Main Page «
Front Page «
Metro «
Business «
International «
Sports «
National «
Editorial «
Home «
Timeout «
Letters «

Archive «
Launch Supplement «
Special Supplements «

HOLDING a fair, free, peaceful and neutral election reflecting the will of the people is only a necessary condition for democratic governance. The election proposed to be held on December 18 to elect members of the ninth parliament is expected to be fair and free under a reformed Election Commission chosen by the non-party caretaker government. Only two days are left before the nomination date and the shadow of doubt about the election is getting longer. If the government is unable to hold a universally participated election even after two years of its unusual tenure, the nation is likely to plunge into an uncertainty worse than the one prior to January 11, 2007. Apart from the brewing political clouds darkening the firmament, the newspaper reports about the inadequate preparation by the Election Commission (Jai Jai Din, November 17), if true, should be a matter of great concern. Is it really true that many assistant returning officers have not yet received the voters’ list without which nominations cannot be proposed and seconded? Why is the commission so reticent now on its state of preparedness for the general elections?
   The roadmap for holding the election on December 18 was announced more than a year ago and if anything, several political parties were demanding elections at an earlier date. To demand shifting of the election date now is certainly within the democratic rights of the political parties but how responsible is the demand for delaying the polls at this late stage? Or has the caretaker government been inept even in its ‘negotiations’ for its retreat route from the unethical ‘minus two’ strategy? Many will agree that one decent course of action available now is to defer the elections by ten days or so to December 28 and the nominations filing date by three to four days to November 24 along with a clear government declaration of a specific date for lifting the state of emergency power rules. These actions will go a long way in assuaging almost all the remaining grievances holding up a universal participation in the election. If some parties still stay away from the election, the nation may understand and may not consider the December 28 election to be one-sided. But immediate lifting of the emergency is a crucially important step.
   Hoping for the best it may be conjecture that a peaceful and an acceptably free election will pave the way for an elected government in office in Bangladesh on the new year’s day of 2009. It may thus be appropriate time to identify and analyse some of the factors that would transform the national parliament into the fulcrum for the sustainable prosperity of the country. The essential elements, however, begin with the election results being accepted as valid by all concerned. The political parties contesting the 2008 polls ought to make an open declaration to that effect sooner than later. There is also a big requirement of all political parties and organs of the state agreeing to vest the principal responsibility of spearheading all national activities to the legislature. Only a sea change in the mindset of all segments of the population will make this metamorphosis possible.
   Just as the quality of the head of an individual dictates the overall characteristics and personality of a person so does the attitude and quality of the speaker of the parliament define its kind. Barring a few exceptional occasions, the speaker of the parliament has not really acted as the dignified father figure guardian dispensing equal treatment to all members of the parliament irrespective of their position in the treasury or in the opposition bench. One reason for this malaise, that is, a concentration of practically all powers of governance in the hands of the leader of the house-cum-the prime minister is anticipated to be remedied by the internal democratising reforms of separation of roles and powers of the party chief. Proposed balance between the offices of the head of the state and the head of the government, if and when realised, is also likely to raise the status and influence of the speaker. Some countries have tried election of a speaker from a party other than the ruling party (Great Britain) or from a minor coalition partner or even a non-participating partner in the cabinet (India). The party/coalition winning the election to the ninth parliament may also consider another option of seeking a consensus in electing a willing elder non-political statesman of the country for donning the position of the speaker of the parliament. The tasks of finding such a venerable person and identifying a vacant parliamentary seat for his/her election without contest have to be an integral part of the consensus. The partisan bias of the speaker mainly originates from a sense of insecurity on two counts, namely, a threat of removal in case of ‘disloyalty’ to the party in power and the uncertainty about the nomination in the next parliament election. It is thus important to find out a dignified independent-minded honest individual for gracing the position.
   The reforms in the mindset of the nation will have to include the time-tested democratic practice in several democracies whereby all major issues of national importance are placed before the legislature for open debate, guidance and decision. The nation would do well to insist on the political parties to put in their election manifesto a pledge to be transparent in consulting and seeking the approval of the parliament on all issues of policy relating to mineral and energy resources including oil and gas, forests, water, land resources, entering into any treaty with any foreign country/entity, defence matters including war, immigration/emigration and naturalisation, agrarian reforms, development planning, investment priorities, human resources, education and employment strategies and so on. A guaranteed impartiality in the kind of a statesman-speaker will ensure that all members of the parliament on both sides of the isle willing to express their views will have a fair and equitable opportunity to do so. The national budget should really be subjected to a strict scrutiny of the parliament as well as line by line approval to legitimise the taxation measures on the basis of the well-known dictum of public finance, ‘no taxation without representation’.
