As the budget writing process for the upcoming fiscal year gains momentum, newly elected MPs are submitting a list of plans for their respective sectors to the ministry, demanding budget allocations.
We use Google Cloud Translation Services. Google requires we provide the following disclaimer relating to use of this service:
This service may contain translations powered by Google. Google disclaims all warranties related to the translations, expressed or implied, including any warranties of accuracy, reliability, and any implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, and noninfringement.
The majority of new faces in the House have largely displaced the old faces. Along with the old parties, the old working style should also be displaced. However, when it comes to following some distortions, the new ones also seem to consider the old as an ideal.
One reference to this is the scenario of MPs visiting the ministry demanding plans. At a time when the budget writing for the upcoming fiscal year is gaining momentum, the newly elected MPs are submitting a list of plans from their respective fields to the ministry demanding budget allocation.
This clearly shows that MPs have not understood the breadth of their own roles, have not learned from past distortions, have not understood the budget distribution system, have not understood the essence of the orders given by the Supreme Court, and ultimately have not been able to think in accordance with the federal system. The government should discourage the practice of MPs suggesting plans and incorporating them into the budget. A strong government should take a strong stance to establish a system on such issues.
The Ministry of Physical Infrastructure and Transport has already requested budget for 686 projects. Many of them are for road and bridge construction. MPs are also demanding budget for small projects that the National Planning Commission has said should be under the local level.
For example, an allocation of Rs 2 million has been requested for the upgrading of the road from Boudhimai Temple to Brahmasthan in Durga Bhagwati Rural Municipality of Rautahat-1. Rajesh Chaudhary, a Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) MP elected from Rautahat-1, has demanded budget for these and other projects.
In the Ministry of Physical Infrastructure, Devraj Pathak, a Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sansthan MP from Dang-1, Ramesh Kumar Malla, a CPN MP from Salyan, 25, Aren Rai, a Labor Culture MP from Khotang, 22, Bikram Khanal, a Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sansthan MP from Nawalparasi West, 20, Pushpa Kamal Dahal, a CPN MP from Rukum East, 19, and Janakraj Giri, a Congress MP from Bajura, have demanded budget allocation for 18 projects.
For MPs to create pressure to allocate budget for projects they want is a lack of understanding of their own role. The main role of MPs is to formulate policies and laws. It is to monitor the development work done by the government.
It is to hold the government accountable. When MPs come forward saying that they will do the development work that the government should do, there is a contradiction in their roles. MPs are supposed to make policies on what kind of development to do, what projects to prioritize, what areas to prioritize and what projects to put in place that will contribute to balanced development, and create public pressure.
They are supposed to put pressure on the government to comply with them. Therefore, MPs who are currently running ministries to allocate budgets for their desired projects are weakening the dignity of the MP position. It is unnatural for the new party and its MPs to continue this distortion that was strengthened by the old parties and MPs. This needs to end.
This trend of MPs is reminiscent of the past criticized programs such as the MP Development Fund, Local Infrastructure Development Partnership Program, or Parliamentary Constituency Infrastructure Development Program. Bharat Mohan Adhikari, the Finance Minister of the Manmohan Adhikari-led government, presented the budget on 1 Poush 2051 and initiated the process of allowing MPs to spend the budget.
Over time, such programs turned into an area where cadres are kept, the budget is wasted like a drop of water, and corruption is rampant. After that, the voice to stop giving budget to MPs has become stronger. The Supreme Court had also emphasized the issue of good governance in its interim order issued on 6 Bhadra 2080, asking not to implement the parliamentary constituency infrastructure development program.
Since then, the budget has been stopped directly to MPs. But the roundabout way of keeping the budget for projects according to the wishes of the MPs has been adopted. This time too, the essence of the MPs visiting the ministry is the same. The government should publicly send a message that this trend of MPs is unacceptable.
The 'National Project Bank Standard 2081' implemented by the National Planning Commission to allocate budget only for projects worth more than Rs 30 million is in practice. According to the standard, only projects worth more than Rs 10 million in the provinces and small amounts at the local level can be kept in the project bank.
When MPs put pressure for piecemeal projects, this standard is violated. There is also a three-tier government, where the local government is for small development works. The provincial government is for medium-sized projects.
It is not desirable for a government that should lead big policies and be involved in big budget projects to get involved in small projects. This is also not appropriate from the point of view of monitoring and agile implementation. Despite this, budget allocations were made for small projects in the past. The budget for the fiscal year 2082/83 also included a scheme of Rs. 1,000.
For example, 20 programmes of Rs. 1,000 were kept for the purpose of paying for the Safe Citizen Housing Programme. Such a trend was criticized. The essence of the federal system and the corruption increased by piecemeal projects cannot be ignored by parliamentarians.
Therefore, the tendency of parliamentarians to increase pressure for piecemeal projects weakens the parliamentary system that holds the government accountable to the parliament. The role of MPs should be evaluated in terms of how effectively they can raise the issues of the people in the House and how strong laws they can make. MPs are supposed to hold the government accountable. It is not unusual for MPs to try to be the conduits of development, but they should not be involved in the selection of piecemeal projects and budget mobilization.
