State of economy and an unfortunate episode

The process started off in a half-hearted manner because of lack of internal resources. The political situation within the country continued to be fluid for quite sometime since the gruesome murder of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and other leaders. It demanded a stable government that could ensure foreign investment. In less than six years President Ziaur Rahman was also killed by some disgruntled army men. Ziaur Rahman replaced temporarily by Justice Sattar. The Army Chief, during and after Zia, General Ershad took over power in March, 1982. He ruled the country for nine years, approximately, and was eventually overthrown on grounds of corruption, moral turpitude, oppression, repression, murder of civilians and umpteen other vices.

Throughout this one and a half decades, from August 1975 (15 August to be precise) to the end of 1990, the economy of the country limped on. Nevertheless, we saw the emergence of quite a big number of the neo-rich awaiting the opportunity for fruitful investment in the industrial, commercial and service sectors. Some of them new used their own contacts abroad for joint collaboration in setting up industries. Yet many opted for readymade garments and knitwear industries, based on imported fabrics, for ultimate export to Europe and America and to the Middle Eastern countries. Since the first phase of a democratically elected parliament under a neutral caretaker government, in 1991, till now, despite much political unrest and bombing incursion of a group of religious extremists, the overall economic situation of the country has not been bad enough to cause despair. We can find a corroboration of this statement from the ever-rising interest of foreign investors to make substantial investment in different sectors here.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

Against the backdrop of the aforestated scenario we have got to make a dispassionate appreciation of the most vital, and catalytical, role that the Board of Investment (BOI) can play. From an organisational point of view its control by the Prime Minister's Secretariat has been a real handicap. This may be abandoned in favour of a fully autonomous entity to be more proactive.

The role of the Board of Investment can be very much identified with the effective role that its chief, the Executive Chairman actually plays. The present incumbent, Mr Mahmudur Rahman, was not selected from the typical bureaucracy. He is a product of the private sector having a proven record of success.

It is known to have been his personal initiative that fetched us a very big proposal for investment. Likewise, he was instrumental in attracting a good many potential investors for registering with BOI. Many of them were not ultimately successful, yet his own efforts cannot be under-estimated. The failure cannot be solely his, rather it is also of the policy/decision makers.

That's how he was recently caught off guard by an investigative report made by the Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD). This report was claimed to have been made on the basis of numerous data provided by Bangladesh Bank, World Economic Forum, and research findings. The BOI Chief was evidently very upset and bitterly annoyed. He took the CPD revelation as a deliberate, and purposeful, attempt at slandering the 'image' of the present government. As a technocrat incumbent, for all practical purposes, it would have been better for him to refrain from being so overtly impulsive. Even if he was right in the logical sense, putting in his own arguments, he damaged the otherwise respectful 'image' that he had built about himself. Things went to the extent of personal vilification of the CPD trustees in an uncouth manner. Even his filing a suit of defamation in the court on a 'misquoted' report was very, very, unfortunate. Yet in spite of the controversy, he must have been disappointed with the observations of some of the senior ministers. They disowned the entire proceedings as being his 'personal' matter.

Instead of allowing himself to be overtaken by a sudden emotional upsurge, it should be possible for the Executive Chairman of BOI to invite the CPD representatives for a direct dialogue on the authenticity of their research findings. That could afford a far stronger base to reject their report. It could also grant him an opportunity to pin-point CPD errors in the data, and in the process of their findings. It is our misfortune that we have been proffered a re-affirmation of the great saying "emotions are masters, intellect the servant".

In any case, the wordy exchanges between the two contesting parties have had one thing in common, that foreign investment in our country was being slowed down. And among the palpable reasons would be our global status as the most corrupt country. Other shortcomings are the rigmarole of the bureaucratic process, indecision of the policy makers (Tata's investment proposal e.g.), terrorist activities, political unrest etc. Notwithstanding these physical hurdles everybody shall agree that the macro-economic status of the country has gained notable mobility, our industrial, agricultural and export sectors have been able to achieve sizeable growth. That does not however absolve us of our concurrent responsibility to be watchful about the threats against our national economy. None, either in the government or outside, should be allergic to the statistics-based reports and make personal invectives.

Kazi Alauddin Ahmed is a management consultant.