Submit your Article

The recent spate of intense pre-monsoon rains has come as an alarm for a polity that has not been quite effective when it comes to protecting lives and properties during disasters, natural or otherwise. 

The rains that have been lashing different parts of the country of late may be an indication that monsoon rains might be more intense this year than in the past, resulting in increased loss of lives and properties than in previous years if the level of our disaster preparedness is not notches in comparison to the past.
Keeping a worst-case scenario in mind, the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Authority has prepared a draft Monsoon Preparedness and Response National Action Plan that estimates that monsoon disasters this year are likely to affect as many as 2m people—in a country with a population of barely 30m—from 4.5 lakh households.The action plan is reportedly based on analysis of relevant data from the Department of Hydrology and Meteorology and also includes suggestions coming from stakeholders. As these disasters are likely to affect all seven provinces, NDRRMA has assigned sectoral tasks to relevant sub-national authorities.     
Preparing a disaster preparedness plan is indeed a good start, it is the way to go when it comes to minimizing injuries as well as the loss of lives and properties. Obviously, its effective execution can make a difference between life and death. A plan that remains on paper is not worth the paper it is written on.  
In Nepal, the weather phenomenon generally sets in around mid-June and withdraws with the start of October.
By the way, even if the monsoon were to stick strictly to its usual dates of onset and withdrawal, that too in this day and age of erratic weather patterns, has this action plan not been a bit late in coming? If yes, what caused the delays? Should not a democratic state tasked with protecting lives and limbs not answer this question? Should not it make sure that such delays do not happen again?
Will our authorities not be running against time while making necessary arrangements for protecting lives and properties from monsoon-induced disasters like landslides, floods, inundation, etc, given chances of an early onset of monsoon? One more thing: Our action plans look great, but their poor implementation leaves much to be desired. ‘Action’ has been the missing part in most of our grandiose plans. Let’s hope that this does not happen with a plan that aims to reduce the risk of monsoon disasters and manage them better. 

The first edition of Sagarmatha Sambaad, Nepal’s initiative to draw global attention to the impact of climate change on the mountains and humanity, begins tomorrow. Themed Climate Change, Mountains and the Future of Humanity, one of the promotional materials for the summit features a nugget of wisdom in Sanskrit, in a smaller print: Vaade vaade jaayate tatwabodha. 

A rough translation of the line would be: Only through relentless deliberations can one get to the essence. It’s just like extracting butter by churning milk, though the process of getting to the essence can be a very long and excruciating, especially in this day and age of global warming, climate change and climate deniers. 

Despite a very small carbon footprint, Nepal has been bearing disproportionate effects of climate change and these effects are most severe on the Himalayas, one of the very few priceless sources of freshwater and a lifeline for billions of people living downstream.  

Notable absences from the neighborhood and beyond aside, diplomats, politicians, climate scientists and experts from around the world are gathering on the lap (literally) of the Sagarmatha, the world’s highest mountain, for the summit. Apart from possible shortcomings on the part of the host, these absences perhaps point out at an alarming level of indifference on the part of the political top brass of respective countries toward a smorgasbord of issues that have a most profound impact on the future of humanity. They seem to forget that while humanity can now explore the vastness of Space in fancy vessels, it cannot bring water from there to quench the thirst of parched living beings.  

Indeed, the summit has become all the more important as it is taking place at the time of a major withdrawal from the Paris Agreement and a fresh round of hostilities between two nuclear-powered countries in the immediate neighborhood and major wars in other parts of the world, activities that take a massive on the environment.
It comes barely a month after the host country nearly choked as air pollution worsened due to drought and raging wildfires, resulting mainly from climate change and global warming.     

As for preparations vis-a-vis the summit, some critics as well as skeptics argue that the government should have adopted a bottom-up approach, by initiating discussions at local, provincial and central levels, identifying issues and presenting them at the forum. Such a grounded approach, they say, would have prevented the conclave from becoming a purely academic exercise and a mere talk shop, taking it further away from the lived experiences of local communities. They are perhaps right, also in their stance that much more could have been done to rally the whole nation behind this common cause.
Criticism and a bit of skepticism aside, the dialogue is a good beginning and here’s hoping that those at the helm of affairs around the world get to the essence soon enough—and act—before this Living Planet ceases to be as a result of our climate-unfriendly ways of life. 

