Editorial

Burdened by carryover projects

Take the dross off the ADP
The Tk 22,000 crore Annual Development Programme (ADP) for fiscal 2004-05 has a total of 1,199 projects, out of which 455 are in the 'unapproved' category, which cannot but raise a question: how projects awaiting approval could be adopted in the ADP? But the irony is, this has been happening year after year.

There is more to it; a break-down of the so-called 455 unapproved projects for this year, which is a record number, shows that 125 are remnants from last year's portfolio, and 330 are new 'unapproved' projects. But what startles one even more is the fact that the 125 carried over projects have had a total allocation of Tk 1817 crore in contrast to Tk 1812 crore for the 330 so-called new unapproved projects. Why must unapproved projects have any allocation at all?

At any rate, all this goes to poignantly underline the burden of liability projects weighing down heavily on the fate of ADP implementation. A question-mark may also dangle on the very nomenclature of Annual Development Programme! Isn't it an encumbered, compromised and unsustainable ADP for all intents and purposes?

The untenable projects were based, not obviously on economic considerations, nor on a dispassionate perception of national priorities, but on a submissive pandering to lobbyist pressure. Worse still, political calculations behind project selection and siting get the better of any overall development planning judgement. The purpose doesn't seem to be to complete a task but to keep projects hanging for more money to be spent depending on the strength and clout of lobbyists, contractors, politicians and other people. It all seems like a game of squeezing out cash in any form in the name of projects. The construction-oriented projects in particular have been the happy-hunting ground for the vested interests. It's a vicious cycle: some money spent on a project is an excuse for spending more money there. So, it goes on and on; never mind the cost-and-time-overruns of inherently bad projects! It's a horrific waste of scarce resources. And, the sense of loss is gnawing when viewed in the context of missing allocations to potentially more useful development projects that got thrown by the wayside.

So, here we are reminded of a recipe suggested by the Public Expenditure Review Committee (Perc): get an expert committee to have a professional say in the matter of choosing projects for the ADP, instead of a cell at the Prime Minister's Office that currently determines which projects are priority ones and which not.