Editorial

Don't make a mockery of social support

Authorities must prevent diversion of relief goods meant for the poor
VISUAL: STAR

We are quite alarmed by the findings of a recent report that brought out a disturbing reality about the distribution of relief rice in Pabna. According to the report, rice from the government's support programmes for vulnerable and underprivileged communities was diverted to privileged organisations, including officers' clubs, press clubs, and other social clubs. This is a gross violation of the intended purpose of such relief efforts. It also highlights a significant flaw in the management of relief materials that made it possible.

According to the guidelines set forth by the disaster management and relief ministry, relief assistance is specifically designed to aid the poor, ultra-poor, disaster-affected individuals and families, malnourished children, etc. It also extends to government and non-government orphanages. Organisations like these are the ones who are supposed to get relief support. However, in Pabna, many entities that do not fit the above description got tonnes of relief rice (so that they can sell those and use the proceeds for their own purposes). Particularly, the involvement of officers' clubs – populated by public officers who are already well-compensated – is most unfortunate. This not only goes against the spirit of the government guidelines, but also perpetuates a system of inequality and abuse of resources.

The justification provided by some of the recipient organisations is equally troubling. Claiming that they received the rice following "due procedure" and that they had various "needs" does not absolve them of responsibility. The fact remains that the relief rice should have been allocated only to organisations and communities that meet the specified criteria of vulnerability and need. That it didn't happen indicates the lack of proper monitoring and oversight on the part of those in charge of our social support programmes.

Of course, this is not the first time that such incidents have happened. In fact, over the last few years, particularly since the outbreak of the pandemic, we have had multiple reports on how the social support schemes have been compromised by the inclusion of underserving recipients. Many well-off and politically connected individuals who shouldn't have been on the lists of beneficiaries were included, while many who deserved the help were either exploited or excluded. We have also seen how the budget for social protection has been diverted to paying pensions and various other unrelated purposes. The latest incident only shows that the government is yet to take social support with the sincerity that it deserves. 

We urge the government to conduct a thorough investigation into the Pabna incident. Those responsible for misallocating relief rice should be held accountable. Additionally, there should be a comprehensive review of the existing relief distribution process to ensure that it remains fair, efficient, and targeted towards the most vulnerable populations.

Comments

Don't make a mockery of social support

Authorities must prevent diversion of relief goods meant for the poor
VISUAL: STAR

We are quite alarmed by the findings of a recent report that brought out a disturbing reality about the distribution of relief rice in Pabna. According to the report, rice from the government's support programmes for vulnerable and underprivileged communities was diverted to privileged organisations, including officers' clubs, press clubs, and other social clubs. This is a gross violation of the intended purpose of such relief efforts. It also highlights a significant flaw in the management of relief materials that made it possible.

According to the guidelines set forth by the disaster management and relief ministry, relief assistance is specifically designed to aid the poor, ultra-poor, disaster-affected individuals and families, malnourished children, etc. It also extends to government and non-government orphanages. Organisations like these are the ones who are supposed to get relief support. However, in Pabna, many entities that do not fit the above description got tonnes of relief rice (so that they can sell those and use the proceeds for their own purposes). Particularly, the involvement of officers' clubs – populated by public officers who are already well-compensated – is most unfortunate. This not only goes against the spirit of the government guidelines, but also perpetuates a system of inequality and abuse of resources.

The justification provided by some of the recipient organisations is equally troubling. Claiming that they received the rice following "due procedure" and that they had various "needs" does not absolve them of responsibility. The fact remains that the relief rice should have been allocated only to organisations and communities that meet the specified criteria of vulnerability and need. That it didn't happen indicates the lack of proper monitoring and oversight on the part of those in charge of our social support programmes.

Of course, this is not the first time that such incidents have happened. In fact, over the last few years, particularly since the outbreak of the pandemic, we have had multiple reports on how the social support schemes have been compromised by the inclusion of underserving recipients. Many well-off and politically connected individuals who shouldn't have been on the lists of beneficiaries were included, while many who deserved the help were either exploited or excluded. We have also seen how the budget for social protection has been diverted to paying pensions and various other unrelated purposes. The latest incident only shows that the government is yet to take social support with the sincerity that it deserves. 

We urge the government to conduct a thorough investigation into the Pabna incident. Those responsible for misallocating relief rice should be held accountable. Additionally, there should be a comprehensive review of the existing relief distribution process to ensure that it remains fair, efficient, and targeted towards the most vulnerable populations.

Comments