How effective are the pourashava standing committees?
The standing committee - an important democratic apparatus to ensure accountability at the pourashava level - remains ineffective due to a number of factors
Strengthening democratic institutions without weakening the executive rests on the effectiveness of the committee system. Committees empower members to perform a variety of tasks that result in a trustworthy and accountable organisation. Committees, for example, help make sound decisions and provide an important way to monitor the work of management bodies.
According to the Local Government (Pourashava) Act, 2009, forming committees is an important function for safeguarding the transparency and accountability of pourashava. Regrettably, the idea of pourashava committees was not received well by those who shouldered the responsibility to take these committees forward.
The act included the provision to form a standing committee to ensure the accountability of the pourashava. According to the act, 10 standing committees shall be formed through regulations during the first pourashava meeting or work proceedings of any onward meetings and after defining two and half hours tenure, namely, a) establishment and finance; b) taxation and levy; c) accounts and audit; d) urban planning, services for citizen and development; e) rules and regulations and public security; f) communication and Infrastructural development; g) women and children; h) fisheries and livestock; i) information and culture, and j) observation, monitoring, and control of prices.
Keep updated, follow The Business Standard's Google news channel
In addition to these committees, the pourashava may form additional standing committees, especially those involved with non-governmental organisations, such as disaster management, market management, women's development, poverty alleviation and slum development, health, water and sanitation, waste disposal, and handover.
The standing committee of the pourashava should have five members and the chairman and members will be elected from among the councillors of the meeting. Mayor shall not be chairman of any committee. Even, no councillor shall be chairman of more than one committee without the decision of the pourashava.
In some pourashava, where separate committees cannot form because of a shortage of elected members, there shall be one committee for more than one issue. In every standing committee, there shall be no less than 40% female members. In every standing committee, the mayor shall be a member by designation and the mayor shall be chairman of the committee of rules and regulations and public security.
If any member of the standing committee is absent for more than two months for unavoidable circumstances, the pourashava can decide to give responsibility to any other councillor.
The committee can also co-opt a person as a member who is an expert on the respective issue. The co-opted member will not have the polling right to take a decision in the meeting. The advice of the standing committee is usually discussed at the next pourashava meeting. And if any suggestion is not granted, the pourashava informs the standing committee in writing of the reason for the allocation and non-approval.
Each activity of this standing committee will be finalised after the approval of the pourashava. If any expert or any citizen expresses interest to be present in any meeting, pourashava or standing committee or other any committee can permit him to be present and he can raise his opinion. The committee can take decisions or suggestions according to his opinion.
The provision of committees at all levels of government has become an integral part of the legislation as committees are now considered an important process in ensuring transparency and accountability of pourashava.
Of course, one may wonder how much the committee system will be able to guarantee transparency and accountability in the activities of the pourashava when the committees are formed with a volunteer attitude and they have no financial and executive authority.
Despite some margins, it is believed that the practice of the committee in the pourashava will ensure coordination of activities among different departments and will certainly help the process of providing services to the poorest sections for whom 'access to public service' is somewhat challenging.
Foreign assistance to local governance is not a new phenomenon in Bangladesh. UN agencies and like-minded donor agencies have been effective in complementing the government's efforts to strengthen the pourashava committee system.
The inherent advantages of holding committees depend heavily on the follow-up process, the opportunity to speak freely without fear, the opportunity to share information, and the intensity of accepting their recommendations at monthly pourashava meetings that reflect customary law. It provides scope to play an overseeing role of the committees on the functioning of the pourashava.
There is a lack of ownership and goodwill on the part of various actors relevant to the committee. The pourashava committee only exists on paper only because the members of the committee find it unacceptable to revive the committee. In most cases, the notice of the meeting is not issued in advance.
Member secretaries in charge of setting agendas and maintaining communication with the chair and other members are not playing their role effectively.
The low participation of the members indicates that the committee meeting is not fruitful. The schemes recommended by the committee meeting at the regular meeting of the pourashava are not urgent.
The effective functioning of the committee can provide many benefits to the effective functioning of the pourashava. For example, the standing committee allows informal discussions between members, which is a prerequisite for developing relations between members of different political persuasions.
Committee meetings serve as a forum for cooperation and settlement. The members of the committee must be assured of patience, perseverance, and gradual knowledge. After all, there is no alternative to strengthening the commitment to uphold the spirit of transparency and accountability of the pourashava.
Dr Mohammad Tarikul Islam is an Associate Professor of Government and Politics at Jahangirnagar University. He has been a Visiting Scholar at the University of Oxford, the University of Cambridge, and SOAS (University of London).
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and views of The Business Standard.
