Khawaza Main Uddin

In Bangladesh today, why do people believe something or why not, is a matter of grievance to those who cannot accept dissent. You can blame rumour-mongers for creating confusion in the minds of others, especially the masses, but that is not a permanent phenomenon if you are clean and ultimately nothing other than truth prevails.

That is why, the state's propaganda machine BSS gave such a headline of a recent news item:"Inu CLAIMS (emphasis on claim) media enjoying full freedom". Inadvertently done perhaps! Hasanul Haque Inu as the information minister said what he was supposed to say to justify his job.

But Bangladesh's professional journalists and even the commoners can see through the 'glass ceiling' that limits the freedom. This is not unknown to foreigners either.

We are also familiar with the official reaction to any 'embarrassing' report, be it on the job crises, investment stagnation or decline in Boro cultivation in recent years. It is reckless power that does not allow its bearer to comprehend, that none of these issues can be resolved by generating imaginary statistics.

However, certain admission of the difficulties in increasing investment and creating employment opportunities came from finance minister AMA Muhith, when he presented the budget in parliament on 2 June. Although he emphasised the two critical issues, he could not come up with categorical answers as to how investment would reach 30 per cent of GDP from 25 per cent and how all youth coming to the job market would be employed.

An individual jobseeker, an entrepreneur or a farmer understands best his/her own economy and where and when they are trying toexplore opportunities. So, they and a greater audience can also read a bit between the lines about why they are presented with statistics that hardly reflect their life in reality.

There are doubts and questions about the projected 7.05 per cent growth during 2015-16, although for a growing economy like Bangladesh, a higher growth is very much a possibility provided political stability and required infrastructures and regulatory atmosphere are there. If a sober economist falls short of calling it phantom growth, his/her analysis still offers puzzles about the country's development attainments, not to mention apprehensions of the future.

The political bosses of the development administration might be angry at the doubters, but hardly take into cognizance the people's reaction to their attemptsto justifyall acts.

The result of such process could be no less than loss of public confidence in official statements and of course damage to state institutions.

This instantly reminds us the tales of cross-fire of two young men - Golam Faizullah Fahim and Mukul Rana - and the arms haul from an Uttara pond.

What else would the officials concerned say, when many of their statements sounded more like political rhetoric than professional messages?

This state of governance has time and again led us to recall the statistical mismatch between voters' presence and the turnouts recorded by the election commission in the 2014 parliamentary polls. All subsequent elections reconfirmed ‘quality’ and motives of holding such general elections, proving further what the country's electoral system turns out to be today.

Everyone in this country knows the 2014 ballot is a major source of our current debacle - economic, political and otherwise. But all are told to believe something else. We are living with a situation where it seemsconfusion is deliberately created, instead of fairly investigating, for example, violent attacks and financial scams.

So once the ruling party leaders such as Mohammad Nasim publicly say they do not believe in 'too much democracy', they claim their priority is development. They shift to fight against militancy when they are at a loss in other areas.

Given nearly a dozen financial scams during the current regime and the poor investment climate, the protagonists of 'development without democracy' fail to show the cherished development and they still boast of an enforced stabilityat the cost of civil rights.

And when they are asked why there is still uncertainty in public mind, they apparently remain clueless about its perceptions and symptoms.

Acrimonious political culture, potential demonstrations any time, law order meltdown including clandestine attacks and killings, shrinking space for civil society, constant criticism abroad of the regime and its repressive policies and absence of an exit route in the political process- nothing creates a difference for them.

PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) in a recent survey report, tried to explain the kind of uncertainty that Bangladesh is now faced with. It quoted a US investor as saying: "I am very concerned about geopolitical uncertainty. It adds a layer of volatility; there is no way to plan for it or analyse it and you cannot insulate your portfolios from something you can’t analyse.”

Practically, both who earned money doing business in the current environment and who made money by other means are aware of the situation. Their 'clever' policy has been reflected in the flight of capital of about Taka 4.5 trillion ($55.87 billion) from Bangladesh in the past decade, as stated in the study report by Center for Policy Dialogue (CPD) based on data compiled by Washington-based Global Financial Integrity (GFI).

Thus, national development remains a byproduct when the taxpayers are kept in the darkabout how their money is utilised.

Most social and economic developments the country has achieved, have come through the individuals' efforts to change their own fate.These people can smartly judge the government's track record.

Complex calculations and wordy statements are often contained in the annual budget which is not clear even to the members of parliament who rubberstamp it. At the end of the fiscal year, everyone sees deviation from what is promised when the appropriation bill is passed.

Who would then believe the budgetary targets including the Tk 3.4 trillion outlay, as set by the finance minister for 2016-17, would be implemented at the end of the financial year?