Want to give an A, but it's leaning towards a B: Debapriya Bhattacharya

Different people will assess the government’s six months differently. It depends on one’s perspective, context and circumstances. The government came into office in a particular situation and with a particular legacy. It made certain commitments and created expectations of changes in the way Bangladesh functions. On the one hand, there were high aspirations; on the other, the government spent the first six months dealing with various obstacles. It also had to deal with unprecedented situations, including the global situation, particularly the energy crisis, various regional complexities, relations with neighbouring countries and the Rohingya issue.

Overall, I think that the government has stumbled in some areas when it comes to implementing the aspirations it expressed. Sometimes you may want to do something but cannot. This, in my view, is the situation that has emerged.

There was a shortcoming in the government’s overall understanding of the situation. Ministers are now saying that they inherited a very difficult situation. But they did not prepare any document detailing what they inherited. I have said before that they have no white paper. One reason may be their uncertainty over their political outlook on the interim government.

There were also difficulties in understanding the benchmark or starting point of the situation. Ministers have come in late and are now saying that they cannot deliver within one or two years. These things were not said earlier.

The main means of implementation is the administration. But the situation within the administration was not entirely comfortable, and it still is not. During the interim government, we clearly saw how the bureaucracy slows down the pace of work. This government has also faced the same problem. There are also suspicions about various political connections within the bureaucracy.

At the grassroots level, law and order, beyond the bureaucracy, is also a major issue for implementation. There is uncertainty over extortion and other issues in the supply chain. The security needed to keep the market economy functioning has not returned. The weakness of the police and the problems involved in restructuring the police administration have also played a role here. There was a shortcoming in the government’s overall understanding of the problems; bureaucracy, law and order at the grassroots level and party activities have also not been conducive to implementation.

At the same time, the process of putting the organisational situation in order has not yet been completed. The process of holding the national council has also not been completed. Therefore, I am willing to give the government some time.

However, it is not apparent that the government has social or political control over all areas. The number-one person says one thing, but others do not put it into practice even after hearing it. You cannot have a functioning market economy without ensuring security for investment and business and trade.

Historically, we have seen that the party’s secretary general is given charge of the Ministry of Local Government. This time, it remains to be seen whether the local government minister becomes the secretary general, or the secretary general becomes the local government minister. We had assumed that the BNP would follow the “one leader, one post” policy. They themselves had said so.

Attempts have been made to implement “one leader, one post” in various countries around the world, and the results have been positive. Then the government’s failures are not directly attributed to the party. Instead of intense criticism from the opposition or movements to topple the government, there is constructive discussion within the party. Internal accountability is also created in the government’s activities. We expected them to retain this system.

But discomfort has emerged elsewhere. Politicians holding party posts have been made heads of government institutions. This clearly creates a conflict of interest. A trusted person can be given responsibility, but the fact that they do not relinquish their party position even after taking up the responsibility is what creates discomfort.

Similarly, many of those appointed as vice-chancellors of universities are undoubtedly people who have struggled; they have made sacrifices and led the party for a long time. But a university is a place of learning. Merit is important here. In assessing the first six months, the lack of good intentions in implementation is visible here as well.

The Prime Minister has said, “Bangladesh first,” and that a competitive economy based on merit will be built. But there is a question as to whether merit is being supported during these six months. The government is still hesitant in this regard. It seems to be moving forward with the old strategy. This is not beneficial for the economy.

At the same time, many capable people have come from abroad. They may not have lived in Bangladesh for a long time, but they have an aspiration for change. Some changes and connections are visible. It should also be remembered that around 225 or 230 of the 350 members of parliament are new. At least one-third of them have never run an institution in their lives. So they also need to be given some time.

The previous government had created a narrative of development that we now know was largely hollow. Although they talked about 7 per cent growth, it was actually no more than 4 to 4.5 per cent. They used this narrative to make up for their lack of political legitimacy. The current government is elected and legitimate; it does not need to take populist measures quickly.

Everyone discusses the Family Card and Farmer Card, and so do we. We fully agree with social protection for a humane and inclusive society. For this, we have also spoken about the need for a common database, accountability and oversight through local government.

But when 2 to 2.2 million people enter the labour market every year, whose needs should receive greater attention? The young people who talked about jobs and quotas during the anti-discrimination mass movement must either be given jobs or turned into entrepreneurs. This area has not received enough attention over the past six months.

