The Proposed National Economic Council – The Way Forward
C Narayanasuwami
The proposal to establish a National Economic Council (NEC) is a welcome move. It should rightfully be the apex body to assist in the formulation of forward-looking and innovative Government policies taking into consideration the emerging development priorities. Lessons of the past as well as an understanding of the positive experience gained by countries in the region would provide useful insights. Countries such as Malaysia, Thailand and the Philippines have a proven record of success in operationalising such institutional arrangements. In the last decade, India, Vietnam, Indonesia and Bangladesh have also joined this formidable group.
Direction and leadership provided by such institutions in the formulation, implementation and management of development initiatives in the agriculture, infrastructure, information technology, and industrial sectors have contributed to visible economic transformation in these countries. The overarching feature of such institutional arrangements has been the high level of political and professional support provided to plan, execute and manage huge national enterprises. Independence and integrity of professionals, including key senior staff engaged in management operations, were always safeguarded to ensure that timeliness, efficiency, and effectiveness in the delivery of expected outcomes were never compromised.
In the past, the planning and implementation entities in Sri Lanka initiated excellent proposals for implementation with focus on sustainable outcomes. But implementation faltered and limited success was achieved largely because of problems associated with political interventions in purely development and management oriented activities, and inadequate capacity of public sector staff to execute programs. More often than not adverse comments noted in reports prepared by donors for the benefit of their Boards of Directors lamented on poor implementation efficiency and cost overruns! It is important to heed lessons learned and provide for systematic adherence to implementation standards that aim at delivering results.
A review of progress achieved in the development field in Sri Lanka during the last two and a half years betrays a lack of coherence, direction and continuity in planning and implementation. This has been largely due to multiplicity of development initiatives sponsored by ministries and departments without clear consultations and interactions with all stakeholders. Given the duplicity of ministries and the nature of functions allocated to pacify disparate interests in a coalition government, NEC has perforce to work within this framework to conceptualise dynamic action-oriented programs that would deliver both short term benefits and sustainable long-term results. A new approach to economic management has therefore become critical to ensure that people’s expectations under the ‘yahapalanaya’ government are fulfilled.
Role and functions of NEC to reflect new development challenges
Comprehensive and structured macro-economic planning aimed at sustainable outcomes requires mature and thought-provoking initiatives. Similarly, development interventions should cut across sectoral, thematic and distributional areas and should be results-oriented. Ideally, NEC should be able to provide leadership to review, assess, redefine and monitor all aspects of development, especially in the following areas; (i) analysis of objectives and scope of investments, including determination of investment priorities, (ii) adequacy of implementation mechanisms and strategies, including coordination structures available to reduce functional overlap, (iii) appointment of competent staff to monitor progress of projects/programs against targets and goals set at project conception, (iv) conducting reviews on a quarterly basis to identify constraints to achievement of development objectives, (v) subject completed programs to candid and objective evaluation to learn from lessons of experience and take steps to improve ongoing programs, (vi) elicit high level political intervention to remedy any impediments to achieving anticipated goals and objectives of development initiatives and (vii) achieve coordination of donor initiatives in a manner that contributes to pooling of resources for a more streamlined partnership in the delivery of development results.
