Growing concerns that the effectiveness of Bangladesh's development efforts could be undermined by governance shortcomings have reached such an extent that it has made the donor agencies hint at improvements in governance benchmarks as a condition for further access to development credits. The above scenario may naturally lead the common man to conclude that we are going downhill, and that there can be no reprieve in the near future.

Such conclusions, however, blur the achievements of development efforts in Bangladesh. According to a major donor agency involved with the development of the country since its inception, Bangladesh has recorded impressive economic and social gains in the past decade.

The country has doubled per capita income and taken strides towards reaching many of the Millennium Development Goals (MDG). Gender parity in school enrolment, at both primary and secondary level, has been achieved, child mortality has been halved, and life expectancy has increased significantly since the 1990s.

What has not happened is that the benefits of development have not trickled down to the grassroots levels sufficiently enough to be called "people's participation," democratic options are evaporating fast, and the rule of law is observed more in its violation. Hence the cry for good governance.

Elements of good governance
What do we mean by good governance (g-gov from now)? In a general sense, g-gov is the manner in which power is exercised in the management of a country's economic and social resources for overall development. This implies sound economic management based on: (i) accountability; (ii) participation; (iii) predictability; and (iv) transparency. Protection of human rights, application of democratic options, the rule of law, and promotion of independent media are also elements of g-gov.

Efforts at improving governance
The government is not unaware of the need for g-gov. Succeeding political governments in the country have, time and again, taken shots at g-gov by means of initiating reforms through donor-assisted projects in different sectors. Financial sector reform project, public administration reform project and dialogue with donors on the need for reducing unacceptably high system loss and inefficient distribution in the power system are some examples.

Who governs: Bureaucracy or parliament?
Governance in Bangladesh is tied down to the bureaucracy because it is, by and large, the executive arm of the government. In our country, as in other Asian countries formerly under colonial rule, administration is top-down and decisions are carried out through an hierarchy of officers to be implemented at the bottom rank.

Under such an environment, g-gov would mean that executive decisions at the Secretary level of a Ministry, taken in national interest, are allowed to go down to the lower ranks, unhindered, for implementation. The problem arises when there is political intervention at the top as well as mid-secretarial level by "higher authorities," especially those with greater political influence, to alter decisions to suit group interests.

In such situations, the bureaucrats perform their duties passively; consequentially inefficiency and poor governance creeps in and permeates throughout the rank and file of the ministry. The end result is disillusionment and confusion, which in turn breed further inefficiency. Piecemeal efforts at g-gov by dynamic officers at different levels, are too little, or come too late, to change the scenario.

Political intervention
What is the rationale behind interventions? Like most countries of South Asia, Bangladesh is experiencing accelerated population growth, particularly, urban growth crisis due to which demand for jobs, housing, medicare and other necessities surpasses the facilities available by far. The person standing at the end of a job line has slim chance of getting a job; thus using political intervention to get it becomes the order of the day.

Viewed from "the reverse angle" (a popular World Cup term), the doling out of such facilities becomes a ploy for obtaining political support, and the rule of law becomes translated into the rule of the high and mighty. Lack of transparency and accountability is a shield for partisan activities. And when another political party comes to power the rigmarole continues; only the players change.

Where does g-gov start?
From the foregoing analysis it can be suggested that in a country with top-down administration, g-gov has to start at the top. The leaders have to rise above partisan interest and have a national vision such that the fruits of development spill over to the common citizens and not just to a particular group or groups. The voice of the common man -- through their representatives in the local government, the parliament or through civil society organisations -- has to make its mark in policy-making.

This means that there has to be grassroots participation in the decision-making process. The front-page interviews published frequently in the local dailies in Bangladesh and chat-forums on television of cross-sections of intelligentsia on national issues and their solutions -- a healthy forum for peoples' participation -- should be listened to by the policy-makers.

The practice of awarding public works and procurement contracts purely on merit basis has to be encouraged. The understanding by the bidders of a contract that they will get the job if they are worthy, whether they are in the ruling party or in the opposition, will lessen the bickering for political power and the resultant agitations. Sound procurement policies will also save the country the hundreds of crores of Taka lost to inefficient management.

Parliamentary supervision in Bangladesh is obstructed by the lack of facilities for the MPs to review and discuss policy issues and options in a rational manner instead of in an environment of political polarisation. Each Member of Parliament should be given office space, a computer, a personal staff and a small fund for research and analysis on issues being discussed in the House.

Heads of some important parliamentary committees like Public Accounts Committee (PAC) and Public Undertaking Committee (PUC) may be rotated between ruling and opposition party lawmakers. A "Minister's Hour" may be introduced on television for a minister to answer questions concerning his ministry. Goodwill delegations of MPs may be sent occasionally to attend parliamentary sessions of developed countries as a learning process. The parliamentary committee on public accounts may insist for audit of public accounts at the end of each financial year.

And finally, the members of the ruling party may give a more patient hearing to the opposition in the parliamentary debates, learning from their own experiences while in opposition. Likewise, the opposition should not oppose for opposition's sake only but speak out when national interest is hampered. A strong national economy will come to the advantage of the next government when they come to power, whereas their task at nation building will become more difficult if they inherit a weak economy. This way, the beginning of a journey towards sustainable good governance may hopefully be made.

Md. Ghulam Murtaza is General Manager, Research Department, Bangladesh Bank.