Can the government ministers proudly say how many people they have created employment opportunities for? Even the employment figures they have provided are not properly presented by anyone. Investment and employment are the driving forces of the economy. Social protection is temporary assistance for people facing hardship. But the government has moved towards populist measures.

However, what the government has said about reforms in the education sector is fully aligned with our position. Children should be provided lunch, clothes and shoes. The digital divide must be reduced. But if the government says it will provide every child with a laptop or tablet, we must also ask who will supply them. We remember the experience of the Doel laptop. So good governance is very important.

During the budget, we said, tell the people the truth. Why are you saying now that you inherited a bad situation? Why was it not said six months ago? A document could have been prepared then saying, “Look at what we have inherited; we will not be able to give anything for a year.”

We also said, do not make a budget that cannot be implemented. We saw this during the previous government. The revenue target was increased by one and a half times, even though achieving it was impossible. If that money does not come in, where will the spending come from?

The government is now unable to introduce a new pay structure. Yet it is very necessary. Government employees’ salaries have not increased in any meaningful way for nearly 10 years, apart from some minor benefits. I am not talking only about senior officials. As I was leaving PATC after giving a lecture on the pay structure, a security guard told me, “Sir, how long can I survive eating papaya and potatoes?” There are people at various levels in government service. I could not answer him. I have explained that increasing the budget deficit will lead to inflation and so on, but I felt helpless in the face of his question.

This government did not put the situation in order at the outset. They thought they had to raise people’s expectations. But could the energy crisis not have been anticipated six months ago? When another LNG project was cancelled during the interim government, could the consequences not have been anticipated? Now, after the Strait of Hormuz has been closed, countries around the world are scrambling for energy. The agreement with the United States has also not been cancelled. The opportunities and flexibility that existed in the energy sector have become blocked. We have to ask whether the government has acted properly.

The Aman harvest will come next, and seedlings are being planted. Then there is also the question of whether fertiliser will be available. Fertiliser factories are closed because of a lack of gas. There should have been an integrated plan here.

There are 28 people in the government along with another 28—56 in total. There is a two-tier cabinet, and another advisory council. There are special assistants again to oversee these two advisory councils. Overall, coordination has become a major problem.

Financing and liquidity in the banking sector are linked to energy imports. Unable to reconcile these issues, the government is trying to have the private sector carry out the imports. The names of those being brought in to handle the imports are not very reassuring either. This is giving rise to criticism that the old oligarchs are being brought back.

Another example of the lack of coordination is that the government enacted a law allowing the old owners to return to banks. Two months later, it realised that the provision would not work and amended the law. Raising interest rates again two weeks after formulating monetary policy is another example of a lack of coordination. Sadly, in many cases, the government is also suffering from a lack of capacity and competence.

Has the government assessed its own six months? It has published a booklet. But just as booklets of this kind were published in the past, this one is also of the same kind. It seems that the government is moving forward with the old playbook or strategy.

Why would a post-uprising elected government behave like this? It should tell the truth truthfully, present the reality, win people’s support, ask them to be patient and make bold statements. One leader said, “We have fully implemented our manifesto, and done even more than that.” I did not think that individual had a sense of timing.

However, I am encouraged to hear that the Prime Minister is evaluating the functioning of the Cabinet. I have heard that an assessment is being conducted through a confidential process, and various committees are also being formed. There may be changes in the Cabinet within six months. The Prime Minister of the fallen government did not think any of his actions needed correction; there was an attitude that his decisions could not be wrong. If the current government, at the six-month mark, holds the ministers accountable based on an assessment of their performance, that would be a major development.

However, there is no guarantee that things will improve simply because changes are made. This is not merely a matter of changing individuals. The structure under which the current two-and-a-half-tier cabinet is operating must also be assessed. The top person cannot assess only individuals and ministries but not the structure within which everything is operating. That is not possible. The government needs to look at strengthening its good intentions, increasing its capacity and improving coordination.

Given the current state of the economy, the government’s first task should be to prepare a core budget or basic budget that the government will maintain. Three months into the current budget, it is becoming clear that it cannot be maintained. The government must maintained the implementable part while keeping its priorities intact. This budget is very important during the period of recovery that is being talked about. Waiting until next March for revisions would be too late.