   A major reforms measure in the legislative practice is the position of and a sense of responsibility of the opposition and the leader of the opposition. In a meaningful parliamentary democracy, governance very much includes the parliamentary opposition. Keeping the opposition out of the governance loop in a ‘winner takes all’ setting has been the most serious weakness in the democratic regimes in Bangladesh. Along with rubberstamping the parliament, the position of the leader of the opposition has been reduced to nullity in most cases. With one exception, the leaders of the opposition in the Bangladesh parliament never presented an alternative proposal to what the governments had tabled. With the exception of one, the leaders of the house have also not paid much attention to the parliament and its activities. The new government will have to elevate the prestige of the national parliament into a solemn place for serious policy debates rather than a forum for shameless eulogy of own leaders or blatant abuse of the opposite. The citizen voters must weigh the competence of the possible leader of a party to lead the country and to make the parliament the centrepiece of national policies before they choose a party to govern the country. The leader of the opposition will have to be given the due consideration and must be accorded the opportunity to express her/his uninhibited views on various matters of policy and governance. Likewise, the leader of the opposition is expected to be competent and aware of the responsibility to help the governance process. The parliament will also be the forum for debating and constructively deciding on issues such as hartal and boycott of the parliament sessions.
   One major instrument that helps strengthening the role of the legislature in the relevant activities of governance is the committee system. In Bangladesh, the parliamentary committee apparatus has either been non-existent or dominated by the ruling party or formed towards the expiry of the life of the parliament or has not been serviced properly with secretarial support. It is high time that the parliamentary norms are developed to ensure formation of parliamentary committees within three to four weeks time from the first day of the first session and these are fully serviced with competent human resources and material assistance. More importantly, the committee chairmanship and member composition should be allocated to all the parties represented in the parliament proportionate to the share of representation in the parliament. In a rational governance structure as in the United States, the appointments of the heads of various statutory bodies are subject to the approval of the congressional committee concerned to which these functionaries remain answerable as well. It will be appropriate to introduce this system in Bangladesh. The role of the parliament will enhance further by the creation of a healthy tradition of an outgoing cabinet minister present in the opposition benches preferably the former finance minister chairing the Public Accounts Committee. Since Bangladesh is seeking to establish transparency and accountability amongst public services and public servants, it is high time that the scrutiny of the accounts of all public sector entities are completed on an urgent basis to scrutinise the accounts of the most recent years so that the functionaries responsible for mismanagement, corruption and rule breaking can be pinpointed and proceeded against.
   The legislature of a country will be as useful to the nation as is the level of competence of its members. With the expected functioning of the local government bodies, the members of the parliament will no more be meddling in the upazila and other such matters; they will thus concentrate on their role in the national policy legislation. In this context, every effort will have to be made by the state to facilitate enhancement of the level of knowledge and skills of a member of the parliament; appropriate offices with supporting staff with expertise in economics, law, environment, poverty eradication and international affairs will have to be arranged for. All IT facilities and telecommunications opportunities are to be made available to the members of the parliament. Needless to say, the members of the parliament should be accorded significantly higher position in the warrant of precedence and maximum compensation that can be afforded by the country’s coffer be given. In exchange, the citizens will expect undivided attention to and full concentration of work by each member of the parliament to the legislative work. The members of the parliament should be exemplary in refraining from business activities for themselves and their respective families and in not harbouring any criminal, smuggling, money-laundering and terrorist activities. Is it not shameful that some members of the parliament cannot resist the temptation of making money out of trading their duty-free automobile import purportedly given for their own use? Society must guard against the tendency of a few contesting the election for a seat in the parliament being used as an investment for future pecuniary benefits. In other words, conditions must be created for the parliament to commit itself towards formulating innovative, appropriate and relevant policy legislation with single-minded devotion and integrity.
   Very often newspaper reports inform the members of the public about the bank loan and utility bill defaults of some members of the parliament. This is absolutely unacceptable that a law maker should be breaker of the law and rules. Maybe the members of the ninth parliament will make an effort to evolve a code of conduct and ethics for themselves. If not, the leader of the house in consultation with the leader of the opposition may help develop such a code of conduct.
   One serious bottleneck in the healthy and free functioning of the legislature in Bangladesh and several other developing countries is the provision under article 70 of the constitution resulting in the forfeiture of the membership in the parliament for voting against the party whip. This repressive provision has been intended to ensure political stability in the governing process. Necessary as it may be, article 70 suffers from many serious pitfalls. First of all, the law very often fails to prevent a dissident member from voting against the party whip as the penal action follow rather than precede the defiance to the party directive. Secondly, the wrath of the provision does seem to fall on an expelled member and not on a member resigning of his/her own volition as happened in case of Abu Hena of BNP in the last parliament. The ninth parliament will certainly give early attention to the provisions under article 70 of the constitution for a more rational amendment. One recommendation which sounds reasonable is to significantly modify the article to make its forfeiture of membership of parliament to voting against party whip applicable only in two instances, the division on a motion of ‘no confidence’ against the government and the voting on the national budget placed before the parliament by the treasury bench. To make the amended penal provision more effective than it has been, it may be provided for that the speaker will disregard the vote of a parliament member voting against party whip in case of a no confidence motion and on a budget item.
   Dr Mohammed Farashuddin is an economist and an educationist, and a former governor of Bangladesh Bank

