KATHMANDU, March 12: The Economic Procedure and Fiscal Responsibility Bill (First Amendment), 2081 has been tabled in the House of Representatives.
Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Bishnu Prasad Paudel presented the bill during today's meeting of the lower house of the Federal Parliament.
Responding to queries from lawmakers who had submitted a notice of protest, Minister Paudel argued that it is unconstitutional to suggest that the federal government should only formulate laws while all development work is assigned to the provincial government.
"The idea that the federal government should only make laws and delegate all development work to the provincial government may sound appealing at first. However, the country cannot progress in this way. We have a three-tier government, and each level has been given executive, legislative, and judicial powers," he said.
DPM and Finance Minister Paudel added that the government would proceed with discussions on tax-related policies while preparing the upcoming fiscal budget.
Lawmakers Prabhu Sah, Prakash Jwala, Prem Suwal, Chitra Bahadur KC, Devendra Poudel, and Narayani Sharma had registered a notice of protest against the proposal seeking permission to introduce the Economic Procedure and Fiscal Responsibility (First Amendment) Bill, 2081.
Sah criticized the government for failing to provide benefits to the people despite collecting taxes, while Jwala accused it of ignoring the parliament, parliamentary committees, and lawmakers.
Suwal emphasized the need for the younger generation to be cultured and disciplined to ensure transparency in economic procedures. He also mentioned the recent vandalism of the office of the Dean of the Institute of Science and Technology by students associated with a ruling party.
Chitra Bahadur KC demanded that the country's economic development be implemented in a proportional manner.
Devendra Poudel opposed the bill, arguing that it diminishes the role of the Planning Commission.
Narayani Sharma objected to the government's decision to introduce the bill through an ordinance without completing the necessary procedures, especially when the Economic Procedure and Financial Responsibility Bill was already under discussion in the parliamentary committee.
Despite the protests, the House rejected the notice of opposition to the bill by a majority vote.
(RSS)