Arjun Bhattarai has been elected as the president of the NGO Federation Nepal. His election comes as civil society organisations (CSOs) suffer due to the cutting of funds from USAID. Similarly, his new term commenced as monarchists were intensifying their protests to overturn the secular republic, achieved after long protests with the federation at the forefront. The Post’s Binod Ghimire talked to Bhattarai on these issues. Excerpts:

A large number of CSOs have been implementing different programmes with USAID funds. What has been the impact of the funds being cut?

Of total funding in the development sector, one-third comes from the US. It has agreed to release $695 million for five years in Nepal, which is a huge amount. Some part of the funding is mobilised from the local partners. The money would go to nutrition in the places where stunting in children is high, to increase the enrollment rate in schools, provide a mid-day meal, medication to HIV infected and for women empowerment. The fund cut means all these sectors would be affected.

The USAID was the largest funder in disaster risk reduction, developing resilience to climate change, promoting social inclusion, promoting the rights of sexual and gender minorities and rehabilitation of the victims of violence. They will no longer be running.

These are the impacts seen in day-to-day lives. The fund cut has taken the jobs of 30,000 to 35,000 youths. The US government’s contribution to Nepal’s treasury will also stop, which means the country will have to take more loans to meet its expenses. The country’s entire economy will be hampered as a result.

Another consequence is that other bilateral and multilateral donor agencies, following suit, are considering shifting their priority. The European Union and other agencies have already told us about a possible fund cut.

I think the current plan to graduate from the Least Developed Country needs to be revised, and the Sustainable Development Goal targets are now unlikely to be met. Similarly, the country should be looking for alternative sources to meet the targets of the 16th five-year plan, which has the vision of ‘Prosperous Nepal, Happy Nepali’.

The Trump administration questioned the transparency in the use of USAID funds globally while announcing that it would cease its support. Are the CSOs in Nepal in a position to claim that the US money has been used rightly?

I understand he meant the funding he allocated doesn’t align with his development priorities. For instance, support for the queer community is not his priority and therefore, that is a waste. However, in our context, US support has been very effective in advocating for rights and uplifting the community. The CSOs work in awareness and advocacy whose results cannot be measured in hard numbers. It takes time for its result. The USAID support has a prominent role in increasing women, youth and Dalit participation from the federal to the local level.

It is not uncommon for government priorities to change with a change in government. However, it should not be forgotten that it is an obligation of developed nations like the US to support us. The decision to cut the fund came with the mentality that only physical development is real development. I can claim the support has brought massive social transformation. At the same time, I cannot claim there have been no incidents of irregularity. There could be a few that can be investigated, and there are mechanisms for action on them.

Has the federation found out how many CSOs have been affected and how many people have lost their jobs because of a halt in support?

While signing an agreement with the USAID, the CSOs must agree that they will get permission before disseminating any information on the support. So we have not been able to get exact data as the Trump administration’s three-month deadline is yet to end. Yet our preliminary study shows around 400 organisations—of which 46 of them had significant funding—have been directly affected. As I said earlier, around 30,000 to 35,000 in Nepal have or would lose their jobs. We are already conducting a detailed analysis of its impact not just on our members but also at the community level.

Not just the US, the Nepal government also says NGOs are not using funds properly. It is also devising laws for tighter scrutiny. What is your take on it?

This is because our monitoring agency is very weak. Things will improve only if the Social Welfare Council takes its responsibility seriously. The CSOs need to submit their documents from the ward level to the District Administration Office and to the tax office for renewal. The government can study them and come up with a conclusion. The council studies how the CSOs work but does not publicise the findings. Why cannot it come with recommendations based on the report?

The finance ministry can develop a digital platform accessible to all, recording which organisation works in which area and how much funds it has for particular projects. This will make everything transparent.

In Nepal, the NGO-people ratio is 1:400. Why does the country still lag in human development while there are so many organisations in action?

Everyone talks about the number of registered NGOs, but there is no record of those that have folded up. It must not be forgotten that the current number includes community forest user groups, children and youth clubs, mother’s groups, and religious groups, among others. Getting to organise is a constitutional democratic right. I don’t see reasons to worry about the large numbers of CSOs.

Having said that, I am clear that there must be transparency and a one-door policy in receiving and utilisation of foreign funds. Let’s use that money to benefit people and the state’s priority sector. However, it would be wrong to argue that the number of NGOs should be limited.

What is the solution to the problems facing the CSOs after USAID fund cut?

As more challenging times are ahead, I have floated the idea of a development conclave owned by the government. I have already discussed the matter with the prime minister. The three or four-day conclave will discuss Nepal’s overall socio-economic context, transparency in the use of foreign aid, misuse of funds, and the role of the CSOs. Based on its conclusion, let’s appeal to global donors for support in specific sectors. It is the right of underdeveloped countries like ours to receive support from developed countries.

Also, there should be a partnership between all tiers of government and the CSOs. Some 40 percent of the government’s capital budget remains unspent annually. We can partner with the government to spend the money. One reason why the youths are leaving the country is the government is not supporting the local clubs and CSOs. Engaging the CSOs in capital expenditure would help create jobs and increase economic activities, which will subsequently help reduce the youth outflux.

Similarly, the federation is working on social entrepreneurship to engage the CSOs in income-generation activities. Also, the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) funding must be spent transparently. The money under the CSR must be spent through the CSOs. It can be done through competition. Let the organisations that come up with the best project idea use the money. We can also earn money through proper use of natural resources. The local CSOs can take work to this effect.

The government is working on an integrated law to manage the CSOs, claiming they are not working effectively. What is your position on it?

Three Acts relating to the CSOs are in effect. Currently, a Home Ministry-led task force has been formed to draft a law to manage NGOs. It is guided by the perception that there are irregularities in fund use and the NGOs are responsible for Nepal being listed in the Financial Action Task Force’s grey list, that they are unregulated and are beyond the government’s grip. All these narratives are baseless. The move to bring all the organisations under the home ministry is principally wrong. The ministry cannot be involved in matters relating to aid mobilisation. We object to the move to draft the bill without consultations.

We demand that the NGOs be allowed to work after being registered locally. However, when they get secure foreign funding, it can come to the notice of the federal finance ministry.

In the past, the federation had been at the forefront of every political issue. Of late, the pro-monarchy forces are on regular protests to reinstate the king and convert Nepal into a Hindu state. Why hasn’t the federation made its position public on the matter?

We are clear that there is no alternative to loktantra. Yes, we had played a pivotal role in accelerating the movement for loktantra. I remember Nepali Congress leader Girija Prasad Koirala and other leaders coming to our office seeking support for the movement. It was the CSOs that initially led the protests. We played active advocacy roles during the constitution-making process. Several of the issues we raised have been enshrined in the constitution. However, the Acts necessary to implement them were formulated without any consultations. The way successive governments functioned in the post-constitution promulgation phase was disappointing. We have grievances. Yet we are together in attaining different goals like SDGs, among others.

There is no public support for the monarchy. People are in the streets as an expression of frustration over poor delivery rather than in support of monarchy. The federation always stands against any regressive actions, including those by the monarchists.