When at issue is project implementation, each one - big or small - need to be brought under regular review. Now that Bangladesh has undertaken a number of mega projects in order to spur its development process, it is no surprise that the urgency of such reviews has proved even more compelling. It is heartening to know that a number of mega projects - most of them foreign-aided - have been taken up for review at a high-level meeting with the checklist to be placed under the probing eyes of Finance Minister AMA Muhith. Bangladesh has a poor track record in implementing its projects. There have been instances when money sanctioned by multilateral or other financiers had to be returned for failure to spend it. In some cases, projects could not get going on schedule and the credit had to be rescheduled. Then there is the viral disease of delaying execution of projects and extension of deadlines several times.
Against such a backdrop, the government initiative to bring all the implementing agencies and the ministries in charge together with the objective of receiving a clear picture of works done so far is indicative of its seriousness. The government has already listed 10 'fast track' projects which are closely reviewed by the Prime Minister herself. It is not clear if those 'fast track' projects are included in the five mega projects, also called 'fast track' ones. According to the additional secretary, Economic Relations Division (ERD), another eight to nine other foreign-aided projects will also be placed on the table for closer review at the meeting headed by the finance minister. The five mega projects are most cost-intensive involving several billions of dollars each. This meeting is likely to identify weak points for which project implementation may suffer and find out ways to overcome those in order to complete the projects on time.
Now, adequate monitoring and supervision by the implementing authorities should actually be the normal practice. The firms or companies responsible for construction or building the infrastructure have their own mechanism to enforce regular monitoring and supervision. They are held accountable for the jobs done. Their progress report should be enough to indicate how far the task is complete or not. The higher authorities also have their mechanism to know that the ground realities and the report submitted are not at variance. Then what is the need for special meetings where the finance minister has to take stock of the situation?
If it is a double check, so much the better. But if it is arranged on reports that the progress of these prestigious projects is less than satisfactory, it really is a cause for concern. Let the last apprehension be unfounded. However, there is one niggling thought, though, concerning the review of several mega projects at a time. Can a meeting do justice to the nitty-gritty of one such large project? When so many mega projects are placed on the table for review, it is impossible to meticulously go through their work progress. Better take up one at a time to know about the details so that not even the smallest of lapses escape notice.
