ADP revision needed before national polls to avoid stagnation in development

THE stagnation that is being observed in the implementation of the country’s development projects is worrying.

According to a newspaper report yesterday, the interim government has not been able to accelerate the implementation of the development project — the Prakash-Unnayan project — despite various initiatives. The situation of domestically supported projects is even worse.

In such a situation, there are concerns about the reduction of a large amount of funds from the Annual Development Program (ADP) for the current fiscal year.

In this case, the deficit could be reduced by about 21,000 crore taka. The Economic Relations Department (ERD) has already started the process of cutting part of the foreign debt.

Needless to say, this clearly highlights the weaknesses not only in financial management, but also in the overall development trajectory. It is known that the allocation of foreign funds in the current ADP was 86 thousand crore taka.

However, in the first three months (July-September), the ministries and departments were able to spend only 5 thousand 74 crore taka, which is the lowest compared to previous years.

The most disappointing thing is that nine ministries and departments, including the departments of bridges, water resources, primary and mass education, and public safety, have not been able to spend a single taka so far. The implementation rates of eight more institutions are below one per cent.

This statistic shows how serious the lack of capacity and sincerity in project implementation within the government structure.

The government has reportedly identified the plight of project directors and contractors after the August 5 and the complexity of the new recruitment process as reasons for the slow implementation of the project.

This is undoubtedly a big challenge. But the problem is not limited to political changes.

Weak project formulation, lack of effective supervision, and lack of PIC/PSC meetings are also due to structural weaknesses such as complexity in land acquisition and frequent changes of project directors.

Moreover, repeated cuts in allocations are evidence of weak implementation capacity, which we believe could tarnish the country’s image in the international arena.

In such a situation, the interim government should, even in the short term, keep the wheels of development moving by ensuring transparency and accountability in project implementation, bringing stability to the appointment of project directors, and effective supervision.

If quality implementation is the goal, then the government’s main priority should be to achieve that goal through quick and effective action, not the fear of cuts of crores of taka.