A new government, with a vision to bring about good governance, may have been established in Nepal, but the troubling pattern of lawmakers requesting small-scale schemes for their constituencies in the national budget remains unchanged. With fiscal year 2026-27 about to commence in a few months, parliamentarians are again besieging the Ministry of Physical Infrastructure, seeking funds for roads, bridges and minor works. The ministry has already recorded 686 project proposals, of which at least 14 are low-budget projects worth less than Rs10 million. Such low-cost projects fall under the jurisdiction of provincial and local governments and are not supported by the federal government’s guidelines for national-level investment.

Despite clear guidelines on funding jurisdiction, lawmakers persistently push for political visibility and constituency-based patronage. During election campaigns, they sell big promises to win votes and therefore feel strong pressure to deliver tangible results. Some demands reported by the ministry are glaring. For instance, as highlighted in a recent report in this paper, a Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) lawmaker from Kailali-1 has sought Rs2 million to blacktop a section of the Bainiya Bhajani road in Kailali. Similarly, 17 road and suspension bridge projects in Rukum East have been proposed through lawmaker Pushpa Kamal Dahal, a former, three-time prime minister.

In doing so, little do lawmakers realise that their legislative overreach undermines Nepal’s federal transition, which aims to empower local and provincial levels by giving them ambit over small-scale projects. The federal government, meanwhile, oversees large, strategic infrastructure. When federal lawmakers put forth small projects, it creates jurisdictional duplication in their execution. Most crucially, when the federal government funds small projects from the federal purse, it puts pressure on the federal budget, affecting bigger infrastructure projects, given that the room for capital investment in the country is often limited, as recurrent expenditure consumes most of the national budget.

In a bid to cut down on fragmented, small-scale budgets, a ‘30 million ceiling policy’ is in place in Nepal. Discussions are underway to raise the ceiling to Rs50 million. These provisions must be strictly implemented. Moreover, in the upcoming national budget, priority shouldn’t be given to any fragmented, populist allocations. Subnational governments have long requested that the federal government allow them to handle small- and medium-sized projects, as stipulated by the constitution. Successive governments have often pledged not to carry out projects whose budgets are below Rs30 million, but have failed to comply. It would be a shame for such a troubling ritual to persist under a government mandated to do away with old ways of governing.

Due to the authorities’ long inaction, Nepal’s pride projects are still struggling to be completed and suffer from underfunding. People have pinned their hopes for faster and better development on the new government. So it cannot afford to squander its budget on small-scale projects. Transferring sufficient funds to subnational levels by strengthening fiscal federalism, so they can fulfil their roles as mandated by the constitution and remain relevant, is just as vital. Doing away with fragmented projects would give subnational levels the budget they require to handle small-scale infrastructure projects. Ultimately, this will be a win-win for all tiers of government.

But that is not all. So long as electoral success is tied to the distribution of small projects to constituencies and lawmakers continue to feel responsible for securing such budgets, budget ceiling policies will fail. Nepal desperately needs a broader shift in such political culture.