When there are accusations that leaders have 'selfish' collusion with businessmen to control the expenses of party operations and elections, it has been suggested that political parties should be subsidized from the state fund to control it. The Election Commission has already been lobbying for financial grants.

In the draft of the bill prepared by the commission to amend the law on political parties, the party was proposed to receive grants from the state fund. Now, the high-level economic reform suggestion commission formed by the government has also suggested the same. In the report that was submitted to the government last week, it was suggested that there should be a legal arrangement that would not allow the candidates to spend their property in the election and grant the party from the state fund.

Kantipur's brief conversation with Rameshwar Khanal, chairman of the High Level Economic Reform Suggestion Commission on this matter : Why do you suggest subsidies to political parties from state funds? 

There is a kind of general frustration in Nepal, the main reason for which is corruption. All party leaders have been questioned. It is common knowledge that they agree on corruption. The party wanted money rather than why the work of corruption was done together. Financial management of the parties was not correct.

It caused disgust among the citizens. That distaste is not only towards the party or the leader, but towards the system itself. Attacks on the system have increased. The main reason for this is political corruption. Unless political corruption is eradicated, it will be difficult to save democracy. If the achievements given by the constitution such as inclusiveness of federalism cannot be saved, the country will go to another conflict. That is why we have given such suggestions for political purification to save the parties.  After the

, the reason for questioning the party and the leader is the current financial system of the party? 

Unless the institutional capacity is strengthened, it is difficult for any organization to maintain its credibility. In a democracy, public institutions should be strengthened. There will be a change of government in 9/10 months and as soon as the government changes, there will be a trend of running secretaries, interest groups dominating various agencies, transfers and appointments due to money manipulation.

The main reason for this is that parties need money to cover their expenses. The trend of not winning the election continued until the next election was spent on huge sums of money. Thus, the proof of victory is seen by spending heavily. Because of that, the question of democracy itself started to arise. Poor and powerless people would neither come from proportionality nor dare to go directly. After the elections became expensive, the alliance of leaders and parties with some committee financial power increased. Honest people who have been in politics for a long time are getting tired. 

Everyone knows that running a political party requires money. They are raising money from businessmen, from interest groups. It's killing the citizens. Those who provide financial support to parties and leaders get unwanted benefits from the government. Some take contracts. Someone increases the price of their product. They benefit in different ways. The burden is somehow on the part of the citizens. Some limited businessmen are gaining power. Don't let that happen. To prevent that from happening, the concept of giving financial subsidies to the party from taxpayers' money or government funds has been introduced. 

The election has become very expensive, have you suggested to stop it? 

Political party expenses required for operation. Another is election expenses. Extras were needed during elections. In the context of Nepal, the candidates enter the election competition by using their wealth. They would try to get their huge wealth back after putting it in the election. As they have to earn for that, many people join immoral work. One example of this is the indiscriminate spending of the constituency development program budget. There have been things like participating in getting contracts and asking for shares in an unauthorized manner. We have said that it should be stopped. 

We have proposed that candidates should not be allowed to collect donations personally, candidates should not be allowed to use their property in the election. The main expenses incurred in the election are the candidates to convey their identity to the voters. For that, radio, TV, public meeting or any other means should be managed by the Election Commission.

That expenditure should be covered by the state fund. For that, the Commission will determine the specific means, place and time for the candidates. If there is a need for elections, voters should know the contestants and vote for the candidate of their choice. Now huge expenses are being spent to name the candidate. That was not right. 

Then, should the state bear all the election expenses of the candidate? 

is not complete. Part of that should be borne by the political party he is affiliated with. The party had to spend as prescribed in programs like Ghardailo. The only organization that collects donations is the party. The party should be audited by the Auditor General. The Constitution of Nepal has given that right. In that case, the accounts of the parties become transparent. Also, people who don't have money become a way to participate in elections. Participation in democracy increases. More inclusive. If that happens, democracy will not go under the control of money. 

When the party starts getting subsidies from the state fund, doesn't its misuse increase? 

Even if the government does not give money to the political parties, the burden is on the people. If an industry has donated a large amount of money, they are charging it by increasing the price. Political parties are discredited by indiscriminate collection of donations. Collecting random donations has been stopped, the money received will go directly to the party's account and after it will be checked by the Accountant General, the responsible party will be promoted. 

According to your suggestion, how much money is estimated to go from the state fund? 

We have not suggested how much the grant will be. There are 18 million voters in Nepal. 3 billion 600 million is needed after calculating the rate of 200 rupees. That too in a situation where all the voters voted. We specified 200 in the interim report. That amount is not huge for the state. Now, there is a load of more than 10 billion while raising random donations. Citizens have to bear the damage in one way or another. Now the cost to citizens is higher. 100% votes do not fall. It also reduces the liability of the state treasury. For