 |
Kathmandu Thursday September 07, 2000 Bhadra 22, 2057.
|
Poverty alleviation and donors
The
government proposed Poverty Alleviation Steering Committee (PASC) has sparked differences
among donor countries, agencies and the government. This is due to the fact that the
government has included more than one-third of the committee members from among civil
servants. By doing so, the government has given rise to apprehensions that the move will
not only breed corruption but also lead to misappropriation of funds. This is a valid
objection and if it is not taken seriously, it could jeopardize the government's long term
plan to spend 28 billion rupees for poverty alleviation programmes in the next fifteen
years. In the past too, the government could not implement its poverty alleviation plans
and programmes effectively due to lack of clear-cut policies and appropriate institutions
for delivery.
The
proposed PASC prepared
by
National Planning Commission (NPC) to govern fund activities comprises 16 members - 11
civil servants and five from non-governmental organisations. This no doubt appears to
contradict what the donor community expected from the government. This apart, the project
based approach lacks comprehensive policy. It does not address the pressing problems of
our society. However, what surprises many is that the donor community has also failed to
come up with alternatives to fund poverty alleviation plans and programmes. Had donor
countries and agencies come up with such options and pressed their demand for supporting
long term plans or programmes,
such
differences would have been minimized. Unfortunately, this did not happen. What has
happened is that the donor community has objected to the proposed PASC without good enough
reasons or alternatives.
The
country's overriding concern has been its reeling poverty. A recent survey estimates that
more than 52 percent of the total population live below the poverty line. Successive
governments which introduced a number of poverty eradication programmes, have no doubt
failed to reduce the rate of poverty as a result of mismanagement, corruption and
inefficiency during implementation. This apart, the government has not only interfered in
the management of poverty fund activities but also appointed political cadres and
jeopardized the entire gamut of poverty alleviation programmes.
The
plan to spend over 28 billion rupees for poverty alleviation in a span of 15 years may go
down the drain if the donor community backs off from the NPC prepared approach. Here, the
government must rethink about including more people from the non-governmental sector in
the committee. However, the donor community must also not pressurize the government
without providing alternative plans. What the donor community has failed to recognise are
the differences within the community. Such differences should not cost the fund for
poverty alleviation and to this end, the government must take care.
Other Stories
|
