National 4 (Spotlight Weekly)

“If We Start Seeing Development And Economic Issues Through Political Prisms, No Government Can Hold The Meeting In Future”

— Bishnu Bahadur KC

Former Auditor General BISHNU BAHADUR K.C. retired a year ago after a long experience in the government service. Known as one have the most frank and bold civil servants, K.C. made every effort to evaluate and monitor how public money were spent during his tenure. K.C. had also introduced new auditing practices showing how development expenditures were being utilized. A strong advocate of transparency, K.C. spoke to KESHAB POUDEL on various issues regarding the forthcoming Nepal Development Forum (NDF) meeting. Excerpts:

What is your response towards the decision to hold the NDF meeting despite pressures from agitating political parties who are demanding its postponement?

It is very commendable and bold decision on the part of Nepal’s development partners to go ahead with the NDF meeting in accordance to the schedule. Donors have shown that they are in Nepal not to support a political agenda of a particular political party but to help a large number of poor Nepalese.

How do you see the remarks by the leaders of responsible political parties urging to postpone the final round of the NDF meet?

It is immoral and irresponsible on the part of the leaders of mainstream political parties. It is an anti-national statement. Agitating parties must realize that donors are not giving money to Girijababu or prime minister Surya Bahadur Thapa but they are here to support poor Nepalese people who are in the critical need of their support.

Don’t you think there could be alternatives to foreign aid?

I do not see any alternative to foreign aid now. Nepal’s almost all development programs are heavily dependent on foreign aid. It is a matter of common fact that our resource base, though it is increasing, is not sufficient to support development programs. Our leaders of the agitating parties also know Nepal’s economic position and the urgency of foreign aid to carry out the poverty alleviation programs. I wonder how they could make such announcement despite knowing the reality. I would like to urge all political leaders to refrain from sacrificing the national interest for petty political gains. It is a pity to know that while foreigners are eager to support us, we are trying to stop them from spending their money to improve the lives of millions of poor Nepalese.

In what sense are you terming the decision as immoral?

The leaders of the agitating parties including former finance minister Dr. Ram Sharan Mahat, CPN-UML leader K.P. Sharma Oli, representative of Nepal Sadbhvana Party and other parties had participated in the preliminary rounds of the meeting and had even chaired them. It is immoral to demand the postponement of the meeting at the last minute. As far as the present foreign aid policy and holding the NDF meeting in the country is concerned, it was the idea of the Nepali Congress government. If we start seeing development and economic issues through political prisms, no government can hold the meeting in time. We have witnessed how bitter were the relations between the CPN-UML and the Nepali Congress in the past. I still remember that the CPN-UML even boycotted the former prime minister Girija Prasad Koirala while he was in office. The efforts to support poor people should not be made anybody’s political agenda. There were political differences in the past; there are in the present and they will be in the future. In all circumstances, we need foreign aid for our development.

Why the meeting is so important now?

At a time when the industries are not in good shape and the tourism industry is facing crisis, the government is in no position to allocate adequate budget to the rural areas. When we are not in a position to generate the resources on our own, we need support from our development partners. We must keep the country’s interest and future uppermost in our mind before making any harsh comments.

However, agitating parties are urging the donor countries only to postpone the meeting arguing that this is not an accountable government. What do you say?

Since I am a retired civil servant, I am not knowledgeable about the constitutional meaning of accountable and unaccountable governments. This seems to be more a political matter than a constitutional one. As an auditor general, I had reported in volumes on the utilization and misuse of development expenditures by previous accountable governments. One could see how much those governments respected the question of accountability during their tenure. I am not a politician and I do not want to go on purely political slogan. I am not here to defend anybody’s government but to defend the cause of poor people living in remote parts of the country. If the donors stop funding, they will be hurt and they will suffer much more than the politicians raising the question of accountability will. Who is going to build their schools, health posts and other facilities? That is my concern.

Do you see any rationale behind the suggestion to postpone the NDF meet?

I have already told you that you cannot mix politics and development together. I may differ with politics but we all want development. The request by the five agitating parties is contradictory to their earlier stands. I do not understand why the agitating parties singled out the NDF. At a time when the poor people are suffering from conflicts and loosing hope, it is only donor countries who can fulfill their development demands. I don’t think any rationale person can justify the demands of the five agitating political parties.

Is it possible to spend the development expenditure at the time of conflict in all the sectors?

Political agitations and conflicts are one issue and they may be there for a long time to come. However, you always need development. For the development, one requires foreign aid. In a situation of conflict, we need more foreign aid. We have had conflict in Nepal for quite a long time. The conflict has been there since 1996. We continued our development programs despite these conflicts. The only issue here is the level of conflict.

How do you see the poverty alleviation and other programs launched in the country?

I have different opinions on the issues of poverty alleviation and good governance since these two words have been misused. They are full of jargon. I don’t think we can alleviate poverty and deliver good governance by holding seminars and symposium in star hotels. As long as we cannot raise the living standard of poor people and end the income disparities, it will be difficult to alleviate poverty and see the emergence of good governance.

How do you look at the priority set by the NDF?

We need to prioritize the development agenda on our own. I know this is not easy but we must convince the donor agencies where we really need the money. This time foreign aid should be sought in the areas of water resources development including expansion of irrigation and development of hydropower, tourism, road and other infrastructures. It is a pity to be asking foreign aid in the areas of good governance, women rights and human rights. Our government itself can afford some money in those areas. If we link the road to Humla and Jumla, a large segment of population will benefit. Once the access to market is provided, people themselves generate income by selling their products. There is a little sense in spending money in non-productive areas. We must focus our attention to build infrastructures like road, health posts, schools, power and irrigation.

How do you find the foreign aid policy?

Frankly speaking, the current foreign aid policy was formulated on our insistence when I used to be the auditor general. It is unfortunate to say that the aid policy is just like somebody’s dissertation paper. The document consists of some technical words and jargons. The policy needs to be clear cut. The foreign aid policy should be directed towards long-term vision as well as be result-oriented.

Don’t you think there require consensus on major issues?

This is what I have been saying. In political issues, I don’t mind having different points of views but we need to have consensus on foreign aid, foreign policy and economic development. If we don’t have minimum consensus on such issues, we cannot show our national character.

How do you see the priorities of Nepal’s development partners?

Many donor countries have shown serious concerns over the problems of Nepal and they come here with the willingness to support Nepalese people. My impression is that the donors want to see transformation in the lives of majority of Nepalese.

As a retired auditor general, you know Nepal’s development expenditures inside out. What do you suggest to make the foreign aid more effective?

Donors have been supporting Nepal significantly in carrying out development activities. We must hail their efforts and sincerity. One of the lacking is the transparency in foreign aid component. It is very difficult to know how much money donors have contributed to Nepal’s development.

How do you see the position of Nepal’s current unsettled account?

It is a huge amount of money. During my tenure as an auditor general, I made hard efforts to control the unsettled account. There is gross mismanagement and violation of financial regulations while spending the public money. No government follows the regulations and rules while spending taxpayer’s money. The amount of unsettled account is still going higher. I think it is increasing in higher proportion now.