The government took a bold move, at the expense of political backlash, in backtracking the decision to revive the constituency development grant, put up as the Priority Development Fund (PDF).

The PDF is a sour old wine in a new bottle. Whatever name it goes by, the idea behind the fund is to allocate a portion of the national budget to constituencies to finance short-term or ad hoc development projects outside the dzongkhag level. It was, when it was called the CDG, seen as a political tool, deemed unconstitutional with the Election Commission of Bhutan writing to Parliament, warning about the consequences.

The ruling party or the government, even under pressure from its members and support of the opposition party, recognised the long-term implications of the proposal. In the words of the finance minister, the PDF proposal could create constitutional issues related to MPs’ roles in both approving and overseeing development funds, including risks of unequal fund distribution. Above all, the fund could compromise free and fair elections. Political parties outside the parliament should be relieved to hear the decision of the government as the fund would come at a huge cost for them.

Politicians could use the CDG or PDF in the next round of elections to convince how they managed to seek funds outside the plans to help voters. It would uneven the level playing field besides being deemed unconstitutional. Going by the trend, people vote for parties that deliver their promises notwithstanding the priority.

The decision, even if the government is going against the wishes of their party members, is a big step in showcasing how vibrant or unique our democracy is. CDG was discontinued because it was seen as an instrument that could breed both monetary and political corruption and could be used to win future elections. Apart from the change in name, the proposed fund is not different.

We can surmise the finance minister and the cabinet minister are coming under severe pressure from the party, but it is good for democracy and rule of law to backtrack on promises or plans that are deemed illegal or controversial.

The government should have gained the trust of the people who are not aligned to political parties. In fact, we should be grateful to the ruling government for backtracking on the decision. This is more credible than giving members of parliament funds to make voters happy.

Besides, like the finance minister said, the local government is provided with a substantial fund in the 13th Plan, Nu 72 billion. For the fiscal year 2024-25, the budget allocated to LGs is Nu 15.17 billion. The budget size is an indication that a lot of developmental activities could be covered in the plan period to ensure that there will be no requirement of “ad hoc” activities.

There will be debates and pressure, but a government  that looks beyond party politics adheres to concerns, fear and potential for creating conflicts with the laws will gain more than they lose. It is about credibility and building trust with the voters by taking the right decisions.