|
The
Chairman of the Panel, Shaikh Razzaque Ali, opened the
colloquy by giving the floor to Mr. Khalilur Rahman.
Mr. Rahman referred to page three of Mr. Ali
Ashraf's paper and said that the Finance Committee was
one of the most important committees of the Parliament.
He referred to where Mr. Ali Ashraf had listed the
different committees within the Finance Ministry as the
Public Accounts Committee, the Committee of Estimates
and the Committee of Public Undertakings.
Mr
Khalilur Rahman asked Mr. Ali Ashraf whether he had seen
this morning a newspaper report that said that the
Auditor General had submitted a report to the President
where the misappropriation of funds of Tk one thousand
crores were reported, particularly in the Education
Ministry, the Works Ministry and the T&T Board.
He asked whether the Public Accounts Committee
had conducted an enquiry on this. Mr. Rahman also
mentioned about the reference made in the paper
regarding the status of the committee chairmen, where he
had said that "such status must be defined and
specified" and also that without due status the
Chairmen could not influence the Minister as a member of
the committee. Mr.
Khalilur Rahman asked whether Mr. Ali Ashraf was trying
to suggest that the committee members should be given
the status of a deputy Prime Minister.
Mr.
A.K Azad continued the questions by asking whether the
opinion of the three Committees described above, the
Public Accounts Committee, the Committee on Estimates
and the Public Undertakings Committee, were taken into
consideration while preparing the budget.
Dr. S. A. Akbar took the floor
next and asked whether the interests and the aspirations
of the common man in the light of his socio-economic
condition were taken into consideration in the
preparation of the budget.
A similar question was asked by Mr. Zahurul Islam
to Mr. Ashraf that, as the Chairman of the Finance
Committee, whether his opinions had been sought in the
preparation of the budget which would be presented very
shortly. Mrs.
Mahmuda Shawgat asked the same question and requested
the opinion of Mr. Ashraf as to what should be the
suitable role of the Chairman.
Mr.
Akhtaruzzaman thanked Prof. Ali Ashraf for his paper and
stated that references to the Indian and British
Parliaments frequently drawn should be avoided because
we were a different people with different socio-economic
backgrounds. Being a Member, he stated, involved the
mundane as well as diverse tasks ranging from providing
proper sanitary facilities to constituents to finding
airline tickets for them to perform their hajj. He
wanted that provisions should be there in the budget for
funds to be allocated to MPs for carrying out these
multifaceted works for the people in their
constituencies. He
said that the Constitution had put the responsibility of
the welfare of a constituent on the elected Member.
Mr. Akhtaruzzaman continued to
state that MPs had no role in the Money Bill, they did
not know why taxes were imposed and asked whether the
government was not violating Article 83 of the
Constitution by invoking the provision of SROs to impose
taxes at any time. He also lamented the fact that the
Annual Financial Statement could be read in the
Parliament but could not be voted on. He also mentioned
that as MPs they were constantly roaming about in the
Secretariat, canvassing for schools, roads, bridges and
culverts for their constituencies. He wanted an expanded
role for the MPs in deciding
budgetary provisions for these sorts of
activities in their own constituencies.
Mr.
Mohammad Abdullah thanked Prof. Ali Ashraf for his
presentation and said that he had made certain
recommendations that represented the views of the
majority of the Parliament.
He also took the opportunity to correct Prof.
Ashraf's observation that the Constitution remained
suspended during the period of 1975-90.
In actual fact the Constitution was not
suspended. He
also complained that the Committee on Estimates had not
sat for the last one year despite several
efforts/reminders to the Speaker. He concluded by saying
that there should be a provision which makes it
mandatory for committees to sit regularly.
Mr.
Kazi Shamsur Rahman referred to a statement made by
Prof. Ashraf in which he had said that the committees
were not able to play a meaningful role in the
government as there is no continuity of the government.
