Funding rural infrastructure development
Saturday, 13 March 2010
The Executive Committee of the National Economic Council (ECNEC) has approved a fund of about Taka 57 billion for a special plan for rural infrastructure development. It was also declared on the occasion that members of parliament (MPs) would get Taka 150 million each from this fund to execute developmental projects of the infrastructural type. In reply to questions from newsmen, the planning minister said the project proposals of the infrastructures have been submitted by the MPs and as per these proposals the Local Government Engineering Department (LGED) would be the executor of these projects. Thus, it is indicated that as the implementing agency, the LGED would be in charge of the entire plan and spending for it.
However, in the absence of elaborations about a truly transparent mechanism to guide it, the plan will continue to create due anxieties about whether it would really serve its intended purpose of rural development. The government will no doubt contend that all elected MPs, regardless of their political affiliations, will be involved in this plan. But considering the composition of the present parliament, the MPs of the ruling alliance will lay claim to a larger size of the allocated fund for undertaking rural infrastructure-type projects under the plan. It was not made clear by the minister what the relationship would be between the LGED and the MPs in executing these projects and also whether the MPs would have a hand, direct or otherwise, in respect of utilisation of fund or carrying out works under it. If the MPs are allowed to have the final say over all the related matters, then the elected representatives of the local government (LG) will have some reasons to feel themselves by-passed. Moreover, spending the money for the entire project fruitfully and efficiently will call for a rigorous scrutiny to ensure transparency and accountability.
In the normal way of doing it, the local government apparatuses should be associated, in one way or other, with the execution of related development activities. But these apparatuses are yet to be used effectively for the purpose of development devolution and administrative decentralisation. The government needs to change sooner than later the old way of running things at the local level. The elected upazilla chairmen and other elected representatives in the LG structure should be given adequate responsibilities to be able to do their expected developmental works effectively. There is no denying that the members of parliament (MPs) are also the elected representatives of the people and they have duties and responsibilities, too, to promote people's well-being at the grassroots. But this must not imply that they should boss over the elected bodies of the LG at the upazillas (sub-districts) in all respects, with the former breathing down the necks of the latter. The LG bodies must be made functionally effective in all possible ways. The upazilla elections were earlier held at huge public costs. The elected persons of the LG bodies must be empowered well to discharge their due responsibilities. Otherwise, elections to LG bodies will turn out to be a waste of resources and finances.
It has crystallized over time that strengthening the local government mechanism and channeling greater resources to it, are very necessary in the context of Bangladesh for truly encouraging useful developmental activities in the countryside. The leadership of the present government do need to give enough thoughts to this issue. It should operationalise at the earliest a proper development-oriented decentralisation plan. They have already been sensitised afresh by the media, think-tank bodies and others to reprioritize things to push up developmental decentralisation higher up in their agenda. All concerned will hope that the government will act upon its electoral pledge, at the earliest, about development devolution and administrative decentralisation.
However, in the absence of elaborations about a truly transparent mechanism to guide it, the plan will continue to create due anxieties about whether it would really serve its intended purpose of rural development. The government will no doubt contend that all elected MPs, regardless of their political affiliations, will be involved in this plan. But considering the composition of the present parliament, the MPs of the ruling alliance will lay claim to a larger size of the allocated fund for undertaking rural infrastructure-type projects under the plan. It was not made clear by the minister what the relationship would be between the LGED and the MPs in executing these projects and also whether the MPs would have a hand, direct or otherwise, in respect of utilisation of fund or carrying out works under it. If the MPs are allowed to have the final say over all the related matters, then the elected representatives of the local government (LG) will have some reasons to feel themselves by-passed. Moreover, spending the money for the entire project fruitfully and efficiently will call for a rigorous scrutiny to ensure transparency and accountability.
In the normal way of doing it, the local government apparatuses should be associated, in one way or other, with the execution of related development activities. But these apparatuses are yet to be used effectively for the purpose of development devolution and administrative decentralisation. The government needs to change sooner than later the old way of running things at the local level. The elected upazilla chairmen and other elected representatives in the LG structure should be given adequate responsibilities to be able to do their expected developmental works effectively. There is no denying that the members of parliament (MPs) are also the elected representatives of the people and they have duties and responsibilities, too, to promote people's well-being at the grassroots. But this must not imply that they should boss over the elected bodies of the LG at the upazillas (sub-districts) in all respects, with the former breathing down the necks of the latter. The LG bodies must be made functionally effective in all possible ways. The upazilla elections were earlier held at huge public costs. The elected persons of the LG bodies must be empowered well to discharge their due responsibilities. Otherwise, elections to LG bodies will turn out to be a waste of resources and finances.
It has crystallized over time that strengthening the local government mechanism and channeling greater resources to it, are very necessary in the context of Bangladesh for truly encouraging useful developmental activities in the countryside. The leadership of the present government do need to give enough thoughts to this issue. It should operationalise at the earliest a proper development-oriented decentralisation plan. They have already been sensitised afresh by the media, think-tank bodies and others to reprioritize things to push up developmental decentralisation higher up in their agenda. All concerned will hope that the government will act upon its electoral pledge, at the earliest, about development devolution and administrative decentralisation.