Foreign tours by government servants
In the October 16, 2012, issue of Energy & Power, Farid Hossain writes: "They simply love foreign tours. They are the senior officials of the ministry, but they don't mind attending training programmes meant for junior engineers." I heard similar stories from scientists of research organisations also. It is a fact that senior government servants frequently attend scientific conferences abroad.
There are allegations that no file for approval of attendance at scientific conferences abroad by scientists moves smoothly in the secretariat unless some senior officials of the concerned ministry are included in the delegation. Occasionally, the approval comes too late with little time to make necessary arrangements for a visit.
No wonder, some civil servants and a private secretary of a minister were included as members of a technical team that went abroad to inspect the equipment of a power plant. Couldn't the equipment be inspected more professionally by a competent body like Lloyds and at a much lower cost?
An eight-member delegation led by a state minister visited Moscow in October 2009 "for having clearer ideas about that country's nuclear technology." Other members of the delegation included the power secretary, the energy secretary, the secretary to the economic relations division, a joint secretary to the power, energy and mineral resources ministry, chairman of the parliamentary standing committee on the same ministry, project director of Rooppur Nuclear Power Project (RNPP) and a member of Bangladesh Atomic Energy Commission (BAEC) (DS October 13, 2009).
The desire of the civil servants to have "clearer ideas" about Russian nuclear technology is most appreciable. We could get the benefit of their visit if any of the secretaries addressed a seminar or wrote an article on the status of Russian nuclear technology after their return to Dhaka.
I wonder where the four secretaries are now. They are unlikely to stay at the same posts after more than three years. If not retired, they have most probably been transferred to other ministries together with all the knowledge they acquired from their Moscow visit. How will the Roopur Nuclear Power Plant (RNPP) benefit now from their knowledge if my assumption is correct?
Secondly, was it really necessary to travel to Moscow "for having clearer ideas" on Russia's nuclear technology?" In this digital age, is it not possible to get all the information the secretaries wanted from the internet? Alternatively, couldn't the BAEC arrange a workshop for the secretaries in Dhaka and provide them with the information they needed?
Thirdly, universities and different professional bodies frequently organise seminars on science and technology in Dhaka and other cities in Bangladesh. How many secretaries attend such seminars for having "clearer ideas" on any scientific and technical subject? Why are they so keen on acquiring knowledge by travelling to Moscow?
Last December, a 15-member delegation spent one week in Moscow to negotiate the terms of the $500 million loan for the RNPP. Does it require 15 members and seven days only to negotiate the terms of a loan? Did anyone enquire exactly what role each member of the delegation played during their stay in Moscow?
It is also noticeable that the delegations to Moscow in connection with the RNPP were accompanied by ministers and several secretaries. I was directly involved with the Rooppur Project during the late 1960s. I made ¾ visits to Moscow and Brussels for discussions with the reactor vendors. Our delegations, much smaller size, were always composed of technical personnel only. No minister or secretary ever accompanied us.
A 14-member delegation, including 11 from Dhaka, attended the annual general conference of the International Atomic Energy (IAEA) in Vienna in 2012. I attended such a conference in 1974. Only two members, the chairman and a member of BAEC, flew from Bangladesh and Justice Abu Syed Chowdhury, then Head of the Bangladesh Mission in Geneva, joined as the leader of the delegation. I joined as the fourth member from Vienna where I was stationed at that time to carry out a nuclear power planning study for Bangladesh.
The general conference of the IAEA is an annual event where only the leader of the delegation delivers a speech. The rest of the members of the delegation have very few functions apart from listening to the speeches by the heads of other delegations and attending receptions. The size of such delegations hardly exceeded 4 or 5 members in the past. It is not clear why it was necessary to send a 14-member delegation to the general conference last year.
These are only few examples to show how public money is being wasted by some public servants. I am not suggesting that official foreign trips by the ministers and civil servants are not necessary. Of course, they need to go abroad for important official tasks but such visits should be made only in the interest of the country and its people. Unnecessary foreign trips not only increase the financial burden of the government but also hamper normal official work during their absence.
I am, however, glad to note that the parliamentary committee on the ministry of water resources recently asked for detailed information on foreign visits by the minister, state minister and high officials of the ministry. The committee wants to know how much money was spent and what was achieved by such visits (Prothom Alo, January 21). It is very encouraging to note that the parliamentary committee wants to bring some kind of accountability to foreign visits by ministers and high officials. Other parliamentary committees should follow this example.
It is also necessary to formulate a general policy on foreign visits by ministers and government servants in order to bring accountability to such visits and to stop unnecessary and prolonged trips in the name of official visits. The policy should attach due priority to visits by research scientists, doctors, engineers and other professionals to attend scientific and technical conferences.
Comments