With less than two months remaining in the current fiscal year, the government has managed to spend only 32.78 percent of its allocated capital budget. This chronic underperformance in capital expenditure is not new. Rather, it is part of a concerning pattern that has plagued the national development trajectory for years.

The failure to effectively utilize the capital budget affects Nepal’s economic prospects. In the last fiscal year, only 63.47 percent of the Rs 302bn capital allocation was spent. Worse still, capital spending has averaged around 60 percent over the past four years, a steep decline from the pre-covid average of 70 percent and a sharp fall from highs of over 80 percent in 2017-18. These figures reflect a system that struggles with efficiency, planning and execution.

The consequences of low spending are multifaceted. On the surface, infrastructure development is delayed or left incomplete. More deeply, low capital spending restricts job creation, depresses local economic activities and drives a surge in labor migration. The country’s inability to create sufficient employment opportunities has forced millions to seek work abroad. This clearly shows that the domestic economy is not growing fast or inclusively enough.

The root causes of this underperformance are well known. Bureaucratic delays, poor project readiness and ineffective implementation continue to hit development projects. Moreover, a recurring trend of accelerated spending in the final months of the fiscal year leads to rushed projects and compromised quality, which affects project outcomes and diminishes the long-term value of public investments. While recurrent expenditures are being met at a higher rate, capital spending has remained dismal. This imbalance not only undermines developmental aspirations but also affects fiscal credibility and the government’s ability to deliver on its promises at a time when some sections of society are questioning the relevance of the federal republican system. 

The government must prioritize structural reforms to speed up spending. Streamlining bureaucratic procedures, strengthening project planning and financial oversight and directing funds toward shovel-ready projects are critical steps that it must take. Moreover, enhancing accountability mechanisms will ensure that public resources are used effectively and transparently. Persistent underutilization of capital budgets is not just a fiscal statistic, it is a roadblock to progress. Until this foundational flaw in public expenditure stays, long-term growth will remain elusive, and the dream of a self-reliant, prosperous Nepal will continue to drift further away.

The coalition government of Nepali Congress (NC) and CPN-UML, formed in July 2024 with promises of political stability, has not been able to function effectively. The two parties have not been able to hold even preliminary talks on constitutional amendments—one of the major tasks for which the two largest parties in parliament formed the coalition. A lack of unified support from NC is among the reasons weakening the coalition’s ability to govern effectively.

The rift within the NC, primarily between party president Sher Bahadur Deuba’s loyalists, and reformist leaders such as Gagan Thapa and Shekhar Koirala, have caused problems for the government. Thapa and Koirala, both vying for the party presidency in the coming general election and eyeing future premierships, have openly criticized the coalition. Their resistance to Deuba’s potential return as prime minister in the latter half of this parliament’s tenure has only deepened the party’s divisions and weakened its commitment to the coalition. Even Deuba’s loyalist leaders like Purna Bahadur Khadka and Prakash Sharan Mahat have hinted they prefer an alliance with the Maoist Center, with NC leading the government.

It took the government 29 days to reach an agreement with protesting school teachers because of the lack of support from the coalition partner. The protest caused significant damage to the education sector with national examination of Class 12, assessment of Secondary Education Examination (SEE) answer sheets and national school enrolment program all affected. The dismissal of Nepal Electricity Authority (NEA) Executive Director Kulman Ghising was another such incident. Although an NC minister pushed for Ghising’s termination, NC leaders, including general secretaries duo Gagan Kumar Thapa and Biswho Prakash Sharma, vehemently opposed the decision. The protracted delay in the appointment of the governor is another example of lack of cohesion in the ruling coalition. 

The NC’s wavering commitment has created uncertainty for Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli. This has forced Oli to frequently seek reassurance from Deuba on the government’s future. Despite Deuba’s public support, UML leaders suspect behind-the-scenes pressures, reportedly from India, and overtures from Maoist Center Chairperson Pushpa Kamal Dahal, who has signaled readiness to support Deuba’s return as prime minister. Thapa’s suggestions last month that the NC could exit the coalition, citing Oli’s leadership failures, underscores just how fragile the alliance has become.

This internal disarray threatens not only to cause the collapse of a coalition with a two-thirds majority but also to erode public trust in democratic governance. Nepal urgently needs a unified and functional government. The NC must bridge its internal divisions, set aside personal rivalries, and focus on delivering its coalition commitments—chief among them constitutional reform and effective governance. Failure to do so risks plunging the country back into another cycle of political instability. This would further alienate people at a time when some forces are calling for a revert to monarchy.