Gandaki Province Planning Commission Faces Scrutiny Over Ineffectiveness

Pokhara. Questions have been raised in a parliamentary committee regarding the role of the Gandaki Province Policy and Planning Commission. At a meeting of the Public Accounts Committee under the Provincial Assembly on Tuesday, lawmakers accused the Planning Commission of failing to present expertise.

They alleged that the commission has become not an institution of experts, but merely a manager for arranging plans pulled out of the Chief Minister and ministers' pockets.

Lawmakers lambasted the commission during discussions on the seventh annual report of the Auditor General. They raised questions about the failure to achieve the goals of the five-year plan, the commission's helplessness in budget formulation, and extreme negligence in government data.

They expressed concern over the commission's very relevance. Lawmakers expressed anger, stating that although the commission formulates five-year plans and goals, the Ministry of Finance and line ministries completely disregard them when preparing the budget.

“The Policy and Planning Commission is not just for managing the plans of a minister or the Chief Minister! It is an institution of experts,” said lawmaker Resham Jugjali. “What is the commission’s role in formulating government policy and preparing the budget? Why can’t the Planning Commission intervene when the finance secretary inserts plans worth Rs 50-100 crore at their own discretion?”

During the formulation of the current fiscal year's budget, then Finance Secretary Rajendra Dev Pandey had included budgets worth crores for his own village in the annual development program.

At that time, lawmakers demanded an end to such practices from within the parliament. Later, Pandey was made to go on leave as a form of punishment by the government and eventually transferred from the province. At the meeting, committee chairman Sudhir Kumar Poudel questioned the commission's inability to set the goals the province should achieve.

“The periodic plan is supposed to guide where we take the province. Our expectations are high. But what is the commission’s role in budget preparation and government policy formulation?” he said. “Why were so few goals achieved? You tell the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Finance tells the Chief Minister. Our process is not aligning.”

Gandaki is implementing its second plan after completing the period of its first five-year plan. Government data shows that the first plan was implemented at less than 30 percent.

Lawmakers raised questions after the report revealed that the Provincial Government had not set clear targets for important indicators under the Sustainable Development Goals, such as poverty, hunger, and drinking water. Similarly, transparency was questioned, with allegations that the objective basis for determining the budget ceiling was not disclosed in the report and was kept secret until the budget was released.

“The ceiling is hidden until the last day. What is the reason for keeping the official report secret like this?” the lawmakers questioned. Allegations were also made of significant embezzlement of funds by keeping DPR-completed projects shelved.

“Either the DPR for projects is not done, or even if it is done, the work is not happening. It was also found that the directorates do not have records of DPRs,” said lawmaker Bed Bahadur Gurung. “It is wrong to prepare DPRs solely for the purpose of including projects in the project bank without actual work.”

He complained that the province would not achieve progress merely by distributing the budget provided by the federal government. “We talk about budgets of Rs 33 billion, Rs 35 billion. The current budget is also decreasing year by year,” he added. “The province must work to increase its resources. The commission must formulate that policy. Despite such a good and easy environment for attracting foreign investment, no political leadership in our Gandaki has shown the will for it.”

Lawmaker Pancharam Gurung suggested strictly implementing a policy of not allocating budgets to small and fragmented projects. Medium-term expenditure structures were also questioned at the meeting. No officials from the commission were present at the meeting.