Government Policy and Program Lacks Specificity Compared to 100-Point Agenda

Kathmandu. On March 26, 2025, a cabinet meeting held in Singha Durbar approved a document that was considered not only by the Prime Minister and ministers but also by the general public as the 'starting point of good governance'.

The document, titled '100-Point Agenda for Governance Reform', is considered an 'aggressive and revolutionary' action plan to change the traditional way of state operation.

Exactly two months later, on Monday, the policy and program for the fiscal year 2024/25 were presented to a joint session of the federal parliament through the President. According to former administrators, the annual policy and program should generally be a detailed version of the government's short-term 'action plan'. However, a comparative study of these two documents reveals a significant gap between the government's words and actions.

On one hand, there is the time-bound and concrete commitment of the '100-Point' agenda, and on the other hand, there are the old clichés, ritualistic language, and the 'policy and program' lacking deadlines.

• Policy Program Forgets Deadline

The most beautiful and strong aspect of the 100-point agenda was its 'deadline'. It clearly stated which task to be done in 7 days, which in 15 days, and which in 100 days.

This created a kind of pressure and accountability in the bureaucracy. However, by the time the policy and program were formulated, deadlines did not seem to be prioritized. The spirit of 'delivery-based governance' brought by the 100-point agenda seems to be confined to the vague language of the policy and program.

• Included but Vague

Some issues from the 100-point agenda for agricultural sector reform have been included. Point number 90 (a) stated that the minimum support price for major agricultural produce would be fixed before sowing the crop, and (b) that farmers would be paid within a maximum of 25 days for the produce they sell. Some aspects of this have been included.

The policy and program have reiterated decade-old clichés such as 'the agricultural sector will be modernized' and 'emphasis will be placed on increasing production'. The 'action plans' directly linked to the lives of farmers do not seem to be covered by the policy and program. The concept of 'one municipality, one cold storage center' mentioned in point 90 of the agenda has been vaguely addressed in the policy and program as 'storage capacity will be increased'.

The government has not adequately included its own agenda in the areas of forests and environment. Point number 23 of the 100-point agenda proposed the formation of a 'Nepal Carbon Authority', which has appeared in the policy and program. Similarly, point 21 had a clear roadmap to prioritize the processing and value addition of medicinal herbs for export.

Upon reaching the policy and program, all these plans have been confined to words like 'forest conservation and sustainable use will be ensured'.

Regarding tourism and entrepreneurship, some issues from the agenda have been included. Point number 73 stated that 2027 would be celebrated as 'Nepal Wellness Year' to make Nepal a hub for health tourism. Instead, 'Visit Nepal 2026' has been announced, although the government appears to prioritize health tourism.

In the field of entrepreneurship, there is a contradiction between the agenda and the policy and program. Point 56 of the agenda proposed implementing a 'fast track' system for startups, removing all hassles within two days. However, the policy and program only state that 'startups will be encouraged' without anything more concrete.

The 'project pipeline' mentioned in the agenda and the 'one-stop system' for foreign investment have been included in the policy and program in a vague manner, covering some aspects like investment facilitation. It appears to be particularly targeting non-resident Nepalis to invest in Nepal.

Point 66 of the 100-point agenda, which included modern plans like making 'GPS tracking' mandatory in vehicles and installing AI-based traffic cameras to reduce road accidents, has been included in the policy and program accordingly.

The government has presented education and health sectors in a haphazard manner in the policy and program.

Point 89 of the 100-point agenda, which proposed stopping internal examinations for students up to class 5 from the upcoming academic session and adopting an assessment system that does not cause psychological impact, was a very revolutionary idea. However, this educational reform was completely overshadowed in the policy and program.

In the health sector, the agenda's point 85 (d) proposed establishing 'burn wards' in all seven provinces, and (c) proposed real-time monitoring of employee attendance and sanitation in government hospitals. However, these specific issues are not clearly defined and included in the policy and program.

The policy and program only contain old and proven unsuccessful statements like 'access to health services will be increased' and 'the insurance program will be made effective'.

In the context of corruption control and good governance, the 100-point agenda had caused a significant stir. Point number 43 of the agenda proposed collecting asset details of key political office bearers and high-ranking officials who have held public office since 2005/2006. The policy and program contain clichés like 'zero tolerance will be adopted against corruption' and 'arrangements will be made to make asset details public'.

For administrative reform and purification of the bureaucracy, the agenda's point 12 proposed abolishing party trade unions in public administration and strictly prohibiting employees from affiliating with any political party. This issue has found a place in the policy and program.

While the government's 100-point agenda appeared as an 'aggressive and revolutionary' document, the policy and program appear 'traditional'. In productive sectors like agriculture, forests, tourism, enterprise, and infrastructure, the novelty promised by the agenda has been presented vaguely in the policy and program.

Although the government's policy and program theoretically touch upon many aspects of its 100-point agenda, a precise 'reflection' is not visible. Nevertheless, it has covered many things.

• Benefit of the Doubt Can Be Given, But Continuity Was Not Broken

A former chief secretary, who closely observes the government's operations, says, 'The government's intent is visible, but not as concrete as it should be. While calling it a new government, I feel that many programs are quite old.'

The former chief secretary stated that while the government is trying to make leaps in some aspects of digital and good governance, other aspects are merely continuations. 'There is usually a break in continuity after every change; the government has not been very progressive in this regard. There is no room to question the government's intentions. It is too early to comment without looking at the synergy between the budget and the policy and program,' he said.