Tussle between MPs and upazila chairmen

The Annual Development Programme (ADP) includes different development projects of the country in a financial year. This is to be implemented through different agencies at various stages. But the misfortune is that the ADP is never executed properly in our country. The prime reasons are various anomalies in the programme, corruption, bribery and inefficiency. Notwithstanding these anomalies, inadequacy of our state infrastructure is not less responsible. The reason is that in a district there exist different interacting forces such as MPs, Upazila Chairmen, Mayors, Deputy Commissioner and Thana Nirbahi Officers. There are widespread lack of co-ordination and malice with regard to responsibilities assigned to different forces for ADP implementation.
The extent of conflict at the upazila level is more acute. As a result, all development programmes are affected from the very approval to the level of implementation. There exist partisan role and whims of certain privileged persons behind the scene. These cause many projects to remain unimplemented. So there is the necessity for removal of lack of co-ordination among the concerned authorities as well as for making infrastructural development by reducing anomalies that exist at personal to institutional level, corruption etc.
There is a tendency in our country that a single individual prefers to do all the jobs. This causes frequent trouble in every field of development activities. But economic development is a necessity. To that end, one of the stages of administrative decentralisation is the empowerment of upazila parishad. Most of the responsible officials of government, semi-government, non-government, autonomous, semi-autonomous orgnisations and institutions, NGOs etc conduct their works centering round the upazila parishad. As a result, the socio-economic development and administrative activities are supposed to be performed as per directives and advice of the concerned upazila parishad. So it is logical that the fund allotted from the ADP should go through the upazila chairman and development works of the upazila should be conducted by the same medium.
Of the three pillars of conducting the affairs of the state such as administration, legislature and judiciary, the MPs directly belong to the legislature with the responsibility of framing laws in the parliament for betterment of the country. On the other hand, being members of the parliamentary committees at the national level, they perform administrative functions also. These are noble jobs. As a result, it is unbecoming of them to be entangled with the allotted funds from the ADP to the upazila. As the upazilas are their electoral constituencies, they may at the most play the role of advisers in development planning of the relevant upazila. MPs may also supervise development activities so that there is no irregularity in project works, but in no case they should involve themselves in utilisation of allotted funds in the implementation of the development process. Over and above, to avoid red tape and unnecessary conflict of interests, use of the ADP fund and the responsibility for implementation of the development projects need to be vested with the upazila chairman, the upazila council to be precise. That will ensure more benefit to the common people of the locality.
For decentralisation of power, the upazila system is laudable. Bureaucratic complicacies in development process are avoided in the truest sense by giving utmost importance and recognition to the power of local government system. As a result, experts say the ADP fund should go to the upazila parishad. The dignity and responsibility of the MPs are much more than that of the upazila chairmen who preside over the upazila parishad only. They should always work and think about the national and international issues. But one cannot approve their race for share of the ADP funds meant for development works of the upazila and the conflict arising therefrom. If such conflicts of interest go to the extreme, the entire people of the upazila are destined to suffer with development works coming to a halt. This usually happens where the upazila chairman and the MP belong to rival political parties. What the people expect from the MPs is that they should act for resolving national and international issues and implement policies for overall welfare of citizens of the country instead of working for cheap popularity. They should gather knowledge on national and international issues and take part in constructive discussions in the parliament for the overall progress of the country and frame laws.
In a country of limited resources like ours what we need is proper and appropriate use of such resources that we have at our disposal. This will prepare the ground for more and more investments for creating job opportunities for millions of jobless people in the country. Under these circumstances, tussle among different interested forces centring round ADP fund will create not only chaos in development process but will also slow down the progress of the country. It is desired that everybody concerned will act accordingly and the ADP fund will go to the authority that is in close contact with the grassroots people. From this point of view, the upazila chairman along with members of his council is the appropriate person to get the ADP funds so that the already backward rural areas could be  developed. That is why experts always give emphasis on strengthening of the local government for socio-economic development of the country.
Therefore, the conflict between the MPs and the upazila chairmen on the use of ADP fund should be resolved or mitigated as soon as possible. Otherwise, proper implementation of the ADP will be hindered.
The writer is a retired Professor of Economics, BCS General Education Cadre.
[email protected]