During the pre-budget discussion, Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Vishnu Paudel expressed the view that the plans of the federal government are lower than those of the consumer committee. The schemes of the previous government were smaller in nature than the scope of the municipality and they had promised not to bring any scheme smaller than 3 crores.

I was encouraged by the finance minister's view that small schemes are a hindrance to the dynamics of federalism. Almost all the federal governments formed after 2074 have brought programs and plans to reduce the working area of the state and local levels. I had constantly raised my voice that the budget should not be brought in that way. I did 'lobbying' in federal parliament, government and other relevant bodies. I wrote dozens of articles in this daily.

When I was a member of the National Assembly, I led resolutions on the implementation of state and local jurisdictions. The meeting of the National Assembly held on May 19, 2079 unanimously decided and directed the government to implement the resolution proposal which has 15 points including the need to end the duplication between the levels of the government and the financial transfer according to the responsibilities.

2079 The meeting of the Council of Ministers on October 28 made an action plan for the implementation of federalism based on the resolution and sent it to the Parliamentary Special Committee for Federalism Implementation Study and Monitoring. It has not happened as per the action plan.

A special committee on the implementation of federalism was formed on May 20, 2079 under my coordination with the representation of all political parties in the National Assembly. The committee recommended 99 points in 13 thematic areas including political federalism, administrative federalism, financial federalism. The first point of recommendation relates to the review of the work detailing report.

Likewise, the 85th point of the recommendation is related to determining the limits of federal and state plans. According to the limit determination, the federal government will not implement projects smaller than 150 million in road infrastructure until the federal government determines the national pride and inter-regional and the state government determines the clear basis and criteria for the selection and implementation of provincial pride and inter-municipal level projects.

Similarly, the limit of other projects is Rs. 5 crores to 7 crores. 20 million for road infrastructure in the province and 5 million for others. While determining the limits, the committee did it based on the opinion and advice of the officials of the National Planning Commission, Ministry of Finance, State Planning Commission, State Ministry of Economic Affairs.

Constitutionally, the levels of government are independent and autonomous. They reserve the right to make standards for plan implementation. However, due to the fact that all three levels of government are implementing the same schemes, there was/is widespread misuse of resources and resources. In such a situation, the committee decided the limits with the intention that the levels of government should make the criteria for the implementation of the schemes themselves, otherwise implement the recommendations of the special committee.

In parliamentary practice, the government is accountable to the parliament. It is the responsibility of the Government to implement the instructions/recommendations of the Parliament. Again, it was a recommendation made by a committee consisting of representatives of all political parties represented in Parliament. It is customary for MPs representing the committee to give opinions only after consulting the party.

In the meeting of the National Assembly on 16th Chait 2080, the then Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal Prachanda promised to implement the recommendations of the committee with sincerity. The meeting of the Council of Ministers on November 11, 2080 formulated the basis and criteria for project classification 2080 and set the limit of infrastructure development projects at Rs. 3 crore has been determined.

The recommendation of the special committee was 150 million. However, the government set a limit of only 3 crores. The federal government is to implement projects of national pride and strategic importance. Some friends said that the limit should be set at 1 billion. However, we accepted it because of the proposal of the then vice-chairman of the Planning Commission, Vishwa Paudel, that we should start with 150 million. However, even when the government decided 30 million, I did not feel inferior. It was said that it would have been implemented only.

The government made a decision but did not implement it. The Federal Ministries started enjoying the thousand/lakh schemes. In fact, this is a shameful situation. Finance Minister Bishnu Paudel brought the standard of 3 crores by the previous government. But did not implement. When I said that I would implement it and show it, my light of hope was lit. 

Before the budget was presented in the parliament, I met with Finance Minister Paudel twice in his office. In the first meeting, I asked him if he would really enforce the limit of 3 crores. I do what he says I will do. He said not to ask questions like journalists. Instead, he asked for written suggestions regarding the budget. I gave the report of the Special Committee on Implementation of Federalism of the National Assembly and everything is in the report. Implement its recommendations.

After a few days, Prakash Panth, executive director of the 'Federalism and Localization Center', and I gave him more than four dozen suggestions covering matters of concern at the state and local levels. In the suggestions, the principle that work should be followed by price, institutional structure, etc., should be transferred based on the responsibilities of the provincial and local levels, according to the spirit of federalism, the organization structures of the association should be cut down heavily, all kinds of grants flowing to the provincial and local levels should be brought under the jurisdiction of the National Natural Resources and Finance Commission, and the portion of the financial equalization subsidy received by the provincial and local levels should be increased in proportion to the budget.

Similarly, the tendency of federal ministries and agencies to set up projects/projects that affect the jurisdiction of the state and local levels should be stopped, the federal government should not implement small projects except large projects of national pride, strategic importance and interregional nature, the limit of 30 million should be followed literally, the leader and minister-oriented plan distribution process should be ended, and balance should be maintained in the budget distribution.

Similarly, due to the problems of land acquisition and infrastructure construction at the state and local levels, they should be resolved, arrangements should be made to name the buildings and infrastructure transferred to the states under the name of the state government, and the situation of going to the lion's palace to ask for employees from the municipality should be put an end to.

