Despite criticism from various quarters of society, the government has given continuity to the Local Infrastructure Development Program (LIDP), previously known as the Constituency Development Fund. However, most of the lawmakers from across the parties have maintained silence over the resumption of the controversial program.
History of Constituency Development Fund
Constituency Infrastructure Development Fund is funding arrangements that channel money from the central or provincial government directly to electoral constituencies for local infrastructure projects. In Nepal, the program of similar nature was initiated in the name of the Local Development Program at the local level with a grant of Rs 300,000 for the then Village Development Committee by late Finance Minister Bharat Mohan Adhikari in 1994 with the intention of appeasing the members of parliament, which was later continued by finance minister Ram Sharan Mahat by providing a new grant for the MPs as Constituency Development Grant of Rs 400,000 each at a time when there was no elected body in the country. It is not only continued to this day but also extended to the provincial governments as well. Currently, the fund is mobilized under a partnership program.
Nepal started distributing such funds in two different names Constituency Infrastructure Special Program and Constituency Development Program. The constituency Infrastructure Special Program and Constituency Development Program are a particular type of local development programs in which the MP identifies community needs of his/her constituency and control fund’s disbursement. Instead of giving continuity to the two programs of the same nature, it was amalgamated into one as a partnership program from the fiscal year 2019-20. Because of its distributive nature, it is also called pork barrel.
The federal government halted resources for projects under the program in July 2020, and decided to use the remaining funds for Covid response. But the KP Sharma Oli-led government in 2021 released the budget for the program. After widespread criticisms, the then finance minister Yubaraj Khatiwada reduced the allocation for the programme to Rs 40 million in the budget for the fiscal year 2020-21 from the earlier Rs 60 million per constituency. The federal government had allocated Rs 6.6 billion for the program in the fiscal year 2020-21, down from Rs 9.90 billion in 2019-20. The programme was discontinued in the fiscal year 2021-22, but provinces continue to make such allocations.
"I have proposed an allocation of Rs 50 million for the Constituency Infrastructure Development Program to address the local needs of development works through their representatives," said Finance Minister Prakash Sharan Mahat while presenting the Fiscal Budget for 2023/24.
Garlic butter baked pork chops
This program, which was introduced before the implementation of federalism to involve parliamentarians in the development of their constituencies, has been continued even in the current decentralized federal system.
The Constituency Infrastructure Development Program, which was devised to address the requirements at the community level with smaller projects that were unable to be included in the national-level program, contradicts not only with the principle of decentralization but also with the democratic ideals.
Means of Resources Exploitation
As soon as the role of a member of parliament becomes decisive in money distribution programs like MP Development Fund, his party, class, caste, religion all urge for funds leading to a biased decision. In an environment where personal thinking, conscience is decisive, it is more effective to maintain the support of the voters and maintain the party's grip than following the policy and scientific basis.
The program has courted controversy time and again because of rampant misuse, as indicated in its report of the auditor general. However, the government’s decision to give continuity to such programs is just a continuation of the rapid exploitation of resources by political parties. Therefore, this program has undermined the basic demand for proper distribution of resources in federalism.
The Constituency Development Fund has also been made an easy tool for party leaders and activists to earn during elections and for distribution of tickets for the election.
The program has been criticized by various sectors not only due to its distributive nature but also due to the rampant misuse of money amid lack of proper monitoring.
Against Separation of power
It undermines the authority of local government and goes against the spirit of federalism. In a democratic government, MPs have the responsibility of drafting the law while the executive branch is tasked with implementing it. Allowing MPs to directly control the development funds, in effect, changes their function of the MPs from a legislative to an executive one. Having the power to both draft and implement laws tips the power of balance disproportionately towards the legislative branch of government.
Chances of Misuse of Funds
Due to the weak monitoring mechanisms, there are chances of misuse of LDIP funds. The regulation has also allowed lawmakers to implement the projects through the consumer committees without competition. As per the Public Procurement Law, most of the projects under this program have drawn controversy due to weak monitoring and implementation. The report published by the auditor general has also raised questions of its utility, usefulness and rationality.
Diverts lawmaker from their core responsibilities
The Constituency Development Program is less aligned with local development priorities than other local infrastructure projects. Project selection is used to influence the result of the elections. In the run-up to the elections, the ruling party may misuse the resources to ensure victory. The other candidates will find themselves at a disadvantaged position to seek favors of the voters, while the incumbent MPs enjoy the fund through commitment to local projects, investment to local youth clubs and cultural trusts. It was evident during the elections that MPs were selective on funds expenditure ahead of the elections.
Regardless of what is called democracy or republic, its basic meaning is to protect and promote the sovereign rights of the people. The rights of the people are exercised through the people's representatives in the administration of the government.
So, the allocation of public funds should be transparent, accountable, and driven by the needs of the people rather than the self-interest of politicians. To truly understand the values of democracy, it is crucial to reform or abolish the Pork Barrel Fund system, and instead establish mechanisms that prioritize the equitable distribution of resources and the genuine participation of citizens in decision making processes. Only then can we be assured that public funds are utilized for the greater good, fostering a democratic society that truly serves the interests of its people.