Second, transparency must be brought into the economy. There are no roadmaps in various sectors of the government. There is no roadmap for the energy sector. Measures are being taken in a fragmented manner to reform the financial sector. There is no roadmap for the banking sector either. The National Board of Revenue has taken some isolated measures.

Along with security in the economy, there must be confidence and predictability about the future. There will be no investment if there is no clear understanding of future prospects. That is why roadmaps are needed.

Third, under the 1991 law on financial management and good governance of the government, reports must be submitted every three months. The finance minister must tell Parliament about the post-budget experience, the gaps in coordination and capacity, and the changing global and geopolitical situation. This is not his responsibility alone; it should be the responsibility of Parliament. The opposition is also repeatedly demanding such a discussion.

The Prime Minister has said, “If you have something good, I will do it.” I liked both the Prime Minister’s challenge and the opposition’s proposals. We have always said that the issue should be brought to Parliament. If the action plans can be organised and placed before Parliament by the end of September, the situation may improve.

All three foreign agencies that assess Bangladesh’s sovereign credit rating have downgraded the country. Their view is that it will take more time for the economy to recover. The government has the willingness and initiative to attract investment; some measures, including deregulation, are also being taken. But there is a gap between what is being said and what is being done. In English, this is called walking the talk—whether you do what you say. That is why good will and capacity are very important.

It remains to be seen whether the government will organise the situation and reassess itself over the next month. I see September as an opportunity to reassess not only the Cabinet but the entire system and the way the country is being governed.

During the fallen government’s tenure, the country was held hostage by the import lobby by not making BAPEX active and investing in it. We need to see how many wells have been drilled over the past six months and what arrangements have been made to transmit the gas from those wells. Foreign investment is also important here. If we fail in this regard, it will send a very bad signal to other investors.

Gas exploration is now taking place offshore. Although tenders were floated twice during the caretaker government, no one came. We hope they will come this time. On the one hand, we have to move towards solar power, but at the same time, for energy security, extracting gas from the mainland and offshore must be treated as an urgent measure. The need for an energy-sector package still remains.

In 2023, soon after Covid, I said that 2026 would be the most difficult period for Bangladesh in terms of debt repayment. At the time, I analysed the mega projects and looked at when the loans for each of them would have to be repaid. But the situation is now even more difficult. The fallen government has left behind $9–10 billion in unpaid liabilities. It brought in energy but did not pay for it; money owed from abroad has also not come in.

There is a budget deficit and a need for financing, and foreign currency is also needed. The government is taking $8–9 billion in loans this year and is borrowing at the beginning of the year to repay loans. This is a serious matter.

We talk about an inclusive and humanitarian state. But we must also consider how many trillions of taka in burden we are placing on the shoulders of the next generation. Politics should not be done with the economy; rather, attempts should be made to manage the economy through politics. Decisions about who is being given responsibility where and what projects will be taken up in the future must be based on reality.

I was encouraged to hear that there will be a dashboard for each project, where progress will be shown in green or red and the IMED will monitor it. This could identify the problems of delays and repeated extensions of project deadlines. But we also need to see whether the government will be able to provide the skills and time required to establish and operate these systems, and how strong its connection will be with technically skilled professionals.

The manifesto promised to form a commission for financial sector reform and abolish the Financial Institutions Division. This is also linked to properly implementing the Pay Commission’s report. These issues are interconnected.

The government is unable to manage the political forces and resources needed to carry these out in terms of political economy. There are both forces resisting reforms and pressure in favour of reforms. But the government currently lacks the strength to deal with them. On the one hand, there is pressure from the bureaucracy; on the other, there is pressure from various interest groups. The government is unable to demonstrate political courage in making evidence-based and justice-based decisions.

My expectation is that the local government elections will be good. Beyond factionalism and electoral symbols, people of local standing should be elected who will not view local government as a means of livelihood. I see a source of hope there. If some powers are decentralised to local government, it could also bring balance to the behaviour of members of parliament. This will quickly become a major issue.

The best decision in the economy was showing the strength to correct its own mistakes. The government initially wanted to return the banks to the oligarchs, but later stepped back from that position and resolved the matter itself. This required a certain degree of courage.

In a single sentence, my assessment of the six months is that there needs to be more good intentions, more capacity and greater coordination. I hope the government will realise this. I want to give it an A, but it is leaning towards a B.