Is it possible to assess accurately how much money will be needed to allow developing countries to adapt to climate change?
   Well, there certainly are still many things that we do not know precisely, but the sorts of figures that are being discussed point in one direction: a lot of money will be needed. The World Bank is speaking of $ 10 to 40 billion per year; according to Oxfam, $ 80 billion will be more likely. The UNFCCC argues that, by 2030, humanity as a whole will need $ 100 billion per year. These figures illustrate the scale of what we are looking at, though the money is not needed immediately.
   
   What funds are available today?
   In total, about $ 1 billion is budgeted for adaptation purposes, and the need will escalate over the years. At the Conference of Parties – COP for short – in Copenhagen at the end of next year, we will need five to ten times as much. The figures will keep rising, just as the impacts of climate change will become ever more evident.
   
   How should that money be handled? The World Bank has shown an interest in becoming the major channel of disbursement.
   Yes, it has, and so have various other multilateral agencies like the UNDP or the Global Environmental Facility. My personal preference would be for the Adaptation Fund to be in charge of the matter. The Adaptation Fund was established by the COP in Bali last year, and it has the best democratic legitimacy in the sense of not being controlled by donor governments. The Adaptation Fund’s governance is based on regional representation, so the countries that are most affected by Climate Change – the small island states, for instance – really have a say.
   
   But don’t the big industrial nations call the shots in multilateral affairs? I always felt that poor developing countries did not have the capacities to meaningful interfere in international negotiations.
   There certainly is no level playing field. Individual governments do struggle to send a competent delegation to a COP every three months, and that is how often they meet these days to cope with the negotiation agenda adopted in Bali. On the other hand, there are groups of countries that are strong enough to make a difference. Three groups matter in particular:
   – the small island states,
   – the African countries, and
   – the least developed countries.
   These groups have become quite effective. As a result, the Adaptation Fund meets governance criteria. Whether it meets efficiency criteria too remains to be seen. It will become operational next year.
   
   If individual governments find it difficult to cope with the fast pace of COPs, are they doing enough domestically to prepare their poor nations for climate change?
   There is quite a lot going on, and the governments are getting better at doing that kind of work. Most have prepared National Adaptations Plans of Action, NAPAs for short. So they know what needs to be done, once they get the money.
   
   What are the first measures that must be taken? I imagine that must differ from country to country.
   Initially it does not differ that much. First of all, it is necessary to build capacities and to raise awareness. People must understand the issues at stake, and so must the leaders. On that base, they can integrate climate-related measures into existing policies on agriculture, forestry, water provision, industrial development and so on. And on that base, there will be a need to invest in physical infrastructures, and the specifics will indeed differ from country to country, depending on whether they are exposed to rising sea levels, or the risk of landslides, or cyclones or whatever other challenges.
   
   As you said before, we are discussing enormous amounts of money. So far, donors have never met their decades-old pledge of spending 0.7 % of GDP on official development assistance (ODA). Lately, donor countries combined have spent around $ 100 billion on ODA per year. Do you really believe they will come up with similar amounts to help countries cope with climate change?
   They have been miserly in the past, yes. But as a matter of principle, we are not discussing ODA when we are speaking of adaptation. Climate change is something that the rich nations have caused, and they must compensate the victims. Moreover, they will not avoid the impacts themselves. The Dutch will need some € 10 billion per year to reinforce the dykes that protect them from the North Sea. It will be expensive to protect cities like London or Hamburg. And if rich nations spend money on their own adaptation, it will be impossible for them not to support other countries too, particularly as those countries are obviously the victims of Northern misbehaviour. Of course, they will focus on their own needs, but they won’t be able to shirk from those of others either.
   
