and are calling for change. We listened. I spoke to our senior members and urged them to step aside and support the next generation. They agreed and as a result, we now have a large cohort of young candidates ready to lead.
Q: You’re also contesting in collaboration with several other parties. Can you tell us more about these alliances and the reasoning behind them?
A: In some constituencies, we’re running as the CWC under the Cockerel symbol. But in others, we’re collaborating with the SJB, the United National Party (UNP), and the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP). These are strategic decisions made at the grassroots level based on local dynamics.
Q: But your party has had public disagreements with politicians from these very same parties. If the country is asking for a clean break from traditional politics, isn’t forming such alliances a return to the old ways that voters are rejecting?
A: Let’s be honest—politicians from all sides know each other well. Even President Anura Kumara Dissanayake has been on friendly terms with many current Opposition members. The media and certain politicians need to stop misleading the public with this idea of eternal enemies in politics. Behind closed doors, there are no such divisions.
I’m not accountable to someone reading a newspaper in Colombo who calls me a frog for switching allegiances. I’m accountable to the people I represent. In 2019, some seven million voters supported Gotabaya Rajapaksa. Many of those same people voted for President Dissanayake and the NPP in 2024. If voters are free to change their minds, why can’t politicians?
I must do what’s best for my community. Most Sri Lankans don’t understand the history or reality of the Indian-origin Tamil community. They see poverty and assume the Thondamans are to blame, without understanding the historical injustices we’ve endured.
Yes, estate communities face enormous challenges—and not just in Sri Lanka. I’m not saying that my family is above criticism, but we’ve remained consistent while others have come and gone. Four generations of my family have been elected. That speaks to a legacy of trust and service.
At the end of the day, I want real solutions for my people. And to achieve that, I can’t be chained to political loyalty. Importantly, we’re not contesting this election with the ruling party—we’re working with opposition parties. What’s wrong with that?
Q: The estate sector is known for its inequity, lagging behind all communities in the country economically, socially and culturally. Since your family has long led the estate sector community, critics argue it’s fair to question what exactly the CWC has delivered. What’s your response to that?
A: The Thondamans haven’t held power for 200 years. The CWC has existed for 85 years, and our political engagement must be viewed in context. In 1948, despite our major contribution to the economy, our community had its citizenship revoked. At that time, Sri Lanka had no garment industry, no IT sector—just only tea alone. And it was my people who plucked the tea. Neither the Sinhalese, the Northern Tamils, nor the Muslims wanted to do that type of work.
People today praise the Srima-Shastri Pact, but between 1964 and 1981, hundreds of thousands of people were sent back to India—many against their will. Those who returned are worse off today. According to the Pact, only those who voluntarily opted to go should have been repatriated, but that wasn’t the reality. Voting rights for Indian-origin estate Tamils only came much later.
Let’s also be clear: my family didn’t enter politics to make money. Saumyamoorthi Thondaman’s father, who founded the CWC, was one of the wealthiest men in Sri Lanka. He owned 6,500 hectares of land. He sold it all to build a political movement for our people. That’s our foundation. Today, there are politicians accused of pocketing millions in State funds—our names are not on those lists. Others have claimed Rs. 95 million for damage to private properties. We haven’t claimed a cent.
If people truly care about improving conditions in the estates, they need to stop scapegoating and start working together.
Q: What, in your view, is the most practical and lasting solution to uplift the estate sector community?
A: Land rights. That’s the cornerstone. Building houses is not a feasible solution. There are 176,000 families in need of houses. The Government can only build a few hundred homes each year. The Indian housing project covers 14,000 houses. Even if we built 1,000 houses annually, it would take 200 years to meet the demand. Plus, each house costs around Rs. 3 million. Do we have that kind of resources?
It’s not about roads, hospitals, roofing sheets, or even houses. Just grant them ownership of the land they currently live on—not tea plantation land or roadside land, but the plots where the line rooms stand. If they have a title Deed, they can build, develop and live with dignity.
Right now, people are being strung along with populist rhetoric: handouts, subsidies, promises of houses. But these aren’t permanent fixes. True, lasting change comes through land ownership, quality education and investment in healthcare.
I’ve seen families who receive houses but can’t afford to maintain them or pay for basic utilities.
We also need a shift in mindset. In Sri Lanka, people expect everything for free. We’re perhaps the only country where people pursue higher education just to secure a Government job. We have 1.4 million Government workers, though we really only need around 400,000. Most of them have nothing to do.
When I served as Minister of Water Resources, I had 1,100 water meter readers. They’d ride bicycles, take down readings—often incorrect ones—and submit faulty data. Their salary was Rs. 150,000 per meter reader. That’s more than what many graduates earn. And these were all political appointments. When I took over, the Water Board had 12,300 employees—only 6,500 were actually needed. I reduced that number to 8,000. This is the state of our public sector.
Out of Sri Lanka’s 207,000 hectares of plantation land, if we give just 10 perches per family, we’d only need around 4,500 hectares. It’s a small, manageable ask. We just need the political will to carry this out.
Q: You speak about political will. The estates were/are represented by several regionalist parties for close to five decades now and there have always been ministers from these parties. Why have they failed to convince previous Governments to implement these changes?
A: Because the plantation companies are immensely powerful. They have the money and they fund political campaigns. That’s the hard truth. Change will take place but it will be slow. However, change will be fast if every political party works together.
Q: So you are ready to support the Government if they come up with concrete solutions to the problems faced by the estate sector?
A: Yes, we would not hesitate to support any endeavour that will help the people. However, they have not appointed a Cabinet Minister from the estate sector. I wish they had given a Cabinet portfolio to someone from Nuwara Eliya, even a Sinhala person.
Q: Research shows women in the estate sector are disproportionately affected by domestic violence, low educational attainment and poor working conditions. What are the structural issues behind this?
A: The biggest problem women in the estates face is the lack of dignity in their work. People see photographs of them eating seated on the ground, walking barefoot, or working without any safety gear and they blame the Government.
But the reality is that the Government doesn’t have the legal authority to intervene. The estates are managed by Regional Plantation Companies (RPCs) in the private sector. The land is leased to them and they make the decisions.
Women make up 74 percent of the estate workforce. Yet there are no basic facilities—no toilets, no shelters, no water points—where they work. If you ask the RPCs, they’ll say they can only build amenities near the line rooms, not in the fields. They also often refuse to support welfare projects.
I started the Field Room Project—a 100 to 200 square foot facility with drinking water, toilets, changing areas and a dining space. The Government offered to cover 30 percent of the cost and asked the RPCs to handle the rest. After prolonged negotiations, they agreed to cover 50 percent.
But midway, they changed their minds and capped their contribution at 30 percent. In the end, the Government had to pay the entire cost. And when these facilities were opened, the RPCs took credit. Every past Government has experienced this—and so will this one.
We must restore dignity to women through proper facilities, secure land rights and better education for their children. That’s how we reduce domestic abuse and alcoholism.
Q: In Parliament last week, Deputy Minister Sundaralingam Pradeep said the Saumyamoorthi Thondaman Memorial Foundation had been audited and raised concerns about its operations. The Government also evicted Senthil Thondaman, your relative from a bungalow owned by a plantation company. What’s your response?
A: The NPP came to power promising to transform the political culture. They are now in a position to act. If they believe we’ve misused public resources, they’re free to investigate and take action. There’s no use making empty allegations in Parliament. Just act—if you have proof.
