No Liability, Perhaps—but Responsibility Must Be Taken

“There is no responsibility or connection of the present government with the ongoing electricity and energy crisis.”

This unequivocal statement was made by Professor Rashed Al Mahmud Titumir, the Prime Minister’s Adviser for Finance and Planning.

He attributed the crisis to the previous authoritarian government’s flawed, import-dependent energy policy.

The remark was made last Wednesday, September 2, at a seminar organised by the Economic Reporters’ Forum (ERF) at its auditorium in Purana Paltan, Dhaka.

The theme was “The Economic Context and Emerging Challenges: Priorities for the Future,” and the Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD) was the co-organiser.

Professor Titumir also said that young people should understand the debt burden created by the previous government’s misguided electricity and energy policies.

He called for research into the “cost of inaction” and the “cost of wrong-doing.”

Other speakers highlighted the country’s broader economic difficulties. CPD Fellow Fahmida Khatun pointed to the uncomfortable situation in production, investment, employment and energy and stressed the need for reforms.

National Professor Mahbub Ullah urged Bangladesh to move from an “economy of plunder” to an “economy of production,” criticising repeated privileges granted to particular groups.

Fazlul Haque, administrator of the Federation of Bangladesh Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FBCCI), suggested urgently operating oil- and coal-fired power plants so that more gas could be supplied to industries.

Professor Titumir is an economist and a professor in the Department of Economics at the University of Dhaka, where he once served as chairman.

He obtained his PhD from the University of London and, before becoming an adviser, regularly wrote analytical articles in Prothom Alo.

I had read several of his writings after a former colleague recommended them and found them thoughtful and well reasoned. I, therefore, hoped that, as an adviser with ministerial rank, he would demonstrate those abilities through practical policymaking.

His remarks at the ERF seminar, however, left me disappointed.
Bangladesh’s economic difficulties are approaching an intolerable level, while the government struggles to address the electricity and energy crisis

. We have heard repeated assurances about the Rooppur Nuclear Power Plant, but the project increasingly appears to be a mirage.

The latest report says that testing under the third stage has been suspended because two safety bulbs are not functioning and that Russian experts may come to repair them.

This raises an obvious question: What have those trained for the project actually learned? Has Rooppur become like the old man who climbed onto Sindbad’s shoulders and refused to get off?

Professor Titumir says the present government has no responsibility for, or connection with, the crisis. Had such a statement come from a political leader, it might have been understandable.

But as an expert and policymaker, he should explain whether Bangladesh can pursue a self-reliant energy policy, what kind of policy the country has followed since independence, where earlier mistakes began and how they produced today’s situation.

A brief history of Bangladesh’s energy policy would help citizens understand both the origins of the crisis and the cost of wrong decisions.

Professor Titumir has called on young people to conduct such research. Has comparable research been undertaken at the University of Dhaka?

The university once enjoyed a global reputation. Economists such as Nurul Islam, Rehman Sobhan and Anisur Rahman studied and taught in its Department of Economics, and their work, along with that of their students, influenced government policy.

Today, Bangladesh is among the countries where public money is wasted on a massive scale.

A fragile economy also creates greater opportunities for corruption, whereas strong institutions make it more difficult to misuse public resources.

Electricity and energy consumption are closely linked to economic productivity. Industrial production requires far more energy than household use, so consumption patterns can provide an indication of a country’s economic condition.

For Bangladesh, uninterrupted electricity has always been essential and remains so.

Successive governments have sought advice from professors at BUET and the University of Dhaka. Unfortunately, experts have often been expected to follow the wishes of those in authority.

When decisions were sound, people benefited; when they were wrong, public suffering increased. The country has moved forward through this process of trial and error.

Today, we are encouraged to install solar panels. If a cyclone destroys them tomorrow, another explanation may be offered.

Nuclear power is environmentally friendly but carries risks, and Bangladesh has accepted those risks.

Yet no one can say with certainty when Rooppur will begin generating electricity. Some believe that, had the project been entrusted to South Korea, generation might have started earlier.

The other speakers at the seminar correctly identified the wider crisis. Production, investment, employment and energy are all under pressure.

Bangladesh must move from an economy of plunder to one of production, while practical steps are needed to supply industries with adequate gas and electricity.

Whatever advice is offered, decisions are ultimately made in the Secretariat, where lobbying occurs and paperwork is prepared.

Proposals generally move from the relevant ministry to the Ministries of Finance and Law before reaching the Prime Minister’s Office.

It is a lengthy process, and responsibility is often passed from one office to another.

The government wants production to raise, investment to increase, employment to expand and people’s lives to improve.

But what is the relationship between these goals and the powerful officials who administer the system?

They receive their salaries and retirement benefits regardless of outcomes and may later become advisers, ambassadors, ministers or senior NGO officials. This has been the pattern for years.

Therefore, no one wants to accept responsibility.
Yet responsibility ultimately belongs to the elected government. It came to power knowing the circumstances and promising to improve people’s lives.

It must therefore demonstrate success. It cannot simply say, “We are not responsible.”

Responsibility may be shared, inherited or disputed. But the responsibility to govern—and to deliver—cannot be avoided.

(The writer is a senior journalist and political analyst)