   Where will all the money come from? Most national budgets are stretched already.
   So far, we have been discussing ODA that is allocated from national budgets. The funds needed for adaptation, however, will not be raised that way. Humanity will need new taxes, and they will be levied on polluters. There are proposals to impose a levy of five percent on cap-and-trade proceeds, so money could be generated when emission rights are auctioned. Such mechanisms can convincingly be presented to the public, much more convincingly than income taxes, for instance. A levy on air-travel tickets has also been mooted. It would generate around $ 10 billion per year – and that is what will be needed after the Copenhagen COP.
   
   How do the global financial crisis and the global climate crisis interrelate?
   There are two trends. On the one hand, businesses – and in particular the fossil-fuel industries – will want to postpone action, arguing that they cannot afford major investments in a time of turmoil. On the other hand, there is evidently a need for large-scale investment to stablise the demand-side of the world economy. Investing in new energy infrastructure makes sense in environmental terms, and so does investing in adaptation. Thanks to the current financial crisis, both also make perfect sense in global-economy terms too. Forward looking politicians will understand this.
   
   How do you assess the role of the major industrial powers in climate negotiations so far?
   The EU has been the most progressive,
   no doubt. European leaders have been arguing for a long time that action must be taken to mitigate climate change and prevent long-term catastrophes, and they have also spoken out in favour of assisting vulnerable countries. The USA under George Bush, however, has been very reluctant to do anything at all. Even to admit that there is a problem at all took this president years. Japan, Canada and Australia are somewhere in between the EU and the US.
   
   But the USA will have a new president soon.
   Yes, the election of Barack Obama is most encouraging. John McCain, of course, has also been ahead of his party on climate issues for a long time. But Obama’s campaign rhetoric on energy matters was much more stringent. He will not be under the pressure of the fossil-fuels lobby in the same way McCain would have been. And he surely has a mandate for change.
   This interview first appeared in D+C Development and Cooperation, a monthly publication based in Germany.

Poor Bangladesh

AKM Mohiuddin (November 18) blames the current government entirely for the condition of the country. Certainly it is to be blamed. But our two main political parties, both elected to government, share the greater blame. It is the stubbornness, selfishness and refusal to change on the part of our politicians that has caused these problems. We can blame the policeman for failing to catch the criminal. We can blame the social worker for not reforming the criminal. But it is the criminal who is ultimately responsible for his crimes —– even more when this criminal is elected to public office. It is not this government that has robbed the nation of hope –— it is our politicians who have robbed the nation of hope. At least we saw this government trying to fight Hasina and Khaleda —– and there is hope to found in the fact that they even tried.
   Ezajur Rahman
   Kuwait

---

We, as a nation is a tolerant one. But we can’t forgive Indian Border Security Forces. We have become angry to the right degree, and at the right time, and for the right purpose, and in the right way.
   We condemn vehemently the border killings by the BSF.
   Gopal Sengupta
   Canada

It was a well written comment by Nasreen Zaman. I wish we could have democracy like that in the United States.
   Unfortunately, we do not have leaders like them. Most of their leaders are highly educated and dedicated. They are not hungry to grab the country’s wealth as soon as they are elected.
   In every election when we elect a leader we think, ‘This time he/she will lead our country on the right track. They have learned their lessons from their previous mistakes. They will be more careful this time.’ But alas! Over the last 37 years we have seen nothing but the same mistakes been repeated over and over again. Not only do we have a short memory, there is no one to lead our country in a prosperous manner. Who will inspire us saying, ‘Yes, we can change.’
   Ishrat Chowdhury
   Mississauga, Canada

Next on Quick Comments

a. AL, JP decide to join polls, form govt jointly: JP hands Hasina list of more than 50 candidates (New Age, November 19) b. Some nominations spark protests in AL (New Age, November 19) c. Rights activists for more women reps in parliament (New Age, November 19) d. Warrant issued for arrest of distributors of 3 China milk brands: Govt bans import of Yashili 1-2, Sweet Baby 2 (New Age, November 19) e. Global financial crisis will hamper aid funding: Red Cross (New Age, November 19)