PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
Take the example of project implementation. We know for fact that projects get delayed and are seldom implemented in time. Many projects start just before the rainy season creating opportunities for financial mismanagement in the name of budgetary implementation. Naturally, work quality is compromised and corruption becomes a way of life for many. Interestingly, the solution to this problem is amazingly simple. Why not introduce a system where release of funds is linked with the quarterly progress report based on a system of program budgeting. This would mean that the concerned ministries would have to prepare their physical and financial targets in a programmed budgeting framework and submit it through the planning commission for approval. Once the program is approved the concerned ministry can immediately go for tendering so that actual construction can start immediately after the end of the rainy season. This is not a new suggestion nor is it rocket science. For all practical purposes it is nothing but common sense. Perhaps Mark Twain the famous American humorist and writer is right: Common sense is not all that common. In Nepal it seems that common sense does not work for the simple reason that it limits the opportunity for uncommon corruption.
An iron triangle consisting of “forward looking “politicians, bureaucrats and businessmen is gaining strength and the common people have to bear the cost of this unholy alliance.
The same logic outlined above applies in the management of public enterprises. Most public enterprises are running at loss and the only efforts that have been made so far is to commission numerous studies, many with the financial support of the bilateral and international agencies. Naturally the studies are full of reasonable suggestions that focus on merit, efficiency and the productivity of resources. In line with this trend the draft report has again repeated the same suggestions with ever greater conviction. But the basic question is: Does any political party in this nation, whether “revolutionary” or otherwise, have the strength and conviction to list merit and economic efficiency as a priority item in their economic agenda? It was widely believed that the Maoist will be different in this respect from other parties. Sadly, the new revolutionary comrades turned out to be more traditional than the so called “traditionalists” that are often projected as the forces of status quo and reaction. During the Maoist rule partisan consideration in major appointments reached new height and loyalty to the party remained the major consideration in economic decisions. It may be of interest to note that in spite of all the rhetoric about radical transformation, revolutionary regimes in the past have turned out to be highly traditional. After the Bolshevik came to power in Russia people were expecting radical change in the management of manufacturing enterprises in line with the idea of “socialization of capital”, however the remedy proposed by Lenin was nothing more than following the cost accounting principles that was a common practice among the capitalist enterprises. As for the structure of governance he boldly declared that “there is absolutely no contradiction between the Soviet democracy (ie, Socialist) and the exercise of dictatorial powers by the individual persons.” Isn’t this a recipe for a traditional form of authoritarian system under the cover of ideology?
USE OF FOREIGN AID
On foreign aid the remedies suggested are again the old prescriptions that have so far been generally ignored. It has been dutifully written in the report that foreign aid should go into projects that are of national priority and the government should be in command in the allocation of resources. And yet we all know that this is not the reality. In fact it seems that these days almost all the diplomatic missions in this country have their own five year development program for Nepal. Most embassies distribute educational scholarship without any knowledge of the government. Diplomatic officials are busy handing out largesse to people in different parts of the country as a part of their development programs or “democracy promotion initiatives” and in many cases the government does not know or does not care about what actually is being promoted. Literally billions of rupees flow through these channels, all in the name of development. And yet we never tire talking and writing about aid coordination and local ownership of the development process citing the Paris declaration on the use of aid as the basis our relationship. It is a nice joke and both the donors and the recipient are well aware of.
THE UNHOLY ALLIANCE
At present, the essential reality of Nepali economy is that there is no incentive for the government to emphasize economic efficiency and merit in economic decisions. After the second people’s movement in 2063 all parties in power have been basically interested not in nation building but in enlarging the financial strength of the party so that it comes handy in the power game of politics. The Maoists have been no exception. The Maoist party has openly declared in national television that guns and money are ultimately the two most important ingredients of power. Naturally, they have no qualms in breaking the rules if it provides new source of funds. A political culture that thrives on impunity is taking roots. Thus, it has become routine for contractors to pay the musclemen of different parties “service money” for having the privilege to take part in the bidding process. Similarly transfer and appointments of officials of both the government and public corporations is up for unofficial bidding and there are increasing indications that the highest bidder gets the job. An iron triangle consisting of “forward looking “politicians, bureaucrats and businessmen is gaining strength and the common people have to bear the cost of this unholy alliance.
(Writer is co-chairman of Rastriya Janashakti Party.)
prakash_dr@hotmail.com
Related story
Early setback for left alliance as Bhattarai decides to quit