He asked Mr. Ali Ashraf whether he felt that, in the
future, the committees would be able to play a
meaningful role. He
also commented on the various Audit Reports exposing the
financial laxity that is rampant in the government which
led to the general population to lose faith in the
Parliamentarians. He asked Mr. Ashraf's own viewpoints
on this matter. He
also asked Mr. Ali Ashraf what steps the government was
taking on the many expressions of frustration voiced by
the Public Undertakings Committee on the anomalies
taking place in the various public institutions.
Mr.
Zafrul Islam Chowdhury reminded Mr. Ali Ashraf that
before being elected to the House he was involved with
the private sector and that he knew very well the
contribution that the private sector had made in the
economic development of Bangladesh.
He also believed that Mr. Ashraf had played a
very useful role as a spokesperson for the private
sector when he was in the opposition. However, today,
when the private sector was languishing under the burden
of many taxes and SROs and when thousands of court cases
on revenues were pending in the High and Supreme Courts,
his paper did not talk about the private sector at all.
He questioned whether Prof. Ali Ashraf, as the Chairman
of the Finance Committee, had any intention of looking
into the sufferings of the private entrepreneurs.
Dr.
Asadur Rahman thanked Mr. Ali Ashraf and asked him to
elaborate on what linkages could be installed to improve
the interaction between the Finance Ministry and the
Finance Committee so that the country's budget could
bring about a change in people's lives.
He also questioned what influence this Committee
could have, with its limited resources, over the Finance
Ministry, which in fact prepared the budget throughout
the year.
Prof.
Ali Ashraf thanked the participants for the interest
they had shown in the paper by asking so many questions.
In his answer to the question raised by Mr. Khalilur
Rahman, Mr. Ashraf mentioned that he had briefly
mentioned in his paper the scope of the three finance
committees and that the Constitution gave these
committees enough scope to look into the matters of
misuse and misappropriation of state funds. He stated
that if corrective actions were taken on the basis of
the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General, then
it is not at all difficult to improve the oversight
functions of the Finance Committee as a whole. In the
same way, if the powers that are given to the Public
Undertakings Committee and the Estimates Committee by
the Constitution are properly executed, a lot of these
problems can be overcome. Emphasizing that the post of
the Comptroller and Auditor General was a Constitutional
appointment, there was enough scope for these reports to
be debated at length in the Parliament and the
irregularities exposed and those at fault be taken to
task.
He
referred to Mr. Akhtaruzzaman's comments about citing
examples of Britain and India, he explained that
wherever there was a good example to cite we should do
so and follow that example.
In this way we shall be enriching ourselves with
the experience that other countries may have taken years
to perfect. As
was mentioned in an earlier session, the experience of
democracy in Bangladesh was interrupted many times and
it has only been since after 1990 that the country has
been working as a democracy. It is a sad truth that the
nation that had fought a war against such odds in 1971
and had set such a glorious example for the freedom
loving people of the world, has been beset with economic
problems from which it has never been able to extricate
itself. He
explained that Bangladesh goes to the Aid Club every
year and the adjectives that are used in the memorandums
of the Aid Club meetings are not very complimentary. He
regretted that the nation has to describe itself in
terms that no self-respecting nation should have to.
He mentioned that he has been in different
financial committees ever since the first Parliament and
he felt that the committees could play a big role in
bringing about financial discipline in the country. He
also mentioned that many of the country's financial
people were in these committees and therefore the
responsibility it had was enormous.
Referring
to the questions by a number of MPs on the role of these
committees in the preparation of the national budget,
Mr. Ashraf explained that the Parliament has elected
these committees, so when these committees are formed,
people with expertise in the field are included.
He said that he was happy to say that this year,
as well as the past year, the Finance Committee had
given some very positive inputs to the Finance Ministry
on the preparation of the budget.
He was also proud, he said, to report that the 31
meetings which the Finance Committee had held had given
their recommendations unanimously. He stressed that
these committees try to bring about transparency in the
government and that every member of the committee,
irrespective of party affiliations, is trying to make
them effective.
The Chairman, Shaikh Razzaque Ali, adjourned the
session by thanking the presenter for his paper and all
the participants for the learned questions they had
fielded.
|
