The Local Government Division has sought a special development allocation of Tk5 crore for each member of parliament (MP), totalling Tk1,500 crore for 300 MPs, to meet the urgent needs of people in their constituencies. However, the proposed source of the funds is the development budgets of upazila parishads and city corporations. This has raised questions over the impact on local government’s own development activities and the role of MPs in grassroots development decisions.
Those concerned say a special allocation for urgent needs in constituencies may be justified. But allegations of irregularities, nepotism and politicisation have been raised in the past over development allocations given to MPs. As a result, the debate now extends beyond the necessity of the funds to their source, spending control and accountability framework.
What the proposal says
According to Local Government Ministry sources, Local Government Division Senior Secretary Md. Shahidul Hassan sent two separate letters to Finance Division Secretary Dr Md Khairuzzaman Mazumder on November 10.
The proposal seeks Tk1,320 crore for 264 MPs outside city corporation areas, at Tk5 crore each, and Tk180 crore for 36 MPs in city corporation areas, bringing the total to Tk1,500 crore.
The letters state that the money will be spent on renovating educational and religious institutions, providing assistance to poor and meritorious students, the welfare of helpless people, and sports and cultural activities.
The local government secretary noted in the letter that people’s expectations have increased following the restoration of the democratic system after long-standing deprivation and discrimination. MPs hear about people’s small but urgent problems when visiting their constituencies, he wrote, but these needs cannot be met with the limited allocations available under the existing discretionary fund.
Equal share for government and opposition
A senior Local Government Division official confirmed to Dhaka Tribune that the letters have been sent to the Finance Ministry. Speaking on condition of anonymity, he said the allocation currently available to MPs in the discretionary fund is very insignificant, and questioned how much of a constituency’s needs can be met with only Tk5 lakh.
He said the letters were sent with the consent of MPs from both the ruling and opposition parties, and that opposition MPs will receive the same amount as ruling party MPs.
“During the Awami League’s tenure, there were instances of special development allocations of Tk15 crore and later Tk20 crore for MPs. Compared to that, this is much less. Besides, all MPs will use this money in the interest of developing their respective areas,” he said.
However, alongside the argument for equal allocations, questions have arisen over how justified it is to give the same amount to all constituencies when population, poverty, infrastructure gaps and actual needs vary.
Past allocations and irregularities
Special development allocations for MPs are not new. Allocations of Tk15 crore and Tk20 crore per MP were made in the past under constituency-based rural infrastructure development projects. The current government also has an initiative to undertake separate projects worth Tk50 crore per MP over five years through the Local Government Engineering Department (LGED), covering roads, bridges and other infrastructure prioritised by MPs. Development researchers have therefore questioned how the new Tk5 crore proposal will be coordinated with earlier initiatives.
In a 2020 study, Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) reviewed 628 development works in 50 parliamentary constituencies. It found instances of low-quality work, unethical transactions between contractors and those concerned, and political influence, along with a lack of transparency and supervision from planning to implementation.
TIB Executive Director Dr Iftekharuzzaman said analysis of past experience and data showed that the bulk of block allocations was used for politicisation in the name of development, creating opportunities for widespread irregularities, corruption, embezzlement and wastage of public money. “The expectation from the current government is that it will move away from this past practice,” he said.
Concerns over political control of local funds
Experts have also raised concerns about the source of the money, which is proposed to come from the annual development funds of upazila parishads and city corporations. They fear this may curtail local governments’ own priority-based development activities.
Articles 59 and 60 of the Constitution establish the basis for the responsibilities and powers of local government institutions, while the primary constitutional responsibilities of MPs are to enact laws and ensure government accountability. Existing laws, however, give MPs an advisory role in local development.
The Local Government Division’s budget for the current 2026-27 fiscal year is Tk40,246 crore, approximately 9% lower than the previous fiscal year’s revised allocation. Amid this, demands have been raised to assess the impact of reallocating funds from existing development funds.
Political analyst Ruhin Hossain Prince told Dhaka Tribune: “First, in my view, the development allocations provided for MPs and ministers for local development are not supported by our Constitution. In other words, this is contradictory to the Constitution. Second, what we say about strengthening local government is also affected. Third, such allocations create opportunities for MPs to assume the role of landlords.”
“Since we are trying to move towards democracy, local government must be strengthened. If public participation and accountability cannot be ensured, the benefits of democracy will not reach the actual people. Considering that, it is necessary to stay away from this kind of allocation and keep MPs away from it as well. This money should be spent through local government while ensuring complete transparency,” he added.
Who will control the spending?
Those concerned say that if the allocation is approved, it must be made clear who will be responsible for selecting projects or beneficiaries, releasing funds, implementation and auditing. In particular, a policy is needed on whether the money will be spent on MPs’ recommendations or whether MPs will be able to make spending decisions directly.
They warn that unless spending information is made public, local participation is ensured, independent audits are conducted and effective action is taken against irregularities, the special allocations risk becoming a tool for political influence.
With the proposal justified by the need to meet people’s urgent needs, how the source of the funds and control over their spending will be determined is now the key question.