As the minister said, the issue of the federal government not implementing schemes smaller than 3 crores came up in the budget speech book. However, unfortunately, the finance minister's commitment was not seen in the ministerial allocation booklets. The news of 'scattered budget in retail projects' started to be published.

Bimal Khatiwada wrote the news in this daily on June 2, that the news is "Unfortunately in the federal budget: 4,000 projects in urban development alone". I did not ask the minister after thinking whether he would really implement the limit of 3 crores. I assumed that the ministers would break it down when they understood it in different subject ministries.

There was also a situation that could be controlled through the Line Ministry Budget Information System (LMBIS) if the finance minister was really determined. In the matter of 3 crores, I understand that the other relevant ministers have been a little more dishonest than the finance minister. However, since there is a lot of news about the 3 crore question, maybe it will improve next year.

The news that most of the budget is in the constituencies of the Prime Minister, Finance Minister and Subject Minister like the retail projects in the budget also came in all the media. The meeting of the House of Representatives was worth watching. Whether it is the ruling party or the opposition, almost all MPs strongly opposed the government. Nepali Congress MP Kancha Lama told Finance Minister and Urban Development Minister that you should lose in the next election, even if you don't see it in Parliament again.

It is a long tradition that most of the budget goes to the constituencies of prime ministers, ministers and powerful leaders. However, in the last 2/3 years, the capriciousness of the ministers has crossed the limit. All the ministers except Ekadha are vacant. They consider the budget built from the tax revenue collected from the blood and sweat of Nepali citizens as their grandchild. Regarding the budget disbursement preferences, I also spoke to the secretaries of some ministries. However, the minister's secretariat took over the LMBIS, and on the contrary expressed regret that the budget could not be kept even for the plans that came from the participatory plan selection method and were identified by the ministry itself. This is also a matter of concern in budget distribution. 

The arbitrariness of the ministers is being done in the budget. Plans have been distributed even in the name of MPs. This has reduced the accountability of the government to the parliament. According to Ministry of Finance sources, plans have been distributed even in the name of MPs of the National Assembly.

When MPs are sold in the name of schemes, they cannot point fingers at the government. Finger pointing by some MPs as a few exceptions is a different matter. Distribution of schemes should be balanced. No one wants to have a balance in the province based on demographic, geographical, social, economic infrastructure development conditions. 

The disease of federal budget deviation has also moved to the provinces. The budget was concentrated in the constituencies of the chief minister and ministers, the distribution of plans was divided between the ruling party and the opposition, and the news that the ministers themselves captured the budget in an election style also came prominently in the media including this daily. Although the selection of

schemes is said to be done by the Project Bank, they are in a state of inactivity. Despite the fact that no budget will be allocated to schemes that are not entered in the project bank of the National Planning Commission, hundreds of schemes are outside the project bank. According to the officials of the Commission, the budget cannot be distributed in projects outside the Project Bank. However, commission officials complain that the role of the commission has been ignored in planning and implementation. 

Let's have a general discussion about how favorable the 2082/83 budget is to the state and local levels. According to the constitution, the provincial and local levels have many responsibilities. More than 60 percent of the work responsibility of the former unitary system is at the provincial and local levels. If the constitution is to be truly followed, the majority of the budget should be at the provincial and local levels. But, in reality, this is not the case. The budget is kept in the association itself under various pretexts. In proportion to the budget, the equalization grant should be increased and is decreasing. 

Grants other than conditional grants are in proportion to the total budget. In 2075/76, it was 7.20 percent for the local level and 4.59 percent for the province. In the 2082/83 budget it is 5.54 percent and 3.42 percent respectively. Equalization Grants In 2075/76, it was 6.44 percent and 3.83 percent for local and provincial respectively. Now it is 4.53 percent and 3.09 percent respectively. The total subsidy of the province with conditions is Rs. 1 trillion 23 billion 43 crores in 2075/76.

97.56 billion in the 2082/83 budget. A.W. In 2075/76, the budget of Nepal government was 13 trillion 15 billion. A.W. The budget for 2082/83 is 19 trillion 64 billion. During this period, the budget has increased by about 7 billion. But the province's subsidy has decreased. The constitution considers the province as the carrier of development. However, the federal government is not ready to accept it. Instead of increasing the financial resources, they are decreasing them. The portion of the allocated equalization grant is also reduced from time to time. 

When discussing from the point of financial transfer, the budget is not favorable to the provincial and local levels. Ministries and agencies of the Singh Darbar should gradually reduce the organizational structure and send down the financial resources associated with it. However, on the contrary, there is a situation of increasing the number of employees, bringing plans and programs by reducing the work area of the provincial and local levels, and reducing the authority of the lower level in the name of various projects.

Finally, the federal government must strictly enforce its commitment not to implement small schemes. Participation, transparency and regional balance should be ensured in budget allocation. The plan should be implemented through the Project Bank based on the need for expenditure, the state of revenue mobilization, the state of social and economic infrastructure, etc. The trend of leader-oriented budget scattering should be stopped. Federal Ministries should stop dividing the jurisdiction of the provincial and local levels through plans and programs and transfer their structures and resources down.