Spread the love

Kathmandu, Jan 6: The government has stepped up termination of so-called non-performing infrastructure contracts in recent months. The push began after Minister Kulman Ghising took charge and now covers projects under physical infrastructure, energy, water resources and irrigation, and urban development ministries.

Official figures show termination proceedings underway for around 235 projects. Supporters see this as a clean-up drive. Construction entrepreneurs see it as an attempt to hide long-standing state failures.

Contractors say the government issues tenders without groundwork, does not ensure budget flow, delays land acquisition, and fails to secure forest and environmental approvals. These gaps stall work from the start. Later, authorities blame contractors for slow progress and cancel contracts. They argue this pattern has existed for years.

Their main complaint is that the state is shifting blame by turning contractors into public villains. Discontent in the construction sector is rising, while Minister Ghising keeps repeating that contracts without progress will be scrapped.

This friction was clear at a discussion organized by the Nepal Economic Journalists Society on the causes and impact of contract terminations. Contractors, former secretaries, and serving officials largely agreed that responsibility lies on both sides. Policy gaps and bureaucratic delays have pushed many projects into trouble.

Federation of Contractors president Ravi Singh said the problem lies not in contracts but in how they are awarded. According to him, the government floats tenders without preparation, offers little facilitation later, and then cancels them citing lack of progress. He accused Minister Ghising of building a narrative where he appears as a hero and contractors as villains.

Singh questioned priorities, saying a six-month government should focus on holding elections instead of chasing popularity through contract cancellations. He argued that abusing contractors will not deliver development. He asked if projects failed due to contractor weakness or because the state did not provide sites, funds, and administrative support.

Contractors also point to flaws in the Public Procurement Act. Complicated procedures, frequent guideline changes, and unclear decisions have added pressure. Singh cited cases where contracts with 80 to 90 percent work done were cancelled over site or paperwork issues.

Former secretary Arjun Jung Thapa said sick projects have increased since 2003. A 2020 anti-graft study found 1,848 troubled contracts, most under the roads department. He blamed broken budget continuity caused by shifting political priorities, misuse of joint venture rules, and firms taking on work beyond capacity. He warned that cancelling contracts does not build projects, especially when half-finished sites attract no new bidders.

Physical infrastructure ministry secretary Keshav Kumar Sharma said mass terminations also worry officials. Out of about 2,800 contracts, around 300 are sick. Termination is complex, blame is hard to fix, and reinvestment is harder. Too many cancellations cut capital spending, erode trust, and hurt the construction sector.

Both sides accept one point: poor preparation and weak coordination within the state remain at the core of delayed and failed projects.

People’s News Monitoring Service