Lies and ADP projects
Wednesday, 13 February 2008
THE public sector development planning in Bangladesh has been marked by slow pace of project execution and consequent downsizing of the Annual Development Programmes (ADPs) at the fag end of every financial year. The resource constraints, at times, have forced the government to drop a few projects of low priority from the ADPs. Indications were there from the competent authorities that the ADP for the current fiscal would not be any exception. But in reality the situation this fiscal appears to be worse than that of the past years as far as implementation of the ADP is concerned. During the first half of the current fiscal the project implementation rate being as low as 20 per cent evoked sharp reaction from the Chief Adviser as well as the Finance and Planning Adviser. Such a poor rate of project execution at a time when people needed employment opportunities more than before is bound to be counted as an indicator of poor economic management. This, actually, is contrary to the expectation of the most people who aspire to see better project selection and higher rate of implementation of the same under a non-political and neutral caretaker administration.
The government has already downsized the current fiscal's ADP by Tk. 40 billion and it is most likely that the same exercise would be repeated to meet unforeseen expenditures on account of increased subsidies on food, fuel and fertiliser. It has, reportedly, decided to double the size of subsidy amount allocated in the original budget. Against the backdrop of poor project implementation, the disclosure made by the Finance Adviser at a seminar the other day that executing agencies are submitting inaccurate information about progress in development project implementation is bound to raise serious concern among all stakeholders. Quoting from a report prepared by the Implementation, Monitoring and Evaluation Division (IMED) of the Planning Ministry, the Finance Adviser pointed out that a project had reported its implementation at 65 per cent when the actual rate of execution was between 5.0 and 6.0 per cent.
The disclosure by none other than the Finance Adviser himself is bound to raise questions about the reliability of the data on development project execution. Under- or over-reporting by government agencies, particularly when it comes to their performance, has been a common practice. But dishing out such grossly cooked up information about development project implementation highlights the malaise that has gone deep into the entire public sector development process. There have been a few attempts to strengthen the IMED. But the Division does not have adequate qualified manpower and logistics necessary to properly monitor and evaluate the development projects, particularly the ones of national importance. Besides, the officials who are found negligent of timely and proper implementation of development projects need to be punished. While taking measures to this effect, the government should also try to find out the reasons for unusual drop in the rate of development project implementation. It could be that officials concerned are deliberately trying to avoid their responsibilities fearing any kind of action later. If it turns out to be so, the government should try to dispel such fear and encourage them to devote to the implementation of development projects expeditiously. In a situation where investment in private sector has slowed down for a variety of economic and non-economic factors, the public sector investment ought to play a bigger role in creating jobs, seasonal or otherwise, particularly under the current state of the economy.
The government has already downsized the current fiscal's ADP by Tk. 40 billion and it is most likely that the same exercise would be repeated to meet unforeseen expenditures on account of increased subsidies on food, fuel and fertiliser. It has, reportedly, decided to double the size of subsidy amount allocated in the original budget. Against the backdrop of poor project implementation, the disclosure made by the Finance Adviser at a seminar the other day that executing agencies are submitting inaccurate information about progress in development project implementation is bound to raise serious concern among all stakeholders. Quoting from a report prepared by the Implementation, Monitoring and Evaluation Division (IMED) of the Planning Ministry, the Finance Adviser pointed out that a project had reported its implementation at 65 per cent when the actual rate of execution was between 5.0 and 6.0 per cent.
The disclosure by none other than the Finance Adviser himself is bound to raise questions about the reliability of the data on development project execution. Under- or over-reporting by government agencies, particularly when it comes to their performance, has been a common practice. But dishing out such grossly cooked up information about development project implementation highlights the malaise that has gone deep into the entire public sector development process. There have been a few attempts to strengthen the IMED. But the Division does not have adequate qualified manpower and logistics necessary to properly monitor and evaluate the development projects, particularly the ones of national importance. Besides, the officials who are found negligent of timely and proper implementation of development projects need to be punished. While taking measures to this effect, the government should also try to find out the reasons for unusual drop in the rate of development project implementation. It could be that officials concerned are deliberately trying to avoid their responsibilities fearing any kind of action later. If it turns out to be so, the government should try to dispel such fear and encourage them to devote to the implementation of development projects expeditiously. In a situation where investment in private sector has slowed down for a variety of economic and non-economic factors, the public sector investment ought to play a bigger role in creating jobs, seasonal or otherwise, particularly under the current state of the economy.