Public funds must not become political patronage

THE proposal to allocate more than Tk 80 crore to each MP representing a constituency outside city corporation areas should not be viewed simply as an ambitious rural development plan.

It raises a more fundamental question: how effectively can such a large pool of public money be protected from political influence, procurement manipulation and corruption?

The Local Government Division has proposed nine new projects costing Tk 20,036 crore, alongside Tk 4,368 crore for two ongoing projects.

Together, the proposals could involve Tk 25,041 crore in additional spending.

Yet the two ongoing projects still have around Tk 637 crore in unspent funds.

Approving further allocations without addressing existing weaknesses risks expanding the loopholes through which public money can be wasted or misused.
There is already troubling evidence.

A Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) study of 628 schemes under the Priority-Based Rural Infrastructure Project documented allegations of commission payments, political interference, contractor syndicates and substandard construction.

Alleged commissions at different stages-from tendering and implementation to final bill payments and release of security deposits-ranged from 8 per cent to nearly 13 per cent of project costs.

Unsatisfactory work was found in 33 per cent of completed or partially completed schemes.

Government monitoring has also identified procurement, supervision and project-management weaknesses.

Extensive use of limited tendering for contracts below Tk 3 crore restricted competition.

Beneficiary surveys reported poor-quality brick chips, while many respondents said roads were shorter or narrower than specified and lacked adequate shoulders.

The allocation formula raises another concern. Broadly similar allocations regardless of population, poverty or infrastructure needs could turn development funding into a constituency entitlement rather than a transparent, needs-based investment programme.

There is also an institutional conflict. MPs are elected to legislate and scrutinise public expenditure.

If they influence project selection, their ability to independently oversee spending may be weakened.

The same political actors involved in determining projects could subsequently be expected to monitor implementation.

Rural infrastructure needs substantial investment. But more money does not automatically mean more development.

Before approving another Tk 25,041 crore, the government should independently review ongoing projects and close procurement and oversight gaps.

Project proposals, contractors, tender results, costs, progress and completed works should be open to public scrutiny. Public money is a public trust.

The priority should not be simply to spend more, but to ensure that what is spent reaches the people for whom it is intended.