Bibek Debroy: The PMO should have done better

I therefore propose to launch a massive scheme to repair, renovate and restore all the water bodies that are directly linked to agriculture.

In the current year, we shall begin with pilot projects in at least five districts, and we shall select at least one district in each of the five regions of the country.... Once the pilot projects are completed and validated, Government will launch the National Water Resources Development Project and complete it over a period of seven to 10 years."

This quote is from the Budget speech for 2004-05. Someone recently asked me whether I knew what happened to these pilot projects. I didn't, just as I didn't know what had happened to the proposal to introduce food stamps on a pilot basis in two or three contiguous districts.

Since a large number of promises are made, within the Budget and outside the Budget, it is a good idea to have action taken reports (ATRs), so that one can pin down the government on promises made. Under the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government, Budget papers had ATRs.

At least for a while. This is a good idea, even if the language of ATRs is sometimes vague. Consider the ATR for 2001-02. "The proposal is under consideration." "Action has been initiated in this regard." "The Expenditure Reforms Commission has been constituted."

Such statements don't get us far. Someone once said, you must not mistake movement for action. These statements from the ATR represent movement. They don't represent action. The 2004-05 Budget papers didn't have an ATR. Understandable. Why should the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) take action on NDA's Budget promises?

I hope there is going to be an ATR this time. Indeed, there should be an ATR not just for the finance ministry, but all ministries.

However, to pin down a government with an ATR or without it, promises must be precise, with clear timeframes. The IMR (infant mortality rate) will be 45 per 1,000 live births in 2007 is a precise promise, even though it is unlikely to be achieved. Contrast this with the following NCMP (National Common Minimum Programme) promise.

"The UPA government will raise public spending on health to at least 2 to 3 per cent of GDP over the next five years with focus on primary health care. A national scheme for health insurance for poor families will be introduced. The UPA will step up public investment in programmes to control all communicable diseases and also provide leadership to the national AIDS control effort."

Public health spending that is 2 to 3 per cent of GDP over the next five years is monitorable. The rest of it is not.

Which brings one to another obvious point. Consider the Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana (PMGSY), launched in December 2000 and believed to have been a success after the National Highway Development Programme (NHDP).

Initial reports on the PMGSY, and the Economic Survey 2003-04 generally continued with this tradition, were all about how much money was spent. Rs 2,500 crore in 2000-01 and Rs 2,329 crore in 2003-04 and so on. We weren't told how many additional roads resulted.

In one of the boxes of last year's Survey there was, of course, the information that 20,740 road-works were completed till March 2004 under the PMGSY.

Now that additional information has begun to trickle in about the PMGSY, this year's Survey will hopefully tell us how many additional kilometres of roads have resulted. That still doesn't tell us much about the quality of these roads. Everyone has been to Neemrana fort. On your way from Delhi to Jaipur, you have to turn right from the national highway to reach Neemrana.

Along that side-road, not too many people venture beyond Neemrana. Those who do, go to see an ancient waterworks. And probably very few venture beyond the waterworks. Because there is only a village beyond and no road that cuts back to the national highway.

On a recent visit to Neemrana, we went to the waterworks and drove beyond it. On a dirt road that led to the village. Suddenly, in the middle of nowhere, the dirt road became a metalled road for one kilometre and went back to becoming a dirt road.

We were told the metalled road was courtesy the PMGSY and nothing more could be added because the money ran out. Has this one kilometre in the middle of nowhere added significantly to village connectivity?

To get back to the point, with technology and geographic information systems (GIS), it should be possible to independently verify what improvements PMGSY has led to. To get back to the original point, Business Standard has carried (February 10) excerpts from the PMO's policy thrust for assorted ministries.

This is supposed to monitor functioning over the next six months and check whether ministries are conforming to NCMP objectives. Excellent idea. But for subsequent ATRs to be meaningful, you need precise targets and timeframes, preferably with improvements in outcomes. But if you go down the list, you will discover the favoured expression is "timely implementation".

Barring the Council for Advancement of People's Action and Rural Technology (CAPART) overhaul and Housing and Urban Development Corporation (Hudco) reorganisation, where there is a timeframe of six months, that's the general thrust. Which is neither here nor there. The PMO should have done better.