The freeze on new development projects is welcome to avoid pilfering of public resources as well as give the public value for their taxes. I think that is why the freeze was sanctioned.
But there is need for thorough audit on both recurrent and development expenditure if we have to make any meaning out of the freeze. Both dockets of recurrent and development budgets are riddled with corruption problems and opportunities.
In order to address what the president is trying to do we have to look at the current provisions of the procurement laws that facilitate corruption. We need to look at the entire government funding and evaluate its effectiveness. Is it efficient? Is what we are getting sufficiently allocated to the intended projects?
Unless we address those fundamental issues we won't make any progress in the war against graft.
If a project stalled and money is allocated to it without analysing why it stalled in the first place, pumping in more money does guarantee its revival, the reason all the focus should be to give analytical view on why the projects stalled in the first place.
I understand the freeze on new projects. I support it to the extent that currently there is routine low absorption rate of development funds. This failure to fully absorb development funds points to poor implementation of development projects.
On the flip-side I don't challenge the freeze because we could have gone out first to understand why we are not absorbing fully the development funds so that we get the underlying challenges that hinder usage of this money and trying figuring out how we can unlock them and facilitate full uptake. For the little that is absorbed we should questions if they are absorbed efficiently and productively to the benefit of the public and for national growth.
Development budgets are normally larger than those of recurrent expenditure, this makes them prone to abuse and looting. So until we are able to demonstrate that development funds are being used in a manner that is legal and doesn't facilitate graft the freeze wouldn't achieve the intended results.
That said free on development expenditure will reduce government spending that is needed to propel economic growth. Development budgets are key in financing contractors and other government suppliers therefore with a halt on development spending there will be a negative effect on the general well being of the national economy.
Anzetse is a Development Economist
Source
No comments:
Post a Comment