Fair return for a nation that invests in its youth

Sri Lanka is bleeding talent. Each year thousands of graduates walk out of our state universities with degrees fully funded by the taxpayer, only to walk straight into foreign embassies, recruitment agencies and overseas job markets. Doctors, engineers, IT professionals and academics trained at public expense are leaving in record numbers. While no one can begrudge an individual’s desire for a better life, the uncomfortable truth is that this unchecked brain drain is deeply unfair to a country that invested in them at a time it can least afford to lose its brightest minds.

Successive governments have lamented the exodus, yet very little has been done to address it structurally. Incentives, appeals to patriotism and temporary policy tweaks have failed. It is time for the government to take a firmer and fairer approach. Making it mandatory for graduates from state universities, including medical doctors, to serve the country for at least ten years is no longer a radical idea. It is a necessary one.

Sri Lanka’s free education system is one of its greatest achievements. From primary school to university, the state absorbs the cost of infrastructure, salaries, equipment, scholarships and training. A medical graduate does not emerge by chance. It takes years of public investment, hospital resources and the labour of senior professionals. The same applies to engineers trained using state laboratories or IT graduates educated using public funds. When these graduates migrate immediately after qualifying, the return on investment for the nation is zero.

At a time when the public health system is stretched to breaking point, the irony is painful. Rural hospitals are understaffed. Specialist clinics are cancelled due to a lack of personnel. Yet freshly qualified doctors are leaving in droves, often before they have meaningfully served local communities. The taxpayer who funded their education continues to queue at overcrowded hospitals, wondering how a system that produced such talent cannot retain it.

The argument that compulsory service violates personal freedom must be weighed against the collective right of a nation to benefit from its own investment. No one is being asked to work without pay or dignity. Graduates would be employed, remunerated and gain valuable experience. Many countries already operate similar models. Bonded service periods exist in Singapore, Australia, India and even the United Kingdom in certain publicly funded training schemes. Sri Lanka would not be reinventing the wheel. A mandatory ten year service requirement does not mean locking graduates in or denying them future opportunities. It simply ensures that the country receives a reasonable return before individuals move on. After a decade of service, graduates would be free to migrate, pursue higher education abroad or enter the private sector with a clear conscience and a contribution made.

However, compulsion alone will not work if working conditions remain poor. This policy must be accompanied by serious reforms. The government must ensure fair salaries, transparent promotions and decent working environments. Doctors posted to remote areas must be given housing, security and educational facilities for their children. Engineers and IT professionals must be given opportunities to work on meaningful national projects rather than being buried in bureaucracy.

Another option is a structured buy out system. Those who wish to leave earlier should be allowed to repay the full cost of their education in installments. This would at least allow the state to recover part of its investment. Such funds could then be channelled into strengthening universities, expanding intake and improving facilities.

The private sector too must be brought into this conversation. Public private partnerships can offer competitive local opportunities that reduce the lure of overseas markets. Research grants, innovation hubs and start up incentives can keep talent engaged at home rather than exporting it.

The government must also communicate this policy clearly to students at the point of entry. Transparency is key. Those entering state universities should do so knowing the responsibilities that come with the privilege. Free education is not an entitlement without obligation. It is a social contract between the individual and the nation.

Critics will argue that forcing graduates to stay will only breed resentment. But resentment already exists among taxpayers who feel cheated by a system that educates professionals for export. The social divide between those who receive free higher education and those who fund it through taxes but never benefit from it is growing.

Sri Lanka cannot continue to subsidise the human resource needs of wealthier nations while its own systems collapse. National development is not possible without human capital. Roads, ports and policies mean little if the people trained to run them are elsewhere.

A mandatory service requirement is not about punishment. It is about fairness, responsibility and survival. If the government is serious about arresting the brain drain, it must move beyond the rhetoric and take decisive action. The cost of doing nothing is simply too high for a country already struggling to rebuild itself.